English Etiquette and Precedence

Caricature of the Prince of Wales from 1878– "The structure of society is such that men and women of rank think it of importance that they should be formally honored wherever they may be, not only before those who are without rank, but those persons who hold a rank inferior to their own."

It is said that when General Grant was in London recently, and went to dinner at the Prince of Wales', he was obliged to go out to the table behind the titled Nobility. English etiquette, it is declared, requires that an untitled foreigner, however eminent, should give precedence, as it is called, to Englishmen of rank. Whether this is true or not, it is certain that etiquette is carried to a great extreme in England, as in other European countries. 

The structure of society is such that men and women of rank think it of importance that they should be formally honored wherever they may be, not only before those who are without rank, but those persons who hold a rank inferior to their own. This etiquette runs through nearly all phases and even all grades of English society; in the private mansion, in receptions at Court, in the army and navy, in official and Diplomatic circles, and also to some extent among the mercantile and middle classes. 

At a dinner-party, for instance, the hostess on repairing to the table always claims the arm of the guest highest in rank present. A member of the Royal family always comes first: then a Duke, a Marquis, an Earl and so on. The rest of the guests go out in the order of their rank, the one of the lowest rank going out last. This rigid rule is sometimes relaxed in favor of a guest in whose special honor the dinner may be given. In such cases, the hostess leads this guest out, even before persons of a higher rank than himself; and however it may have been at the Prince of Wales’, it is probable that General Grant was usually accorded this honor when he went as the guest of an English house. 

There is an official table which decides the precedence of each of the Royal family, the Nobility and the great officers of state; and this table determines how the company shall be placed on all public occasions, and in what order they shall walk or drive in processions or stage pageants. According to this “table of precedence,” the Sovereign comes first; then all her sons in order of birth; then all her daughters in the same order; then her grand-children in the same order; finally her uncles, aunts and cousins. After the Royal family, the Archbishop of Canterbury holds the highest rank of precedence; then the Lord High Chancellor; then the Archbishop of York; then Dukes, then Marquises and so on.  —Youth's Companion, 1878

Etiquette Enthusiast, Maura J Graber, is the Site Editor for the Etiquipedia© Etiquette Encyclopedia 

Etiquette for Properly Making Tea

Tea is an extremely delicate article!

A CUP OF TEA

How To Make It Properly, and How to Spoil It ...  from The London Telegraph, 1889

"It seems a simple thing enough; yet of the millions who use this refreshing and agreeable beverage a very small proportion understand bow to prepare it. But if not properly made, tea is deprived of a great deal of its value, and sometimes rendered absolutely injurious. The water to be used should boil, and it should be poured on the tea immediately it boils; if allowed to overboil the peculiar property of boiling water which acts upon tea evaporates and eventually disappears. Tea should not be a decoction, but an infusion. If allowed to stew, it becomes little better than a decoction of tannic acid. Tea that is overdrawn is hurtful to the nerves and to the digestion. As to the precise number of minutes which should be devoted to the process of drawing, some people will say five minutes, some seven, some will perhaps go as far as ten, but our experience is in favor of six; this suffices to bring out the flavor, quality and strength.
        

The replenishing of the teapot with fresh hot water is very objectionable.

Just as much tea as is wanted should be made — no more. Make fresh tea as often as it is required. The replenishing of the teapot with fresh hot water is very objectionable. As the thorough heating of the receptacle is of the first importance, the teapot should be made thoroughly hot before the tea is put into it. The earthenware teapot is preferred to all others by many connoisseurs, and it is superfluous to say that whatever utensil is used for this purpose should be immaculately clean.
                                    

Reading the tea leaves, do you see a better cup of tea in your future?

Tea is an extremely delicate article. Its susceptibility to the odors of commodities near it is a source of danger and deterioration, as it readily takes up the smell of coffee, cocoa, spices, cheese, bacon, or other articles of pronounced odor. The complaints sometimes made about tea would probably not arise if always kept in places free from such contagion. Tea should be stored in a warm, dry place; unnecessary exposure to the air should be avoided. Even when securely packed in the leaden chests in which it arrives in England, the change from the glowing lights of Eastern skies to the damp and humid atmosphere of this climate deprives tea of much of its beautiful fragrance.         

No burnt hands! No lifting the pot! No aching arms! No soiled clothes! It turns the drudgery of pouring a cup of tea into a pleasure! How fragile were American women? ~ An American made self-pouring tea pot from 1888

Tea of much better quality than is generally dispensed at our railway stations and refreshment rooms can be bought at 2s per' pound. A pound of tea would make 128 cups. This is "considerably less than a farthing per cup. You may well ask why is it that we should be still charged 4d and 6d "for a little hot milk and water slightly flavored with undesirable tannin."

Etiquette Enthusiast, Maura J. Graber, is the Site Moderator for Etiquipedia© Etiquette Encyclopedia

Etiquette and a "Woman Problem"

Was this a "Woman Problem" or in reality, a "Man Problem?"  In the 1890s, British women were more quiet and reserved in their etiquette and mannerisms, compared to their American counterparts, throughout all levels of society. Between the 1870s and the outbreak of World War One, more than 200 daughters of America's wealthiest families, went to Great Britain and Europe to exchange cash for a place in the British aristocracy and Europe's royal families. Finding many eligible young men who were the heirs to cash-strapped, large estates and titles, these marriages were rarely "love-matches," but America's young women with affluence, ingenuity, and a different set of manners, brought permanent changes to the English aristocracy and ruling classes of the day.

"The Woman Problem in England"

A superior and well educated class of young women in England, daughters of officers and clergymon, of professional men as well, are seeking employment in the London shops, where hours are shorter and wages are better than in the more genteel occupations of nursery governess and schoolteacher. 

One of these independent young women says she infinitely prefers the business work to the hopeless monotony of the village home life and the painfully patronizing attention of the squires. And indeed if titled ladies open tearooms and millinery establishments in town, why is the shop life dishonorable for those of lower rank? 

The problem of what to do with the daughters of Great Britain is hopelessly involved by the great excess of women over men in the population, by the tendency of the English bachelor to-wed with American beauty and gold and the petty conventionality which prescribes certain phases of work as unbecoming the dignity and rank of the daughters of impoverished country squires or clergymen in poor livings, professional men of small means and large families. 

— From the New York Sun, 1893

Etiquette Enthusiast, Maura J. Graber, is the Site Editor, for the Etiquipedia© Etiquette Encyclopedia 

Of Etiquette, Food and Man

Beautifully designed drinking horn from the 1300s.

Man has been distinguished from other animals in various ways; but perhaps there is no particular in which he exhibits so marked a difference from the rest of creation—not even in the prehensile faculty resident in his hand—as in the objection to raw food, meat, and vegetables. He approximates to his inferior contemporaries only in the matter of fruit, salads, and oysters, not to mention wild-duck. He entertains no sympathy with the cannibal, who judges the flavour of his enemy improved by temporary commitment to a subterranean larder; yet, to be sure, he keeps his grouse and his venison till it approaches the condition of spoon-meat.

It naturally ensues, from the absence or scantiness of explicit or systematic information connected with the opening stages of such inquiries as the present, that the student is compelled to draw his own inferences from indirect or unwitting allusion; but so long as conjecture and hypothesis are not too freely indulged, this class of evidence is, as a rule, tolerably trustworthy, and is, moreover, open to verification.

When we pass from an examination of the state of the question as regarded Cookery in very early times among us, before an even more valuable art—that of Printing—was discovered, we shall find ourselves face to face with a rich and long chronological series of books on the Mystery, the titles and fore-fronts of which are often not without a kind of fragrance and goût.

As the space allotted to me is limited, and as the sketch left by Warner of the convivial habits and household arrangements of the Saxons or Normans in this island, as well as of the monastic institutions, is more copious than any which I could offer, it may be best to refer simply to his elaborate preface. But it may be pointed out generally that the establishment of the Norman sway not only purged of some of their Anglo-Danish barbarism the tables of the nobility and the higher classes, but did much to spread among the poor a thriftier manipulation of the articles of food by a resort to broths, messes, and hot-pots. In the poorer districts, in Normandy as well as in Brittany, Duke William would probably find very little alteration in the mode of preparing victuals from that which was in use in his day, eight hundred years ago, if (like another Arthur) he should return among his ancient compatriots; but in his adopted country he would see that there had been a considerable revolt from the common saucepan—not to add from the pseudo-Arthurian bag-pudding; and that the English artisan, if he could get a rump-steak or a leg of mutton once a week, was content to starve on the other six days.

Those who desire to be more amply informed of the domestic economy of the ancient court, and to study the minutiae, into which I am precluded from entering, can easily gratify themselves in the pages of “The Ordinances and Regulations for the Government of the Royal Household,” 1790; “The Northumberland Household Book;” and the various printed volumes of “Privy Purse Expenses” of royal and great personages, including “The Household Roll of Bishop Swinfield (1289-90).”

The late Mr. Green, in his “History of the English People” (1880-3, 4 vols. 8vo), does not seem to have concerned himself about the kitchens or gardens of the nation which he undertook to describe. Yet, what conspicuous elements these have been in our social and domestic progress, and what civilising factors!

To a proper and accurate appreciation of the cookery of ancient times among ourselves, a knowledge of its condition in other more or less neighbouring countries, and of the surrounding influences and conditions which marked the dawn of the art in England, and its slow transition to a luxurious excess, would be in strictness necessary; but I am tempted to refer the reader to an admirable series of papers which appeared on this subject in Barker's “Domestic Architecture,” and were collected in 1861, under the title of “Our English Home: its Early History and Progress.” In this little volume the author, who does not give his name, has drawn together in a succinct compass the collateral information which will help to render the following pages more luminous and interesting. An essay might be written on the appointments of the table only, their introduction, development, and multiplication.

The history and antiquities of the Culinary Art among the Greeks are handled with his usual care and skill by M.J.A. St. John in his “Manners and Customs of Ancient Greece,” 1842; and in the Bibliaor Hebrew Scriptures we get an indirect insight into the method of cooking from the forms of sacrifice.

The earliest legend which remains to us of Hellenic gastronomy is associated with cannibalism. It is the story of Pelops—an episode almost pre-Homeric, where a certain rudimentary knowledge of dressing flesh, and even of disguising its real nature, is implied in the tale, as it descends to us; and the next in order of times is perhaps the familiar passage in the Odyssey, recounting the adventures of Odysseus and his companions in the cave of Polyphemus. Here, again, we are introduced to a rude society of cave-dwellers, who eat human flesh, if not as an habitual diet, yet not only without reluctance, but with relish and enjoyment.

The Phagetica of Ennius, of which fragments remain, seems to be the most ancient treatise of the kind in Roman literature. It is supposed to relate an account of edible fishes; but in a complete state the work may very well have amounted to a general Manual on the subject. In relation even to Homer, the Phagetica is comparatively modern, following the Odyssey at a distance of some six centuries; and in the interval it is extremely likely that anthropophagy had become rarer among the Greeks, and that if they still continued to be cooking animals, they were relinquishing the practice of cooking one another.

From “Old Cookery Books and Ancient Cuisine” by W. Carew Hazlitt, 1902

🍽Etiquette Enthusiast, Maura J. Graber, is the Site Editor for the Etiquipedia Etiquette Encyclopedia