Mass

Mass (pronounced mas)

(1) A body of coherent matter, usually of indefinite shape and often of considerable size.

(2) A collection of incoherent particles, parts, or objects regarded as forming one body.

(3) Aggregate; whole (usually preceded by in the).

(4) A considerable assemblage, number, or quantity.

(5) Bulk, size, expanse, or massiveness.

(6) In painting, an expanse of color or tone defining form or shape in general outline rather than in detail.

(7) A shape or three-dimensional volume that has or gives the illusion of having weight, density, and bulk.

(8) The main body, bulk, or greater part of anything.

(9) In physics, a physical quantity expressing the amount of matter in a body. It is a measure of a body's resistance to changes in velocity (inertial mass) and also of the force experienced in a gravitational field (gravitational mass); according to the theory of relativity, inertial and gravitational masses are equal.

(10) In pharmacology, a preparation of thick, pasty consistency, from which pills are made.

(11) In the Roman Catholic Church and certain Protestant Churches, the celebration of the Eucharist.

(12) In some religious rituals, the musical setting of certain parts of this service, as the Kyrie eleison, Gloria, Credo, Sanctus, Benedictus, and Agnus Dei (sometimes with initial lowercase).

(13) In extractive mining, an irregular deposit of ore not occurring in veins.

Pre-900: From the Middle English masse, from the Old English mæsse from the Vulgar Latin messa & massa (mass; that which forms a lump) from the Church Latin missa, past participle of mittere (to send, dismiss), perhaps derived from the concluding dismissal in the Roman Mass, Ite, missa est, (Go, it is the dismissal).  Ultimate root was the Ancient Greek mâza (barley cake, lump, mass, ball), akin to mássein (to knead).  Mass is a noun, verb & adjective, massing is a noun & verb and massed is a verb; the noun plural is masses. 

The meaning "lump, quantity, size" is from the late fourteenth century, the sense a direct borrowing from the Old French masse (lump, heap, pile; crowd, large amount; ingot, bar") which had enjoyed the meaning since the eleventh century, under the influence of the Latine massa (kneaded dough, lump, that which adheres together like dough), probably from Greek mâza related to mássein from the primitive Indo-European root mag- (to knead); related was the Lithuanian minkyti (to knead), root of macerate.  The sense extended in English in the 1580s to "a large quantity, amount, or number" and the strict sense in physics is from 1704.  It was first used as an adjective in 1733 and was used thus in biology in the nineteenth century.  Mass-culture was first used (in sociology) in 1916; mass hysteria from 1914; mass media from 1923; mass movement from 1897; mass production from 1920; mass grave from 1918 and mass murder from 1880.

Increasing mass: Lindsay Lohan posts pregnancy progress pictures on Instagram.

Increasing Mass and the Higgs Field

In physics, mass is locked up energy; as an object accelerates, its mass will increase, mass here called “inertial mass”.  Inertial mass is the amount of resistance a physical object has to any change in its motion, this including the resistance a body has to acceleration or to directional changes.  According to the theory of relativity, gravitational mass is always the same as inertial mass; however, when describing an object’s mass increasing due to acceleration, it’s the inertial mass which increases.  So, as an object increases in speed, so does the amount of energy it has, this energy is what is referred to as “the increase in mass”.  It’s this relationship between mass and energy which explains why nothing can exceed the speed of light.  The energy of a particle diverges to infinity as it approaches the speed of light and because there cannot be infinite energy in a particle, the speed of light cannot be reached although particle physicists are divided about whether this was always true.  In the first fraction of a second after the big bang, almost all particles were massless, travelling at or beyond the speed of light until, sometime in that first second, the Higgs field came into existence, permeating the whole universe, giving mass to particles.

The now famous Higgs boson (known also as the Higgs particle) is a subatomic particle which was first described theoretically (as part of a mechanism which was initially referred to as the Higgs Mechanism and is now called the Higgs Field) in the 1960s by English theoretical physicist Peter Higgs (b 1929) and (independently) by a number of others.  The Higgs Field was “invented” because without its operation there was no way to account for the mass of bosons (one of two types of particles) and while bolting it onto the models physicists use for their calculations, it’s existence wasn’t proved until experiments conducted using the Large Hadron Collider (LHC, a very big particle accelerator) at the Conseil européen pour la recherche nucléaire (CERN; the European Organization for Nuclear Research).  The formal announcement of the verification of the existence of the Higgs boson (and by implication the field) was made in July 2012, the Nobel Prize in Physic awarded the following year to Higgs and Belgian theoretical physicist François, Baron Englert (born 1932) (technically the field is properly known as the Brout-Englert-Higgs mechanism, noting the contribution of US theoretical physicist Robert Brout (1928-2011).

Inside the Large Hadron Collider (LHC), a high-energy particle collider mounted in a 17 mile (27 km) long tunnel in a loop deep under the Swiss-French border near Geneva.

The boson is associated with the Higgs field, a form of energy which permeates the entire universe and can be conceptualized as part of the universe’s “fabric” although it’s not helpful to visually that literally but particles acquire their mass by interacting with this field, the Higgs boson the quantum excitation of the field.  Electrically neutral, the Higgs boson is very short-lived, decaying almost at the point of creation and its very existence can be detected only indirectly by an observation of the particles into which it decays.  It took decades to detect because until the LHC was fully operational, a machine capable of sustaining the experiment didn’t exist.  However, while the work at CERN is thought proof of the existence of the field but nothing beyond; how or why the field exists and why some particles interact more than others remains unknown.

Conglomerate & Agglomerate

Conglomerate (pronounced kuhn-glom-er-it or kuhng-glom-er-it (noun & adjective) and kuhn-glom-uh-reyt or kuhng-glom-uh-reyt (verb))

(1) Anything composed of heterogeneous materials or elements; mass.

(2) A corporation consisting of a number of subsidiary companies or divisions in a variety of unrelated industries, usually as a result of merger or acquisition.

(3) A coarse-grained sedimentary rock consisting of round rock fragments cemented together by hardened silt, clay, calcium carbonate, or a similar material. The fragments (clasts) have a diameter of at least 2 mm (0.08 inches), vary in composition and origin, and may include pebbles, cobbles, boulders, or fossilized seashells. Conglomerates often form through the transportation and deposition of sediments by streams, alluvial fans, and glaciers.

(4) Gathered into a rounded mass; consisting of parts so gathered; clustered.

(5) Consisting of heterogeneous parts or elements.

(6) Of or relating to a corporate conglomerate.

(7) In geology, of the nature of a conglomerate.

(8) To bring together into a cohering mass.

(9) To gather into a ball or rounded mass.

1565–1575: From the Latin conglomerātus, past participle of conglomerāre (to roll-up), from glomerāre (to wind into a ball), the construct being con- + glomer- (stem of glomus) (ball of yarn or thread) + -ātus (-ate).  The prefix con- was from the Middle English con-, from the Latin con-, from the preposition cum (with), from the Old Latin com, from the Proto-Italic kom, from the primitive Indo- European ḱóm (next to, at, with, along).  It was cognate with the Proto-Germanic ga- (co-), the Proto-Slavic sъ(n) (with) and the Proto-Germanic hansō.  It was used with certain words to add a notion similar to those conveyed by with, together, or jointly or with certain words to intensify their meaning and, later, to indicate being made from or bringing together of several objects.  The suffix -ate was a word-forming element used in forming nouns from Latin words ending in -ātus, -āta, & -ātum (such as estate, primate & senate).  Those that came to English via French often began with -at, but an -e was added in the fifteenth century or later to indicate the long vowel.  It can also mark adjectives formed from Latin perfect passive participle suffixes of first conjugation verbs -ātus, -āta, & -ātum (such as desolate, moderate & separate).  Again, often they were adopted in Middle English with an –at suffix, the -e appended after circa 1400; a doublet of –ee.  Related forms include conglomeratic, conglomeritic, conglomerated, conglomerating, conglomerateur, conglomeration & conglomeratize.

Agglomerate (pronounced uh-glom-uh-reyt (adjective & noun) and uh-glom-er-it (noun))

(1) To collect or gather into a cluster or mass.

(2) Gathered together into a cluster or mass.

(3) In botany, crowded into a dense cluster, but not cohering.

(4) In geology, a mass of angular volcanic fragments united by heat; distinguished from conglomerate.

(5) In meteorology, an ice-cover of floe formed by the freezing together of various forms of ice.

1675-1685: From the Latin agglomerātus, past participle of agglomerāre, the construct being ad- (to) + -glomerāre (to wind or add into a ball), from glomus (a ball; a mass), from globus (genitive glomeris), (a ball of yarn) of uncertain origin.  Related forms are the adjective agglomerative, the nouns agglomerator & agglomeration and the verbs (used with or without object), agglomerated & agglomerating.  The intransitive sense "grow into a mass" dates from 1730.

Conglomerate rocks (left) are those compose of mostly rounded, gravel-size clasts, a matrix of finer grained sediments, such as sand, silt or compressed clay filling the gaps between the clasts, the form held together with calcium carbonate, iron oxide, silica, or hardened clay which acts as a natural cement.  Agglomerate rocks (right) are large, coarse fragments associated with the lava flow ejected during explosive volcanic eruptions.  Although they resemble sedimentary conglomerates, agglomerates consist almost wholly of angular or rounded lava fragments of varying size and shape. Fragments are usually poorly sorted in a matrix, or appear in a mix of volcanic dust or ash that has turned to stone.

An agglomeration of Lindsay Lohan magazine covers.

Requiem

Requiem (pronounced rek-wee-um)

(1) In the rituals of churches, (notably the "Requiem Mass" of the Roman Catholic Church), a form of religious service to honor and remember a dead person and celebrate the repose of the souls of the dead.

(2) A musical composition, hymn, or dirge for the repose of the dead (sometimes attached specifically to religious services).

(3) Rest; peace (obsolete).

(4) In Ichthyology, (as requiem shark), any member of the taxonomic family Carcharhinidae (order Carcharhiniformes).

1275-1325: From the Middle English requiem (mass for repose of the soul of the dead), from the Latin requiem, accusative singular of requiēs (rest, repose (after labour)) from the opening of the introit, Requiem aeternam dona eis (Rest eternal grant unto them).  The construct was re- (used here as an intensive prefix) + quies (quiet) (from a suffixed form of the primitive Indo-European root kweie- (to rest; be quiet).  In Latin, the formal descriptions, Missa pro defunctis (Mass for the dead) or Missa defunctorum (Mass of the dead) were both used and requium was the first word of the Mass for the Dead in the Latin liturgy: Requiem æternam dona eis, Domine... (Rest eternal grant them, O Lord...).  In the Roman Catholic Church, the requiem ritual (Roman Missal) was revised during Vatican II and since 1970 has used this phrase as the first entrance antiphon.  Like many of the changes wrought by the Second Vatican Council (Vatican II, 1962-1965, published 1970) the newer rituals weren’t always adopted.  Although Rome pointed out the term Requiem Mass was never official terminology, resistance to replacing it with the preferred Mass of the Resurrection continues to this day.  By the early seventeenth century, requiem was used to describe any dirge or solemn chant for repose of the dead.  Requiem is a noun; the noun plural is requiems.  The adjectives (requiemlike, requiemesque) are non-standard but have been used although no composer of dirges seems ever to have been described as a "requiemist".

Part of Mozart’s original score for the Requiem.

Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart's (1756–1791) Requiem in D minor is probably the best known requiem, famous less for its musical qualities than the legends and myths which surround its composition.  Mozart wrote part of the work in Vienna in late 1791, but it was unfinished at his death on 5 December that year.  A completed version (dated 1792), by Austrian composer and conductor Franz Xaver Süssmayr (1766-1803) was delivered to the noted amateur musician Count Franz von Walsegg (1763–1827) who had commissioned the piece to commemorate the anniversary of his wife's death.

Mozart's Requiem in D minor, Berliner Philharmoniker under Herbert von Karajan (1908–1989), Berlin, 1976.

Constanze Mozart (1782), oil on canvas by Joseph Lange (1751–1831).

Mozart's widow Constanze (1762-1842) was responsible for a number of tales including the claims that Mozart received the commission from a messenger who did not reveal his or the commissioner's identity, and that Mozart came to believe that he was writing the requiem for his own funeral.  Mozart received only half the payment in advance, so upon his death his widow Constanze ensured the work completed by someone else so the balance of the bill could be collected.  Exactly who was responsible for what remains controversial among musicologists and historians although the most usually performed version (Süssmayr) is widely accepted as the standard version.  Adding to the romance attached to Mozart's requiem is that so distraught was the count at the death of his young wife, although himself only 28, he would never re-marry.

Velocity

Velocity (pronounced vuh-los-i-tee)

(1) Rapidity of motion or operation; swiftness; a certain measurement of speed.

(2) In mechanics and physics, a measure of the rate of motion of a body expressed as the rate of change of its position in a particular direction with time.  It is measured in metres per second, miles per hour etc.

(3) In casual, non technical use, a synonym for speed.

1540-1550: From the Middle French vélocité, from the Latin velocitatem (nominative vēlōcitās) (swiftness; speed), from vēlōx (genitive velocis) (swift, speedy, rapid, quick) of uncertain origin.  It may be related either to volō (I fly), volāre (to fly) or vehere (carry) from the primitive Indo-European weǵh- (to go, move, transport in a vehicle) although some etymologists prefer a link with the Proto-Italic weksloks from the primitive Indo-European weg-slo-, a suffixed form of the root weg- (to be strong, be lively). Although in casual use, velocity and speed are often used interchangeably, their meanings differ.  Speed is a scalar quantity referring to how fast an object is moving; the rate at which an object covers distance.  Velocity is the rate at which an object changes position in a certain direction. It is calculated by the displacement of space per a unit of time in a certain direction. Velocity deals with direction, while speed does not.  In summary, velocity is speed with a direction, while speed does not have a direction.  Velocity is a noun; the noun plural is velocities.

Great moments in velocity stacks

Velocity stacks (also informally known as trumpets or air horns) are trumpet-shaped devices, sometimes of differing lengths, fitted to the air entry of an engine's induction system, feeding carburetors or fuel injection.  Velocity stacks permit a smooth and even flow of air into the intake tract at high velocities with the air-stream adhering to the pipe walls, a process known as laminar flow.  They allow engineers to modify the dynamic tuning range of the intake tract by functioning as a resonating pipe which can adjust the frequency of pressure pulses based on its length within the tract.  Depending on the length and shape of the stack, the flow can be optimized for the desired power and torque characteristics, thus their popularity in competition where the quest is often for top-end power but the flow can also be tuned instead to produce enhanced low or mid-range performance for specialized use.

1973 McLaren M20C.

The 1968 McLaren M8A was built for the Canadian-American Challenge Cup (the Can-Am) and used a new aluminum version (later sold for street use as the ZL1) of the 427 cubic inch (7.0 litre) big-block Chevrolet V8.  Dry sumped and fuel injected, it was rated at 625 bhp.  A series for unlimited displacement sports cars, the wonderful thing about the Can-Am was the brevity of the rules which essentially were limited to (1) enclosed body work and (2) two seats (one of which was close to a fake).  With engines eventually growing to 509 cubic inches (8.3 litres) and reaching close to 800 horsepower, the McLarens dominated the series for five years, their era ended only by the arrival of the turbo-panzers, the turbocharged Porsche 917s which in qualifying trim generated a reputed 1500 horsepower.  The McLarens remained competitive however, the final race of the 1974 series won by a McLaren  M20.    

1970 Ferrari 512S.

Ferrari built 25 512S models in 1969-1970 to comply with the FIA’s homologation rules as a Group 5 sports car to contest the 1970 International Championship for Makes.  It used a five-litre V12 and was later modified to become the 512M which, other than modified road cars, was the last Ferrari of the post-war era built for sports car racing, the factory instead focusing on Formula One.  Not until 2023 would Ferrari return to the Sports Car circuits, celebrated with victory in the Le Mans 24 hour endurance classic, the marque's first since winning with a 250 LM in 1965.  

1965 Coventry Climax FWMW flat-16 prototype.

Coventry Climax developed their FWMW between 1963-1965, intending it for use in Formula One.  A 1.5 litre flat-16, both the Brabham and Lotus teams designed cars for this engine but it was never raced and the engines never proceeded beyond the prototype stage.  Like many of the exotic and elaborate designs to which engineers of the era were attracted, the disadvantages imposed by the sheer bulk and internal friction were never overcome and the promised power increases existed in such a narrow power band it’s usefulness in competition was negligible.  Even on the test-benches it was troublesome, the torsional vibrations of the long crankshaft once destroying an engine undergoing testing.  It was Coventry at its climax; after the débacle of the FWMW, the company withdrew from Formula One, never to return.

1970 Porsche flat-16 prototype.

Porsche developed their flat-16 in the search for the power needed to compete with the big-capacity machines in the Can-Am series.  Unable further to enlarge their flat-12, their solution was to add a third more cylinders.  As an engine, it was a success and delivered the promised power but the additional length of the engine necessitated adding to the wheelbase of the cars and that upset their balance, drivers finding them unstable.  Porsche mothballed the flat-16 and resorted instead to forced-aspiration, the turbocharged flat-12 so effective that ultimately it was banned but not before it was tweaked to deliver a reputed 1500+ horsepower in Can-Am qualifying trim and, in 1975, at the Talladega raceway it was used to set the FIA closed course speed record at 221.160 mph (355.923 km/h); the mark stood for five years.  Had the 917 from the start been designed around a flat-16, it's history may have proved more remarkable still.

1966 Ford 289 V8 in GT40 Mk 1.

Not all the Ford GT40s had the photogenic cluster of eight velocity stacks.  When the Ford team arrived at Le Mans in 1966, their Mk II GT40s were fitted with a detuned version of the 427 cubic inch (7.0 litre) big-block FE engines used on the NASCAR circuits and instead of the multiple twin-choke carburetors with the velocity stacks familiar to the Europeans, it was fed by a single four barrel unit under a fairly agricultural looking air intake.  On the GT40s, the velocity stacks looked best on the 289 and 302 cubic inch (4.7 & 4.9 litre) small-block Windsor V8s, the ones built with the four downdraft Weber carburetors thought most charismatic and they're nicely complemented by the "bundle of snakes" exhaust systems.

1967 BRM H-16.

In typically English fashion, the 1949 BRM V16 is celebrated as a glorious failure.  In grand prix racing, it failed for many reasons but in one aspect, it was a great success: the supercharged 1.5 litre engine generated prodigious, if hard to handle, power.  Not discouraged, when a three litre formula was announced for 1966, BRM again found the lure of sixteen cylinders irresistible though this time, aspiration would be atmospheric.  It actually powered a Lotus to one grand prix victory in Formula One but that was its sole success.  Although nice and short, it was heavy and tall, the latter characteristic contributing to a high centre of gravity, exacerbated by the need to elevate the mounting of the block to make space for the exhaust system of the lower eight cylinders.  It was also too heavy and the additional power it produced was never enough to offset the many drawbacks.  Withdrawn from competition after two seasons and replaced by a more conventional V12, the FIA later changed the rules to protect BRM from themselves, banning sixteen cylinder engines.  Had BRM persisted, what was planned was four-valve head so the H-16's component count would have listed: 16 cylinders, 2 crankshafts, 8 camshafts, 2 distributers and 64 valves, making those who value intricacy porn most content.

1969 Ferrari 312P.

Build to comply with Group 6 regulations for prototype sports cars, the Ferrari 312 P was raced by the factory towards the end of the classic era for sports car racing which dated back to the early 1950s.  Fielded first with a three litre V12, it was re-powered with a flat-12 in 1971 and has often been described as the Ferrari Formula One car with bodywork and while a simplification, given the engineering differences between the two, that was the concept.  It appeared on the grid to contest the World Sportscar Championship in 1969, a return from a year of self-imposed exile after one of Enzo Ferrari's many arguments with the FIA.  Needing reliability for distance racing, the Formula One engine was slightly detuned and, as in the open wheeler on which it was based, acted as an integral load-bearing part of the structure.  Unlike Ferrari's earlier sports cars, this time the classic array of Webber carburetors was eschewed, the velocity stacks sitting atop Lucas mechanical fuel-injection.

Albert Einstein, Lindsay Lohan and velocity

Velocity plays is a critical component in Albert Einstein’s (1879-1955) Special (1905) & General (1915) Theories of Relativity which profoundly redined understanding of space, time, and gravity.  In the Special Theory of Relativity, there is an explanation of the perception of “simultaneity”: events simultaneous in one frame of reference may not be simultaneous in another frame moving at a different velocity.  The critical implication of this was that time was absolute but depends on the relative motion of observers.  This means a moving clock runs slower than one which is static (relative to the observer).  History’s second most quoted equation (number one said to be “2+2=4” although this is contested) is Einstein’s expression of mass-energy equivalence (E=mc²) which shows that mass and energy are interchangeable.  The significance in that of velocity is that as an object's velocity approaches the speed of light, its relativistic mass increases, requiring more energy to continue accelerating.  From this Einstein deduced the speed of light was the “universal speed limit” because for this eventually to be exceeded would require the input of an infinite amount of energy.  Whether such a state might have been possible in the first fraction of a second during the creation of the current universe remains a matter of speculation but as it now exists, the limit remains orthodox science although, for certain purposes, it is possible usefully to construct a model of the universe where, in a sense, "everything is happening at the same time", an abstraction which, paradoxically, is often used to illustrate why it's wrong.  This "everything is happening at the same time" model differs from one in which time doesn't exist: in such a place, everything would have to happen at once.     

The role of velocity in the General Theory of Relativity remains fundamental but is more complex still.  In addition to the dilation of time sue to relative motion, there is also “Gravitational Time Dilation” (due to relative motion, gravity itself causes time to dilate).  Objects moving in strong gravitational fields experience time more slowly than those existing in weaker fields.  Radically, what Einstein did was explain gravity not as a force (which is how we experience it) but as a curvature of space-time caused by the effects of mass & energy and the motion (and thus the velocity) of objects is is influenced by this curvature.  The best known illustration of the concept is that of “Geodesic Motion”: In curved space-time, a free-falling object moves along a geodesic path (the straightest possible between the points of departure & arrival). The velocity of an object influences its trajectory in curved space-time, and this motion is determined by the curvature created by mass-energy.

Two of Lindsay Lohan’s car most publicized car accidents.  All else being equal (which, as Albert Einstein would have explained, probably can’t happen), if an object is travelling at a higher velocity (in the casual sense of "speed"), the damage will be greater.  In these examples, at the point of impact, the Porsche 911 (997) CarreraS (2012, left) was travelling at a higher velocity than the Mercedes-Benz SL 65 AMG roadster (2005, right).

In classical (pre-Einstein) mechanics, the explanation would have been an object traveling at a higher velocity would have its kinetic energy increase quadratically with velocity (ie double the velocity and the kinetic energy increases by a factor of four.  In relativistic physics, as an object's velocity approaches the speed of light, its relativistic mass increases with velocity and relativistic mass contributes to the object's total energy.  For velocities much less than the speed of light (non-relativistic speeds (a car, even with Lindsay Lohan behind the wheel)), the increase in mass is negligible, and the primary difference is the increase in kinetic energy which follows the classical equation.  However, at velocities approaching the speed of light, both the kinetic energy and the relativistic mass increase significantly.  In a car crash, the main determinate of an impact's severity (and thus the damage suffered) is the kinetic energy:  A car traveling at a higher velocity will have significantly more kinetic energy, so any impact will be more destructive; the kinetic energy is determined by the square of the velocity meaning small a small increase in velocity results in a large increase in energy.  So, on the road, it’s really all about energy because the velocity attainable (relative to what’s going to be hit) means any increase in mass is going to be negligible.  However, were a car to be travelling at close to the speed of light the relativistic mass greatly would be increased, further contributing to the energy of the crash and making things worse still.

Genocide

Genocide (pronounced jen-uh-sahyd)

(1) A special class of mass-murder, the deliberate and systematic extermination of a national, racial, political, or cultural group, usually by a state; the systematic killing of substantial numbers of people on the basis of their ethnicity, religion, or nationality.

(2) In casual (and imprecise) use, by extension, the systematic killing of substantial numbers of people on other grounds.

(3) In casual (and imprecise) use, by extension, the systematic suppression of a cultural identity, language etc on the basis of cultural, racial or ethnic origin (often expressed as culturicide or cultural genocide).

1944: The construct is géno + cide.  Géno is from the Ancient Greek γένος (genos) (race; kind) from the primitive Indo-European gene- (give birth, beget (with derivatives referring to procreation and familial and tribal groups)); it was cognate with the Latin gēns (tribe, clan).  The suffix cide (cīda) is from the Latin caedere (to kill; a killing).  The creation of the word genocide is attributed to Polish-born US lawyer Raphael Lemkin (1900-1959) who used it in his book Axis Rule in Occupied Europe (1943-1944) in reference to the Nazi extermination of the Jews of Europe.  In the English-speaking world, there were the pedants who didn’t approve of the mixing of Latin and Greek, noting the proper formation would be genticide, the construct being the Latin gēns (a race, nation, people; a clan, family (oblique stem: gent-)) +‎ -cide and is a hypothetical Latin etymon of the form genticīdium (from gēns +‎ -cīdium (the suffix denoting “killer”; “cutter”) +‎ -ium (from the Latin -um (neuter singular morphological suffix)).  Genocidal is the adjective.

There was earlier, in a similar sense, the French populicide (variously cited as dating from 1792 or 1799) from French populicide, a construct made necessary by the excesses in the aftermath of the 1789 French Revolution.  This was later adopted in German as Völkermeuchelnden (genocidal) and was known in English by 1893 as the anglicized folk-murdering.  The less rigorous ethnocide is attested from 1970 in French and 1974 in English.

Raphael Lemkin (1900-1959).

The word genocide was coined by Raphael Lemkin (1900-1959), a Polish-Jewish lawyer who had immersed himself in study after, as a student, being shocked to discover there existed nothing in international law to prosecute the Ottoman leaders who were complicit in what is now (though not by all) often called the Armenian Genocide (1915-1917) in which over a million are thought to have been killed.  Essentially, Lemkin identified the doctrine of sovereign immunity (the idea that what happens within nation boundaries must be regarded as purely internal matters) as the reason state-sanctioned mass-murder had such a long history and it could be stopped only if this doctrine was subject to some limitations.

In November 1944, Lemkin’s book Axis Rule in Occupied Europe was published.  It was a review of the legal implications of the consequences of the Nazi Germany New Order administrations in the occupied nations and contained the first definitional framework of genocide.  His point was that genocide did not of necessity mean “the immediate destruction of a nation” which was a concept of course familiar from thousands of years of warfare but instead signified “a coordinated plan of different actions aimed at the destruction of essential foundations of the life of national groups, with the aim of annihilating the groups themselves.”  That formulation was something specific to the circumstances of the holocaust, a process which, for almost a decade, progressed from the Nazi state introducing laws which sought to marginalize and exclude the Jews from Germany’s cultural and economic life to the building of an industrial system intended to murder every Jew in Europe, a process which was organic, a reaction to the circumstances at the time.  The Nazis, upon their assumption of power in 1933 had not even the vaguest plan of extermination, not because Hitler would have thought mass-murder on any scale unacceptable but because it was unimaginable that such a thing was possible.  What was planned was eradication, the forced migration of the Jews from what Germany was and what it was to become, what would now be described (in the literal sense rather than as the euphemism with which the phrase is now associated) as ethnic cleansing.  It was the circumstances of inter-war politics and later war-time realities which meant (1) that mass-emigration firstly within and later beyond Europe was not possible and (2) that under the Nacht und Nebel (night and fog) of war, the mass-murder of millions became possible.  As the word tends now to be used, between 1933 and 1942, a displacement of population became genocide.

Perhaps surprisingly given the perceptions of many, the word genocide did not figure large in the incitements served at the Nuremburg Trial (1946-1946), being mentioned not as one of the four counts but included in Count Three (War Crimes:  "...deliberate and systematic genocide, viz, the extermination of racial and national groups, against the civilian populations of certain occupied territories in order to destroy particular races and classes of people and national, racial or religious groups, particularly Jews, Poles and Gypsies and others."

Judges' bench at the International Military Tribunal, Nuremberg, 1945-1946.

Although the holocaust was the most monstrous matter to be tried at Nuremberg, any reluctance to include genocide as a separate count was understandable. Nothing quite like the International Military Tribunal (IMT) which convened at Nuremberg had ever been assembled and it was acknowledged at the time some of the matters with which the defendants were charged were based in retrospective law; they were being held to account for conduct which, at the time, was not unlawful.  Sensitive to this and the need to frame the incitements as close as possible to acknowledged legal norms, the prosecutors, mostly working lawyers for whom the primary concern was winning the case, tried as much as possible to avoid novelty in the incitement.  As it was, the document grew from a three-odd page draft in June to a final copy of sixty-five pages when served on the defendants.  The word genocide appeared just the once.

Genocide was in 1946 recognized as a crime under international law by the United Nations General Assembly and was codified as a crime in the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (the Genocide Convention.  It expanded Lemkin’s definition, holding that genocide was “any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

(1) Killing members of the group.

(2) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group.

(3) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part.

(4) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group.

(5) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

Genocide is defined in the same terms in the Rome Statute which created the International Criminal Court (ICC) as well as in the statutes of other international and hybrid jurisdictions.  Over one-hundred and fifty states have ratified the convention but the International Court of Justice (ICJ) has anyway ruled the convention embodies principles that are part of general customary international law so whether or not ratified, in legal theory, all states are bound by the principle that genocide is a crime prohibited under international law.  Many states have also criminalized genocide in their domestic law.  Technically, intent is the most contentious element in any genocide prosecution.  To succeed, intent must be a proven on the part of perpetrators physically to destroy a national, ethnical, racial or religious group; cultural suppression or destruction is not genocide and nor is expulsion from territory. 

After Nuremberg, genocide was long applied only to the destruction of an ethnic group (as conventionally defined) although there has more recently been a debate about whether it applies only if killing of all members of the group is involved or if other means, such as dispersing the group to the point where shared cultural practices or identity are no longer possible also constitutes (an unqualified) genocide; the concepts of cultural genocide, linguistic genocide etc.  The crime has never needed to be absolute.  It has always been understood to include “systematic mass killing”, even if there’s not an intention absolutely to eradicate a group, thereby covering geographically localized events, the actions which in the Balkan wars of the 1990s came to be known as “ethnic cleansing”.  Where there is some purpose other than the actual destruction of a group, such as terrorizing the group or killing the population of a particular place irrespective of group membership, the more precise term is democide, the construct being the Ancient Greek δῆμος (demos) (people) +‎ -cide.  The conduct of the Pol Pot regime in Cambodia in the late 1970s, because it wasn’t inherently or exclusively based on ethnic division, is thus, technically, probably a democide although such was the enormity of the awfulness of what happened that most probably find this a fine and needless distinction.

As many passages in sacred texts (including the Koran and the Bible) indicate, genocide, as a political imperative and military strategy, has a long and cross-cultural history in human civilization.  Although most attention is devoted to the most modern events with the highest death-toll (such as the holocaust, the still disputed matter of the Armenians in 1915 and the events in Rwanda in 1994), in a global sense, the most recent genocide which went closest to succeeding was the genocide of the Moriori, the indigenous people of the Chatham Islands (which lie to the east of New Zealand).  Invaded by the Maori in 1835, the Moriori were subject to mass murder, enslavement and a policy of deliberate cultural repression; the population which had once numbered close to two thousand by the 1870s shrinking to under a hundred.  In a sense that act of genocide did succeed, the last pure-blooded Moriori dying early in the twentieth century.

Wiglomeration

Wiglomeration (pronounced wig-glom-uh-rey-shuhn)

Needlessly or pointlessly complicated, time-consuming legal wrangling (listed by most sources as “always derogatory” but it’s presumed within the profession it’s sometimes an expression of admiration).

1852: The construct was wig + (agg)lomeration.  Wiglomeration is a noun, the noun plural is wiglomerations.  Although some must have been tempted, there seems no evidence anyone has ever created derived forms such as wiglomerative, wiglomerating, wiglomerator etc.

Wig (a head of real or synthetic hair worn on the head (1) to disguise baldness, (2) for cultural or religious reasons, (3) for fashion, (4) by actors better to resemble the character they are portraying or (4) in some legal systems by advocates or judges during court proceedings) was a shortened form of periwig, from the Middle French perruque which was probably borrowed from the western Lombard perrucca & parrucca which are of uncertain origin, the Oxford English Dictionary (OED) suggesting there may be some relationship with the Latin pilus (hair) but, noting the phonetic variations, ponder that instead it could be related to parrocchetto (parakeet), the reference being to the bird’s feathers.  Linguistically, the process might have been similar to the phonetic changes of the intervocalic “L” into “R” of Italian parlare and Sicilian parrari.  Among fisherman, a wig was also “an old seal” although that use is now rare.  The meaning “to reprimand” is thought related to the slang term “bigwig” (that dating from the seventeenth century fashion in England of wearing big (and in the era increasingly bigger) wigs in England, a trend which peaked in early in 1700s) because of the association with aristocrats, nobles, lawyers and judges, the size and grandeur of one’s powdered wig a status symbol used to convey a perception of wealth and social standing.  Fashions however change and during the eighteenth century, the use declined and while among a few they lingered into the early 1800s, the French Revolution (1789) really was their death knell just about everywhere except courtrooms.

Interestingly, academic sources inside the construct was wig + (agg)lomeration rather than the more obvious wig + (g)lomeration, this based on an analysis of the unpublished notes of the author who coined the word.  Glomerate (to gather or wind into a spherical form or mass; to collect certain objects) was from the Latin glomeratus, past participle of glomerāre (to wind or add into a ball; to glomerate).  Agglomerate (the act or process of collecting in a mass; a heaping together; the state of being collected in a mass; a mass; cluster) was from the Latin agglomerātus, past participle of agglomerāre, the construct being ad- (to) + -glomerāre, from glomus (a ball; a mass), from globus (genitive glomeris), (a ball of yarn) of uncertain origin.

Wigs galore: Court of Chancery, Lincoln's Inn Hall (1808-1810), a book illustration created by Rudolph Ackermann, WH Pyne, William Combe, Augustus Pugin & Thomas Rowlandson, British Library collection.

Wiglomeration was coined by Charles Dickens (1812–1870) for a bit of a rant by Mr Jarndyce in the serialized novel Bleak House (1852-1853) which told the tale of the fictional probate case Jarndyce vs Jarndyce (spoken as “Jarndyse and Jarndyse” in the conventions of English legal language) which, over the decades it unfolded in the Court of Chancery Court, absorbed in legal fees all of the vast estate which the proceedings were initiated to distribute to the rightful beneficiaries.  The legal establishment at the time of publication criticized the depiction as “an exaggeration” but while it wasn’t typical, nor was it without basis because cases lasting over a decade were known and one famously ended (with the subject estate exhausted in legal costs) only in 1915 after running for 117 years.  Even well into the twentieth century, judicial sluggishness was not unknown: the House of Lords once took almost 19 years to hand down a decision.  In his youth as a court reporter Dickens had witnessed much wiglomeration.

Bleak House Chapter 8 (Covering a Multitude of Sins):

“He must have a profession; he must make some choice for himself. There will be a world more wiglomeration about it, I suppose, but it must be done.”

“More what, guardian?” said I.

“More wiglomeration,” said he. “It’s the only name I know for the thing. He is a ward in Chancery, my dear. Kenge and Carboy will have something to say about it; Master Somebody—a sort of ridiculous sexton, digging graves for the merits of causes in a back room at the end of Quality Court, Chancery Lane—will have something to say about it; counsel will have something to say about it; the Chancellor will have something to say about it; the satellites will have something to say about it; they will all have to be handsomely feed, all round, about it; the whole thing will be vastly ceremonious, wordy, unsatisfactory, and expensive, and I call it, in general, wiglomeration. How mankind ever came to be afflicted with wiglomeration, or for whose sins these young people ever fell into a pit of it, I don’t know; so it is.”

Lindsay Lohan in blonde bob wig, appearing on Late Night with Jimmy Fallon, New York, November 2012.

The word does not of necessity imply complex or intricate legal reasoning or argument although that can be part of things.  In the jargon, the trick to successful wiglomeration is to use the court’s processes to prolong proceedings (barristers are usually paid for each day’s appearance), either by causing delays or requiring the other side to respond to matters raised which may be so arcane as to be irrelevant, even if that’s not immediately obvious.  Obviously, the more time consuming (and thus more lucrative) these maneuvers prove the better and even if cases don’t literally become interminable, to some they must seem so.  There is also the possibility wiglomeration can fulfill a strategic purpose: if one party has access to effectively unlimited legal resources (ie money) while the other party is financially constrained, sufficient wiglomeration (which manifest as another day’s fees to be paid) can compel the poorer party either to end proceedings or settle on terms less favorable than might have been achieved had the case been brought to judgment.  The most egregious examples of the practice can be classified as an “abuse of process” but judges are sometimes reluctant to intervene because (1) the tactics being used are usually technically correct and (2) it might be seen as denying a party their rights.  The problem is the system but a wholly equitable solution is not immediately obvious.

Central criminal court Old Bailey 1840.

The tradition of barristers wearing wigs in English courts began in the seventeenth century when powdered wigs were a fashionable upper class accessory.  Culturally, lawyers tend to identify upwards so the adoption would not have been seen as “aping their betters” but just a natural alignment of style.  The courtroom style persisted even after wigs had elsewhere fallen from fashion and are still worn in many jurisdictions with traditions inherited from England.  The rationale offered is (1) the wig & gown have by virtue of long use become a symbol of formality and professionalism which lends dignity to proceedings and (2) the garb helps create a sense of anonymity and impartiality, presenting the officers of the court as representatives of the law rather than individuals with personal biases or prejudices, once a matter of some significance at a time when, for historic and structural reasons, there were perceptions of a lack of impartiality in the legal system.  They’re now not always a feature of proceedings but in most systems where they’ve been retained, barristers seem still to want to cling to the tradition although in recent years there’s been a tendency for judges to avoid them where possible and some more recently convened courts have reserved them only for ceremonial occasions and the odd photo opportunity.  Some courts (notably the UK’s recently established Supreme Court has made it possible for cases to be conducted without anybody be-wigged or gowned although, in a sign of the times, vegan wigs are now available as an alternative to the traditional horsehair.

The opinion the younger Dickens formed of the ways of lawyers has been shared by many.  Adolf Hitler’s (1889-1945; German head of government 1933-1945 & head of state 1934-1945) movement in its early days had much need of the services of lawyers and their efforts saved many Nazis from the consequences of their actions but Hitler showed little gratitude to the profession, declaring more than once “I will not give up until every German realizes that it is shameful to be a lawyer.”  Hitler’s own lawyer was Hans Frank (1900–1946) who in 1939 was appointed Governor General of occupied Poland where his rule was corrupt and brutal by even the Nazi's standards of awfulness and few have ever doubted he deserved the death sentence handed down by the International Military Tribunal (IMT) at Nuremberg (1945-1946).  Even in 1946 Frank was still describing Hitler as “…that great man” and regretted his one “…conspicuous failing…” was his mistrust of both the law and lawyers.  What Frank wanted was an authoritarian state but one under the rule of law; he was appalled not by the mass murder which would come to be called genocide but by it not being authorized by a duly appointed judge.  In Nuremberg he claimed to have undergone a number of religious experiences and was received into the Roman Catholic Church, apparently anxious either to atone for his sins or avoid an eternity of torture in Hell.  Of his death sentence he remarked “I deserved it and I expected it.” and of Hitler’s “thousand year Reich” he observed “…a thousand years will pass and still this guilt of Germany will not have been erased.”

There’s a popular view William Shakespeare (1564–1616) shared the general disapprobation of the profession because one of his most quoted phrases is “The first thing we do is, let’s kill all the lawyers.”  However, the context is rarely discussed and quite what the bard was intending to convey is open to interpretation.  The words were given to a character Dick the Butcher and spoken in Act IV, Scene II of Henry VI, Part II (1596-1599).

JACK CADE: I am able to endure much.

DICK [aside]: No question of that; for I have seen him whipp’d three market-days together.

JACK CADE: I fear neither sword nor fire.

SMITH [aside]: He need not fear the sword; for his coat is of proof.

DICK [aside]: But methinks he should stand in fear of fire, being burnt i’ th’ hand for stealing of sheep.

JACK CADE: Be brave, then; for your captain is brave, and vows reformation. There shall be in England seven half-penny loaves sold for a penny: the three-hoop’d pot shall have ten hoops; and I will make it felony to drink small beer: all the realm shall be in common; and in Cheapside shall my palfrey go to grass: and when I am king,– as king I will be,–

ALL. God save your majesty!

JACK CADE: I thank you, good people:– there shall be no money; all shall eat and drink on my score; and I will apparel them all in one livery, that they may agree like brothers, and worship me their lord.

DICK: The first thing we do, let’s kill all the lawyers.

Dick is a villain and the henchman of Jack Cade, who is leading a rebellion against King Henry and their view is that if they kill all who can read and write and burn all books then they’ll find a population easier to rule.  Knowing that, the more generous interpretation is that civilization depends for its fairness and tranquillity on the protection afforded by law and administered by lawyers, Shakespeare representing the rule of law as society’s most fundamental defense against those hungry for power at any price.  Lawyers of course support this version of Shakespeare’s intent, Justice John Paul Stevens (1920–2019; associate justice of the US Supreme Court 1975-2010) even discussing it in a dissenting opinion (Professional Real Estate Investors Inc vs Columbia Pictures Industries Inc (1993)) when he noted “As a careful reading of that text will reveal, Shakespeare insightfully realized that disposing of lawyers is a step in the direction of a totalitarian form of government.”  However, as neo-Marxists and others would point out “He would say that, wouldn’t he.”  If one’s world view is a construct in which the law and lawyers are agents acting in the interests only of the ruling class (the 1% in the popular imagination), then Dick the Butcher and Cade the labourer in seeking to overthrow an unfair, oppressive system are victims whose only hope of escaping their roles as slaves of the nobility is to revolt, a part of which will be the killing of the lawyers because, as the profession offers their skills only to those who can pay; those with no money have no choice.