Heckflosse

Heckflosse (pronounced hek-flos or hek-floss-ah (German))

A nickname for the Mercedes-Benz W111 & W112 sedans produced between 1959 and 1968 (1961-1971 for the coupés and cabriolets with the abbreviated fin) and usually translated in English as “fintail”.

1959: A compound word in modern German, Heck (rear; back) + Flosse (fin).  As a surname, Heck (most common in southern Germany and the Rhineland) came from the Middle High German hecke or hegge (hedge), the origin probably as a topographic name for someone who lived near a hedge.  The link with hedges as a means of dividing properties led in the Middle Low German to heck meaning “wooden fencing” under the influence of the Old Saxon hekki, from the Proto-West Germanic hakkju.  In nautical slang heck came to refer to the “back of a ship” because the position of the helmsman in the stern was enclosed by such a fence and from here it evolved in modern German generally to refer to "back or rear".  Flosse is obscure but was probably related to the Middle English and Old English finn, the Dutch vin, the Low German finne and the Swedish fena.  Because all German nouns are capitalized, Heckflosse is correct but in English, where it's treated as a nickname, heckflosse is common. 

The (low) rise and (rapid) fall of the Mercedes-Benz tail-fin

Although designed during Detroit’s tail-fin craze during the mid-late 1950s, Mercedes-Benz always claimed the Heckflosse (tail-fins), introduced in 1959, weren’t mere stylistic flourishes but rather peilstege (parking aids or sight-lines (literally "bearing bars", the construct being peil-, from peilen (take a bearing; find the direction) + Steg (bar))) which marked the extent of the bodywork, this to assist while reversing.  It's never been clear if this interpretation existed during the design process or was applied retrospectively in response to criticism after the debut but by 1960, even in the US where fins has assumed absurd proportions, the fad was fast fading.  As a cultural artifact, the distinctiveness of the Heckflosse made them a staple for film-makers crafting the verisimilitude of the 1960s high cold war, just as the big 600s from the same era are used still when wealth or evil needs to be conveyed.

1963 Mercedes-Benz 300 SE Lang (Long) (W112).

Although on a longer wheelbase than the standard 300 SE, the model designation remained the same, the SEL nomenclature not appearing until the subsequent (W109) 300 SEL (1965), the additional chrome framing around the badge on some early-build models the only embellishment.  The alpha-numeric soup of model designations which proliferated from the late 1960s started as something almost logical (ie a 300 used a 3.0 litre engine, a 220 a 2.2 etc) but as new product lines emerged, anomalies increased until, in the early 1990s, it was re-organized although the new system would generate its own inconsistencies and eventually the number often had only a vague relationship with engine displacement.

On 1 October 1966, Heckflosses were part of the small motorcade in which, having served the twenty year sentences they were lucky to receive from the International Military Tribunal (IMT) at Nuremberg (1945-1946), war criminals Albert Speer (1905-1981) and Baldur von Schirach (1907–1974) were driven from Spandau prison in Berlin.  The next day he boarded a Pan-Am Boeing 727 for a flight to Hannover, his first time on a jet aircraft because in 1945 permission had been denied (ostensibly on security grounds) for him to go on a test flight in one of the two-seater Messerschmitt Me-262s built for training.  Like many aspects of his life after release, the THF-HAJ flight had been planned while in Spandau, Speer particularly taken with the 727 because he'd so often seen it during its final descent while tending the prison grounds which he transformed into a landscaped park.

1971 Mercedes-Benz 280SE 3.5 Coupé (W111).

On the sedans, the uncharacteristic exuberances were left undisturbed until production ended in 1968 although the line was restricted to a line of lower cost utilitarian models after 1965.  The coupé and cabriolet were introduced in 1961 and lasted a decade.  Truncating the Heckflosse, they achieved an elegance of line Mercedes-Benz has never since matched but then, few others have.

1969 Mercedes-Benz 300SEL 6.3 (W109).

By 1965, on the W108 and W109 which replaced the more expensive W111 & all the W112 sedans, the fins were barely discernible, the factory noting the contribution to structural rigidity, adding strength without the increase in weight the use of other techniques would have imposed.

1978 Mercedes-Benz 450SLC 5.0 (C107).

Advances in metallurgy and engineering meant achieving the required strength became possible even without additional curvature in the metal and in 1971 the R107 (roadster) and C107 (coupé) debuted with the rear surface an uninterrupted flat plane.

1978 Mercedes-Benz 450SEL 6.9 (W116).

Despite that, a year later, the W116 sedans were released with the most vestigial of fins.  The retention of styling elements between generations is not unusual, the second generation Range Rover reprising the earlier model’s distinctive hood creases, even though no longer a structural necessity.

Réchauffé

Réchauffé (pronounced rey-shoh-fey )

(1) A warmed-up dish of food; the use of leftovers.

(2) By extension, anything old or stale brought back into service; old material reworked or rehashed.

Circa 1800: From the French réchauffé, past participle of réchauffer (to re-heat), the construct being r(e)- (again) + échauffer (to warm) (from the Vulgar Latin excalefāre, the construct being ex- (the intensive prefix + calefacere ( to warm).  In English, the spelling is usually rechauffe and the word was a direct borrowing from the French rechauffe, the feminine réchauffée, the masculine plural rechauffes & the feminine plural réchauffées.  Échauffer was related to Middle & Old French chaufer (which persists in modern French as chauffer) (to warm), ultimately from Latin cal(e)facere (to make hot), the construct being cale– (stem of calēre (to be hot) + facere (to make).  The Middle French chaufer was the source of English chafe (to wear or abrade by rubbing) although the original meaning was ”to warm, heat”, and that sense survives in culinary use, the chafing dish a receptacle which consists of a metal dish with a lamp or heating appliance beneath, used for keeping food hot at the table.

In English, few prefixes have been more productively applied than re- but, being a direct import from the French, re-chauffe never emerged.  The re- prefix is from the Middle English re-, from the circa 1200 Old French re-, from the Latin re- & red- (back; anew; again; against), from the primitive Indo-European wre & wret- (again), a metathetic alteration of wert- (to turn).  It displaced the native English ed- & eft-.  A hyphen is not normally included in words formed using this prefix, except when the absence of a hyphen would (1) make the meaning unclear, (2) when the word with which the prefix is combined begins with a capital letter, (3) when the word with which the is combined with begins with another “re”, (4) when the word with which the prefix is combined with begins with “e”, (5) when the word formed is identical in form to another word in which re- does not have any of the senses listed above.  As late as the early twentieth century, the dieresis was sometimes used instead of a hyphen (eg reemerge) but this is now rare except when demanded for historic authenticity or if there’s an attempt deliberately to affect the archaic.  Re- may (and has) been applied to almost any verb and previously irregular constructions appear regularly in informal use; the exception is all forms of “be” and the modal verbs (can, should etc).  Although it seems certain the origin of the Latin re- is the primitive Indo-European wre & wret- (which has a parallel in Umbrian re-), beyond that it’s uncertain and while it seems always to have conveyed the general sense of "back" or "backwards", there were instances where the precise was unclear and the prolific productivity in Classical Latin tended make things obscure.

Rechauffe entered English early in the nineteenth century in the figurative sense which had for some time been current in France, suggesting something (ideas, literature etc) or someone (actors, artists and (especially) politicians) old being rehashed or recycled (hence the common phrase c’est du réchauffé (meaning “it’s old hat)).  That remains the most common use in English but by the late 1800s, the original sense in French (reheated food) had been picked up across the channel, presumably because “Réchauffé Bœuf bourguignon” is a more appealing dish than “yesterday’s stew”.

Lasagna (lasagne).

Before the figurative use prevailed, rechauffe referred to reheating food left over from an earlier meal, a practice doubtless common since cooking became a thing and one commendable for reducing waste and encouraging thrift.  It needs however to be undertaken with care because cooked food cannot be stored for too long without the quality deteriorating or the risk of unpleasant bacterial infection increasing.  As a general principle, never re-cook; only reheat left-overs which retain their wholesomeness.  Where possible, cut the cooked food finely (increasing the surface area will quicken the reheating and enhance the penetration of flavor, where necessary adding additional moisture (sauces or a gravy) during the reheating.  There are some foods which probably should never been reheated (most famously chicken) and some which are said to benefit from being left overnight, notably lasagna (lasagne) which many insist seems to gain some richness once rechauffed.

The politically rechauffed

Politicians in the modern age are rechauffed with less frequency than was once tolerated.  It’s hard now to imagine major political parties allowing someone who let them to defeat at an election being further indulged but in earlier times, Australia and the United States provided a few examples:

William Jennings Bryan (1860–1925) who gained the Democratic Party’s nomination for President of the United States in 1896, 1900 & 1908, losing each time.  For a generation he dominated his party but is probably now better remembered as the anti-evolutionist lawyer in the 1925 “Scopes Monkey Trial“ (State of Tennessee v John Thomas Scopes).  His daughter once had to sprint to catch a bus and remarked "I'm the first member of my family successfully to run for something". 

Dr HV Evatt (1894-1965) was a judge of the High Court who entered politics, becoming leader of the Australian Labor Party (ALP), leading them to defeat in three successive elections, 1954, 1955 & 1958.  They were difficult days for the ALP and Evatt’s declining mental acuity, subsequently attributed to arteriosclerosis, was noted even at the time.  Later, those who knew him would differ greatly on just when the instability began though all would agree there was madness.

Evatt’s successor as ALP leader was Arthur Calwell (1896-1973), a devoted Roman Catholic who in dress and manner appeared a figure from an earlier age.  He contested three elections (1961, 1963 & 1966) without success although he came close in the first, actually gaining more votes than his opponent though without securing the requisite number of seats.  However, he lost in 1966 in a landslide, a result which would have implications, the extent of his loss meaning not even the landslide the ALP achieved in 1969 was enough to secure victory.  His slim volume Be Just and Fear Not (1972) remains one of the better Australian political memoirs.

It was Sir Robert Menzies 1894–1978 (prime-minister of Australia 1939-1941 & 1949-1966) who thrice defeated both Evatt and Calwell.  Written-off after losing office in 1941 (the famous phrase of the era that “Menzies couldn’t lead a flock of homing pigeons” summed up the feeling) his rechauffe was all the more remarkable because he followed a path which rarely succeeds, forming a new political party as his platform, one that survives to this day as the country’s most successful electoral machine.  Menzies said of Evatt “I disliked him, I distrusted him” but served as one of the pallbearers at his funeral, some wondering what “the Doc”, whose feelings were reciprocal, would have made of that.

Adlai Stevenson, 1952.

Adlai Stevenson (1900–1965) had no easy task running for US President in 1952 against Dwight Eisenhower (1885-1969; US president 1953-1961).  That he lost to the popular soldier who had been supreme commander not only of the D-Day invasion of Nazi-occupied Europe but also of NATO (1921-1952) was less a surprise than the fact the general’s margin of victory wasn’t greater.  In the prosperous 1950s, the Democratic nomination to run against Eisenhower wasn’t really a good career move but Stevenson sought the party’s endorsement and it unexpectedly turned into a fairly nasty contest after the general suffered a heart attack, encouraging some previously reticent Democrats to enter the fray.  The president however recovered well and won in a landslide.  When Stevenson died in London, many obituaries ran the famous photograph of him on the hustings in 1952 with a hole in his shoe.

Richard Nixon (left) & Lyndon Baines Johnson, the White House, 1968.

Eisenhower’s vice-president was Richard Nixon (1913-1994, US president 1969-1974) perhaps the most remarkable rechauffe of the modern age.  His famous defeat in the 1960 presidential election seemed bad enough but what appeared the final nail in his political coffin was losing the gubernatorial contest in California two years later and most suspect that for any other politician, that really would have been the end.  His tenacity however was legendary and assisted by the lucky circumstances of the 1960s: (1) the huge loss by Republican Barry Goldwater (1909-1998) in 1964, (2) the various traumas of the Vietnam War, (3) social unrest and (4) the implosion of LBJ’s (Lyndon Baines Johnson, 1908-1973; US president 1963-1969) presidency, Nixon returned to win convincingly in 1968 and massively in 1972.  From there it ended badly but the Nixon of 1960 does deserve some credit.  After being told he’d lost by “an electoral eyelash” and there was evidence of much fraud (and that evidence was compelling, unlike the allegations in 2020), his advisors told him he had sound grounds on which challenge the result.  Nixon declined to pursue the matter, arguing the institution of the presidency was too important to suggest it was tainted.  “Nobody steals the presidency of the United States” he told his aides.  Not all of his successors have shared his view.

The rechauffe of John Howard (b 1939; Australian prime-minister 1996-2007) proved a remarkable success and one he’d come not to expect.  Having lost the 1987 election after a bizarre schism in conservatives politics, he’d been written off, a judgement with which he agreed, telling one interviewer that a comeback “…really would be Lazarus with a triple bypass” yet the universe shifted and he regained the leadership, winning four successive elections (even a now rare upper house majority which proved a poisoned chalice).  Howard’s internecine opponent of the 1980s, Andrew Peacock (1939-2021) was also recycled but without success, his tilt at the 1990 election no more productive than his loss in 1984.  One of his opponents, noting the rechauffe, explored the culinary metaphor further, observing that “a soufflé never rises twice”.  That was an allusion to his image as someone rather insubstantial but he’ll always be remembered for allowing the country to have two elections contested by a Mr Peacock and a Mr Hawke.  It was a time of such coincidences, the leaders of the National Party at the time being successively Mr Blunt and Mr Sharp.

Shunamitism

Shunamitism (pronounced shunn-ah-might-izm)

The ancient practice of an old man sleeping with, but not necessarily having sex with, a young virgin, either to preserve youth or restore health.

Biblical (1 Kings 1-4): From Shunamite +‎ -ism, after Abishag (אבישג‎ (Avishag) in the Hebrew), a Shunamite woman who served this purpose for King David.  A Shunamite was an inhabitant of the Biblical village of Shunem.  The –ism suffix is ultimately either from the Ancient Greek -ισμός (-ismós), a suffix that forms abstract nouns of action, state, condition, doctrine; from stem of verbs in -ίζειν (-ízein) (whence the English -ize), or from the related suffix Ancient Greek -ισμα (-isma), which more specifically expressed a finished act or thing done.

Still recommended

Shunamitism is the practice of an old man sleeping with, but not necessarily having sex with, a young virgin to preserve his youth.  A legitimate medical theory of the time, the rationale was heat and vitality of the young maiden would revitalize the old man.

The term is based on the Biblical story of King David (1 Kings 1-4) and Abishag, a young woman from Shunem.  The King was very old and could not stay warm so his servants procured the young Abishag to sleep with him; they did not enjoy intimacy but Abishag also provided another footnote in royal history.  After a power-struggle with his brother Adonijah, Solomon was crowned king and when Adonijah asked for Abishag in marriage, Solomon, fearing another attempt to usurp the throne, had him put to death.

As late as the eighteenth century, physicians were still prescribing shunamitism and, in emergency medicine, it remains a recommended method to treat hypothermia when no medical facilities are available, though without mention of the necessity to secure a young virgin.

A work in progress: Rupert Murdoch (b 1931) with wife Jerry Hall (b 1956), Barbados, 2019.

Reports in June 2022 were circulating that Mr & Mrs Murdoch had separated and, after six year of marriage, were to divorce.  A usually reliable source for the details of such matters, the Murdoch tabloids, were as silent as they'd been when last Mr Murdoch sundered a marriage but no denial was issued, this taken as a confirmation by those who read between the lines.  Anything involving Mr Murdoch is an event of note, not least because he probably ranks with Billy Hughes (1862-1952), MacFarlane Burnett (1899-1985) and Germaine Greer (b 1939) as the most influential Australians of the last hundred-odd years.

Libre

Libre (pronounced lib-rah (U) or lee-bra (non-U))

(1) Of or relating to free will; independent & unconstrained (now rare).

(2) Of software with few limitations on distribution and including access source code with a right granted to modify and distribute changed versions, usually with the limitation that this must be on a free-of-charge basis.

(3) As Formula Libre (historically Formule Libre), a category of motorsport which imposes only minimal safety rules and is otherwise unregulated.

(4) In historic use, a free (ie not enslaved) black person living in a territory under the administration of the French or Spanish-colonial empires, the use most institutionalized in New Orleans.

1700s: From the French or Spanish libre (at liberty, free; clear, free, vacant; free, without obligation), from the Latin līber (free; unrestricted (and related to librum (book)), from the Old Latin loeber, from the Proto-Italic louðeros, from the primitive Indo-European hlewderos, from hlewd- (people).  Etymologists speculate the currency the word attained in the English-speaking world was initially due more to influence from Spanish than French, the word in more common use in the former.  The specific (though sometimes misleading) sense in software dates from the late twentieth century, more precise terms such as “open source”, “freeware”, “crippleware” & “freemium” actually more helpful.  Libre is a noun, verb and adjective.

Variations appear in many European languages (apart from those which directly borrowed libre) including the Alemannic German liiber, the Romanian liber and the thirteenth century Old Galician and Old Portuguese livre (in which libre co-existed).  Because of the influence of Spanish colonialism, libre appears often in Filipino dialectical use where it has tended to replace the older gratis (free).

Libre was a popular element in many in French formations encapsulating concepts, some of which were adopted in English although that tendency has now faded.  The phrases include un homme libre (literally “a free man” but used idiomatically in the sense of “an unmarried man”), la voie est libre (the way is clear), temps libre (free time), libre arbiter (free will), amour libre (free love (in the sense of the eradication of restrictive sexual mores) libre-échange (free trade), association libre (free association), à l'air libre (uncovered; in the open air (a pre-modern medical dogma which advocated not bandaging wounds), libre comme l'air (free as the air, synonymous with “free as a bird”)), nage libre (the freestyle stroke is swimming) & papier libre (a masculine noun for a piece of stationery not stamped or franked (ie without letterhead); it’s unrelated to newspapers etc distributed for free or without censorship).

There were also constructions of Spanish origin including aire libre (the outdoors, fresh air), barra libre (open bar (ie no limit), comercio libre (free trade). libre de culpa (off the hook, ie blameless”), libremente (to do something in an unrestrained manner), radical libre (free radical in the technical sense from chemistry), saque libre (the free kick in football), tiempo libre (free time), libérrimo (most free, the superlative degree of libre) & libertad (a degree of freedom; latitude, leeway).

Two constructs were adopted in English and added to the technical jargon of English.  The morphème libre in grammar indicates that which may be unattached from another morpheme (the smallest meaningful element in a text string).  Vers libre (free verse, ie in poetry, lines of varying lengths) was borrowed by English circa 1870.  Originally, the adoption reflected the technical meaning which was referenced against the French alexandrin (alexandrine), a syllabic poetic meter of twelve syllables (there were occasional deviations) with a medial caesura dividing the line into two hemistichs (half-lines), each of six syllables.  The structure, the origins of which can be traced to the twelfth century, was dominant in French poetry from the seventeen to the nineteenth centuries, encouraging a host of imitators around the continent and in the English-speaking world.  However, what were claimed to be the implications of free verse attracted the modernists who produced work which was derided by many critics (professional and otherwise) as “no verse” and thus, whatever the discernible structure, not exactly poetry and certainly not vers libre.  Free verse works which however, which tended either to ignore or parody the tradition of rhyme, did become a genre which endures to this day and among literary theorists, there’s long been the argument that in not relying on formalism (the technical constraint of rhyme) works needed to be more adventurous and imaginative, the focus on meaning rather than structure.  Divisions between the schools of poetry, although barely noticed by most of the population, continue to this day.

Formula Libre

Formula libre is the informal description of a motorsport category which, in its pure form, imposes no regulations other safety standards and to permit competition between vehicles which can be configured to widely different specifications, events are often conducted on some sort of handicap basis.  The philosophy of formula libre is the antithesis of that of motorsport’s governing body, the Fédération Internationale de l'Automobile (FIA, the International Automobile Federation) which began in the early twentieth century with the admirable aim of encouraging competition in the quest for speed but, beginning in the 1960s, started to develop an obsession with slowing things down.  The reasons for this have been debated and, whether related or not to the change in emphasis, the FIA in recent decades has morphed into a vast bureaucracy dedicated to (1) imposing category rules which make cars as uninteresting as possible, (2) imposing conditions which require event organizers to pay for increasing numbers of FIA staff to do things at the events and (3) find reasons why fees have to be paid to the FIA.

Motor racing in a recognizable form began in France in the 1880s, soon evolving from races between villages into formally organized events and by early the next century, was established as a popular spectator event, run sometimes on public roads (usually but not always closed to other traffic!) and increasingly, on circuits built expressly for the purpose, these have the advantage of being fenced, thus permitting an entry fee to be charged for those wishing to watch.  The first race to be called a Grand Prix was held in France in 1906, conducted over two days on a road course in Le Mans, 65 miles (105 km) in length and the interest generated encouraged others; by the 1920s, Grand Prix were held in many countries although there was no linking championship, the rules varying from place to place, tweaked often to ensure the machines produced by local manufacturers might enjoy some advantage, a practice which long endured.

1929 Mercedes-Benz SSKL.

The FIA’s predessor, the Association Internationale des Automobile Clubs Reconnus (AIACR, the International Association of Recognized Automobile Clubs) began creating rules governing the categories in motorsport just before the outbreak of hostilities in 1914, specifying minimum & maximum weights, engine displacement and defining body types but it was in the inter-war years that the first attempts were made to impose universal rules.  The rules were created but many race organizers, seeking wider entry lists and more spectacular racing, often declined to adopt them, instead preferring the less restrictive “sports car” definition which attracted more manufacturers, including those not in a position to produce pure racing cars which conformed with the AIACR’s regulations.  Eventually, such was the resistance, the rules for Grand Prix racing were in 1928 abandoned and the era known as Formule Libre began, exemplified by the big Mercedes-Benz SSKL, the last of the road-cars used to win Grand Prix races but one which illustrated the limitations of the approach; the next generation would have to be pure race cars, a change which ushered in the age of regulation which lasts to this day.

1936 Auto-Union Type-C.  Not used on the circuits, the twin-rear tyres were fitted for hill climbs in a partially successful attempt to tame the handling quirks induced by mounting the 6.0 litre (366 cubic inch) V16 behind the driver.  Although a preview of the form F1 cars would begin to adopt in the late 1950s, the less adventurous Mercedes-Benz W125 with a front-mounted, 5.7 litre (346 cubic inch) straight-eight proved both more effective and easier to handle.

The structures of competition also become formalized.  The number of Grand Prix had risen from five in 1927 to eighteen by 1934 and a manufacturers’ world championship had actually been awarded in 1925 although it consisted only of the Indianapolis 500, the Grand Prix of Europe, France & Italy.  Interestingly, there was no drivers’ title and in Formula One, the FIA would not award the Constructors' Championship (initially the International Cup for Formula One Manufacturers) until 1958 although there had be an award for drivers since 1950, an evolution of the 1935-1939 European Drivers’ Championship, created with the agreement of the national federations.  The memorable racing of the era was governed by rules and even then, the AIACR reacted against the increasing speeds which had been thought not possible under the 750 KG (1653 lb) maximum weight rule, creating in 1938 two classes (1) 4.5 litre (275 cubic inch) displacement un-supercharged & 3.0 litre (183 cubic inch) supercharged and (2) a 1.5 litre (92 cubic inch) supercharged voiturette class (informally known as formula two; Formula 1, 2, 3 etc would not be codified until the post-war years), the first Formula One race held in Italy in 1946.

Juan Manuel Fangio, BRM V16, in a Formule Libre race, Goodwood 1953.

Development of the big aero-engines used in World War II meant there had been enormous advances in forced induction and it was clear a 4.5 litre, naturally aspirated engine would be uncompetitive against a 3.0 litre supercharged unit so the FIA (the AIACR had in 1947 been reorganized and renamed) in 1949 announced the seven round Grand Prix World Championship for Formula One drivers would in 1950 be held for 1.5 litre supercharged and 4.5 litre un-supercharged cars.  However, a decline in the number of entries meant the championship was in 1952-1953 contested by Formula 2 cars which existed in greater numbers and this resurrected interest in Formule Libre; because dramatic machinery like the 4.5 litre Ferraris and the BRM V16 no longer had a championship to contest, they were instead entered in the handful of non-championship F1 races on offer and the more numerous Formule Libre events.  During the 1950s, the Formule Libre race, often the last of the weekend, was regarded by many spectators as the highlight, the machinery almost always the fastest at the event.

Allcomers, New Zealand, circa 1963, the Morrari leading a Corvette-powered Ford Zephyr Mk II.  Note the open-stack exhausts protruding from the Zephyr’s bonnet (hood), an efficient solution when space is limited but one banned by the FIA.

In the decades since, Formule Libre (now usually spelled formula libre) has never really gone away, (despite the best efforts of the humorless clerks at the FIA), its spirit exemplified by the rule book for the Unlimited Division at the Pikes Peak International Hill Climb: (1) Must meet all safety specifications & (2) No other restrictions.  Pure formula libre thus and there have been competitions which went close such as the Canadian-American Challenge Cup (the Can-Am) for sports cars which specified only (1) Must meet all safety specifications, (2) enclosed wheels & (3) two seats.  Notable also was the “Allcomer” category adopted for New Zealand’s saloon car championship in the 1960s which was for unlimited displacement touring cars and accommodated machinery as diverse as a 1956 Ford Customline powered by a Galaxie 427 cubic inch (7.0 litre) V8 (thus dubbed the Custaxie) and, more improbably still, the Morarri, a Morris Minor with a Ferrari 555 Super Squalo F1 chassis (#555/1) and a 327 cubic inch (5.3 litre) Chevrolet Corvette V8.  Many other bastard offspring were barely less extreme.  After 1967, the Allcomer Saloons were banned and the championship was run under the FIA’s Group 5 regulations and the category was well-supported but lacked some of the appeal of their wild predecessors so, in 1973, a locally concocted Schedule E was written which enabled the construction of things with something of the earlier flavor.

The formula libra concept has clearly attracted the interest of the Fédération internationale de notation (Fina, the International Swimming Federation) which recently announced a ban on the participation of transgender women from elite female competition if they have experienced “…any part of male puberty beyond Tanner Stage 2 or before age twelve, whichever is later."  Given the controversy, the announcement was not wholly unexpected and, although it sets Fina apart from federations affiliated with the IOC (International Olympic Committee), it won't be the only body to issue the sanction and already the International Rugby League (IRL) has imposed a similar ban.

As something of a workaround designed somehow to combine inclusion and exclusion in the one policy, Fina undertook to create a working group to design an “open” category for trans women in “some events” as part of its new policy.  Formula libra for women’s swimming therefore, a category in which women, trans- or cis-gender, could compete.  Fina’s president, Dr Husain al-Musallam (b 1960) insisted “Fina will always welcome every athlete (and) the creation of an open category will mean that everybody has the opportunity to compete at an elite level. This has not been done before, so Fina will need to lead the way.”  Whether a concept used for machines will be thought appropriate to apply to people remains to be seen.

The competing arguments (fairness in competition vs inclusion & diversity) can’t easily be resolved and the use of the formula libre concept hasn’t been well received by many, some trans activists suggesting it would be labelled a “freak show”.  The idea has before been floated, some genuinely interested in the maximum performance possible by the human body suggesting it might be interesting if a competition was established for athletes using performance-enhancing drugs.  Unsurprisingly, that went nowhere but nor is the “open class” idea new, the origin of competitive athletics in the modern age actually organized as a formula libre style, open class, some track events once scheduled on the basis of distance and anyone, male or female, was able to enter.  It was later that the women’s category was created as “protected class” so they might enjoy fair competition, something Fina claim is the basis of their exclusionary rule.

Both sides are now assembling, selectively perhaps, the scientific research which supports their respective positions and perhaps the most significant announcement was from the Fédération Internationale de Football Association (Fifa, the International Federation of Association Football) which confirmed it was reviewing its gender eligibility regulations.  Fifa issued a statement indicating they were consulting with “…many stakeholders… (and) should Fifa be asked to verify the eligibility of a player before the new regulations will be in place, any such case will be dealt with on a case‑by-case basis, taking into account Fifa’s clear commitment to respect for human rights.”  Such is the international influence of Fifa that it’s likely their position may become the default template for federations everywhere not anxious to make targets of themselves.

Mandamus

Mandamus (pronounced man-dey-muhs)

At common law, an order of a superior court or officer commanding (an inferior tribunal, public official, or organ of the state) a specific thing be done.  Formerly a writ, now issued as an order.

1530-1535:  From Middle English, a borrowing from the late fourteenth century Anglo-French, from the Latin mandāmus (we order (which were printed as the opening words of a writ of mandamus), first person plural present indicative of mandāre (to order).

Some writs

A mandamus was a writ compelling a court or government official correctly to perform that which the law required; for technical reasons it’s now issued as an order rather than a writ.  It’s one of a number of procedures called the prerogative writs, an evolutionary fork of the common law which ensured courts could compel governments to adhere to the law.  These devices constitute the means by which the rule of law is maintained and, because of the intent, a mandamus must follow black-letter law.  If a law says a minister must review something, the court can force only the review and cannot instruct what the finding should be.  The use is now generally limited to cases of complaint someone having an interest in the performance of a public duty, when effectual relief against its neglect cannot be had in the course of an ordinary action.

There are other mechanisms in this class.  The subpoena duces tecum (order for production of evidence) is a summons ordering the recipient to appear before the court and produce documents or other tangible evidence for use at a hearing or trial.  It’s similar to the subpoena ad testificandum (summoning a witness orally to testify) but differs in that it requires the production of physical evidence.  The literal translation was "under threat of punishment, you will bring it with you", the construct being sub (under) + poena (penalty) + duces (you will bring) + te (you) + cum (with).  Habeas corpus in the Medieval Latin meant literally "that you have the body".  It provides recourse in law by which a person can report an unlawful detention to a court and request the court order those holding the person to bring the prisoner before a court so it might decide whether the imprisonment is lawful; it is best understood in modern use as "bring us the body".  The quo warranto, which in Medieval Latin was literally "by what warrant?" required a person to show the court by what authority they have for exercising some right, power, or franchise they claim to hold.  A prohibito (literally "prohibited") directed the stopping of something the law prohibits.  A procedendo, from Medieval Latin in the sense of the meanings “proceed; prosecute”, was a writ sending a case from an appellate court to a lower court with an order to proceed to judgment and was also the writ by which the suspended commission of a justice of the peace was revived.  A writ of certiorari was a request for judicial review of the findings or conduct of an inferior court, tribunal, or other public authority ands in its pure form it existed by right, not by leave of the court.  The Medieval Latin was certiorārī (volumus), a literal “we wish to be informed".  Certiorari is the present passive infinitive of the Latin verbs certioro, certiorare (to inform, apprise, show).

William Marbury (left) & James Madison (right).  Marbury's former house in Georgetown, Washington DC is now the Ukrainian Embassy to the United States.

Marbury v Madison (5 U.S. (1 Cranch) 137 (1803)) was the US Supreme Court case which established the principle of judicial review in the United States, the consequence being US courts have the power to strike down laws they find to violate the US Constitution; it’s thus regarded as the single most important decision in US constitutional law, establishing that the constitution, although a foundation political document, is also actual law and thus the country’s basic law.  It was this decision which made possible the enforcement of the separation of powers between the federal government’s executive and judicial branches.

The case had an unlikely origin in a political squabble which sounds remarkably modern.  John Adams (1735–1826; US president 1797-1801) had lost the election of 1800 to Thomas Jefferson (1743–1826; US president 1801-1809) and in March 1801, two days before his term ended, Adams appointed several dozen Federalist Party supporters to judicial offices, intending to sabotage the Democratic-Republican Party’s incoming administration.  A compliant Senate confirmed the appointments with a haste which would seem now extraordinary but the outgoing Secretary of State John Marshall (1755–1835; US secretary of state 1800-1801 & chief justice 1801-1835) did not deliver all of the papers of commission before Jefferson's inauguration, thus encouraging the new president to declare them void.  One undelivered commission was that of William Marbury (1762–1835) and in late 1801, after Madison had more than once declined to deliver his commission, Marbury filed suit in the Supreme Court requesting the issue of a writ of mandamus, requiring Madison to deliver the papers.

The court’s judgement was handed down by John Marshall, now the chief justice.  The court held that (1) the president’s refusal to deliver the commission was illegal and (2) in those circumstances a competent court would order the official in question to deliver the commission.  However, despite the facts of Marbury v Madison, no writ of mandamus was issue, the rationale being that upon examining the law with which Congress had granted the Supreme Court jurisdiction in such matters, the legislature had expanded the definition of its jurisdiction beyond that which was specified in the constitution.  The Court then struck down that section of the law, announcing that American courts have the power to invalidate laws they find violate the Constitution.  The finding in Marbury v Madison was the origin of judicial review in the US.

Forrest-Marbury House, 3350 M Street NW, Georgetown, Washington DC, once the home of William Marbury.  It was in this house on 29 March 1791 that George Washington (1732–1799; president of the US 1789-1797) negotiated the real-estate deal for the land that would become Washington DC.  Since 1992, it has been the chancery of the Embassy of Ukraine.

Paean

Paean (pronounced pee-uhn)

(1) A hymn of invocation or thanksgiving, sun in Ancient Greece to Apollo or some other deity.

(2) By extension, a song of praise, joy or triumph, especially if sung loudly and joyously).

(3) By extension, an expression of reverential or enthusiastic praise.

1535–1545: From the Latin paean, (religious or festive hymn; hymn of deliverance, hymn to a help-giving god), from the Ancient Greek (παιάν (also παιήων or παιών)) (paiān) (hymn to Apollo), from his title Paiā́n (or Paiōn) (denoting the physician to the gods), from the phrase Ἰὼ Παιᾱ́ν (Iṑ Paiā́n) (“O Paean!, Thanks to Paean!).  As well as the name (from Homer) by which the divine physician was known, paiān was later an epithet of Apollo and thus of interest is the literal translation "one who touches" (in the sense of “curing by a touch of the hand”), perhaps from a word in the hymn like paio (to touch, strike).  English picked it up as paean (as did Middle French) which was adopted in many languages but variations include the French péan (although the Middle French paean peacefully co-exists), the Italian peana and the Portuguese peã & péan.

The Greek παιάν was from παιάϝων (paiáwōn) (one who heals illnesses with magic) but the origin is contested.  Some etymologists link it with παῖϝα & παϝία (blow), related to παίω (beat), from the primitive Indo-European pēu-, pyu- & pū- (to hit; to cut)- or παύω (paúō) (withhold; to bring to an end; to abate, to stop), from the primitive Indo-European pehw- (few, little; smallness).  Paiān remains however mysterious and may be from the Archaic Greek or indeed be pre-Greek.  Paean (present participle paeaning & past participle paeaned) & paeanism are nouns, paeanic is an adjective, paeanically seems to have been used as an adverb and paeanize is a verb (apparently first used by philosopher Thomas Hobbes (1588–1679) in the early seventeenth century).  The noun plural is paeans and the alternative spelling (in occasional US use) is pean (pæan the traditional form).  A paean may variously be referred to variously as a hymn, acclamation, anthem, ode, praise, psalm, song, laud or laudation and, outside the technical use in texts from Antiquity, the choice is probably dictated by context and desired literary effect.

A fresco of Apollo playing the kithara, from a building in the Forum of Rome (Augustan period), Museum of the Forum Romanum, Rome.

As the lyrical phrase “O Paean!” hints, in Antiquity, a Paean was a song of joyful triumph.  Most surviving texts suggest the paean was written usually in the ancient Greek Dorian mode and was accompanied by the kithara, the instrument of Apollo, god of music.  The military, when paeans were sung on the battlefield, augmented the kithara by the aulos and kithara.

Confusion still sometimes surrounds the understanding of the Greek Dorian Mode because it was long confused with the modern use of “Dorian” mode.  Like many of the tangled constructions and interpretations from Greek & Latin which endure to this day, the fault lies mostly with medieval ecclesiastical scholars.  Some of the names of musical modes in use today, (Mixolydian, Dorian et al), are direct borrowings in spelling but not meaning, the scribes of the Church misunderstanding the mechanics of Greek texts.  In Athens and beyond, intervals were counted from top to bottom whereas the practice during the Middle Ages was (sometimes) to work from bottom to top, hence the jumble.  The error was recognized by the seventeenth century but such had been the proliferation of the new conventions of use that the misinterpretations were allowed to remain, labelled “Church Modes” to distinguish them from the ancients.

The problems began with the translation of a treatise on music (De institutione musica (The Structure of Music (circa 507)) by Boethius (Saint Anicius Manlius Severinus Boethius; circa 478-524, a Roman and historian and philosopher) which was neglected until unearthed by scholars during the ninth century who found it so compelling it was soon the most widely translated and disseminated medieval work on the subject.  The influence of Boethius was immense, his De consolatione philosophiae (On the Consolation of Philosophy (523)) one of the classic works through which the classical age was understood during the centuries which followed although modern historians do caution the medieval (and later) reverence of antiquity did lead to some idealized and romantic visions of the lost world taking hold.

Both Plato & Aristotle fancied themselves as musicologists and thought the ancient Greek Dorian the most "manly" of all the musical modes, suggesting it could move soldiers to heroic acts in battle.  The famous Battle of Thermopylae, a paean composed for a solo lyre, was inspired by the tale of two-thousand-odd Spartans, Thespians & Thebans, a rear-guard which for two days defied a whole Persian army at the battle of Thermopylae in 480 BC.  Professional musicians today note that to convey the martial spirit which should be summoned in performance, it’s vital to understand the ancient Greek Dorian mode so it’s played with the vigor Plato & Aristotle described when writing of the technique.

The USS Pueblo, moored on the Taedong River in Pyongyang, part of the DPRK’s Victorious Fatherland Liberation War Museum.

The USS Pueblo (AGER-2) is a lightly-armed, US Navy scientific research vessel which in January 1968 was attacked and captured by the DPRK (North Korean) military which alleged she was engaged in espionage activities while in their territorial waters.  One US sailor was killed during the attack, the surviving 82 seized and not released for almost a year, a period described variously as the Pueblo “affair”, “incident" or “crisis".  The Pueblo is still held in the DPRK as a war-prize (although the legal status of that is dubious) and the US Navy has never struck the vessel from the active list, Washington’s position that it was seized illegally and should be returned.

Bowing North Koreans make their grateful paeans before the statue of Kim Il-sung (1912-1994, Great Leader of the DPRK 1948-1994).

The word paean came in handy as a diplomatic device.  As part of the deal securing the sailors’ release, the captain issued a statement "confess(ing) to his and the crew's transgression."  Before he recorded the brief speech, the text was checked by the DPRK government and they were presumably pleased at the capitalist lackeys saying: "We paean the DPRK.  We paean the Great Leader, Kim Il Sung.  We paean the DPRK flag" but missed an essential nuance, the captain pronouncing "paean" as "pee on".  Nor did seizing the hardly imposing Pueblo achieve the Great Leader’s strategic objective, the US increasing its diplomatic and military support for the ROC (South Korea).