A Tale of Etiquette and Diplomacy

A pink granite bench honors J. J. Jusserand in Washington, D.C. The semicircular bench, dedicated by Franklin Delano Roosevelt in 1936, holds the distinction of being the first memorial erected on U.S. federal property to a foreign diplomat. Jean Jules Jusserand served as French Ambassador to the United States from 1902-1925. Soon after he arrived in D.C., Jusserand earned the confidence of President Theodore Roosevelt. Roosevelt and Jusserand shared a love for the outdoors and spent many long hours hiking in Rock Creek Park. Besides significant contributions to diplomacy between France and the U.S. (serving under 5 presidential administrations and all of WWI), Jusserand’s writings earned worldwide recognition. He won the first Pulitzer Prize in History for “With Americans of Past and Present Days,” a book recounting key contributions of Frenchmen to U.S. history. For his efforts in Franco-American relations, Jusserand also received the “Grand Croix” of the French Legion of Honor, the highest French distinction. Promoting friendship between the two countries led him to create the American Society of the Legion of Honor, recognizing Americans who make significant contributions to France.– photo source, Wikipedia 

Ever the Gentleman, He Could Not Dispense With Hat or Gloves

Roosevelt’s fondness for long walks in Rock Creek Park during his Presidency is well known. Nothing pleased him so much as to drop companions along the road unable to keep up with him. If he thought anyone was too well dressed for an outing, he would swim across a deep pool and everybody was compelled to follow. He was a great sport. Walking one day with a party among whom was J.J. Jusserand, French ambassador, President Roosevelt proposed that they all go bathing in Rock Creek, without bathing suits, out far off the public highway (says General Scott). Jusserand waded in without any clothes, except a pair of white kid gloves and a high silk hat. Roosevelt looked at him with astonishment for some time, but finally curiosity became too great and he had to ask the reason for the ambassador’s costume. “Oh, Mr. President...” Jusserand replied, “suppose some ladies should go by!” – Kansas City Times, 1929

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

Etiquette and Roots of Diplomacy

The “Amarna Letters” (or tablets) are the clay tablet-form letters of the pharaohs Amenhotep III and Akhenaten, with some letters from Tutankhamen’s reign. The correspondents were mostly Great Kings of Syria-Palestine, as well as Egyptian vassals, but letters also came from the Egyptian rulers. 

The Amarna correspondence is a set of mostly diplomatic letters, on topics like exchanges of gifts, disputes, requests for resources, and marriage. From internal evidence, the earliest possible date for this correspondence is the final decade of the reign of Amenhotep III, who ruled from 1388 to 1351 BC (or 1391 to 1353 BC), possibly as early as this King's 30th regnal year; the latest date any of these letters were written is the desertion of the city of Amarna, commonly believed to have happened in the second year of the reign of Tutankhamun later in the same century in 1332 BC.

Why do diplomats give each other gifts? At the U.S. Department of State , diplomatic gifts come in all shapes and sizes from woven straw baskets to precious gems. In ancient civilizations on every continent, dignitaries and leaders exchanged gifts to welcome, honor and cultivate beneficial diplomatic relationships. Many of the gifts shown here (and in the U.S. Diplomacy Center’s collection) embody symbols of esteem and welcome for our Secretaries of State while traveling abroad or receiving visitors. Gift exchanges take place in the ceremonial climate of toasts, banquets, speeches and formal greetings. A gift of state often captures the essence of a nation, chosen for its ability to exhibit pride in a unique culture and people. Gifts of state may showcase traditions of fine or folk arts, crafts or craftsmanship. They may display wealth in precious stones or metals, fine textiles and apparel. Gifts may draw from a rich heritage of antiques and antiquities or an expressive storehouse of cultural icons. This way the gift becomes more than a mere formality, but a reminder of the special alliance between the gift giver and receiver.

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

Reagan’s Royal Etiquette Blunder

The late, Harold Brooks-Baker, an American authority on British nobility who was a sought-after commentator on the doings -- serious, scandalous or merely ridiculous -- of the British royal family, was at one time managing director of Debrett’s. He published in 1978 a tongue-in-cheek, bestselling guide to The English Gentleman, who “does not drive a Rolls-Royce unless it is very old and smells of dogs”, and always “speaks to the engineer before a train trip because of an old belief that he owns the railroad.”

“Princess David?” No, a royal blunder! Charles and Diana may be casual about etiquette, but not their names!

President Reagan made a double gaffe at a White House dinner by first calling his guest “Princess David” and then “Princess Diane,” a royal genealogist said Sunday in London. Reagan erred by not using her official title, the Princess of Wales, and when he tried to correct himself he got it wrong again by muddling Diana's name. “It's like calling Queen Elizabeth II ‘Libby’ or something like that,” said Harold Brooks-Baker, publishing director of Burke's Peerage, one of the bibles of British bluebloods. While the Princess is popularly referred to in the news media as Princess Diana, her official title is the Princess of Wales, which is what she is called at all official functions. Brooks-Baker said he blamed Reagan's speechwriter and the British and American protocol experts who were given advance copies of the speech for the breach of royal etiquette not the President. “He's not to know, but his advisers are to know,” Brooks-Baker told The Associated Press. “It's no wonder the Prince of Wales looked somewhat downcast after the President proposed the toast.” 

The gaffes came while Reagan was making a toast at a White House dinner Saturday night attended by show business celebrities such as Clint Eastwood, John Travolta and Neil Diamond. While millions of Americans watching the Prince and Princess of Wales on television might not notice, Brooks-Baker said the two are changing royal etiquette. “Right at the top is the fact that they behave as equals. It is no longer prince and consort ... or Queen and Consort, as it is still with the Queen and Prince Philip,” he said. “More often than not, on this tour, we have seen the Princess of Wales taking the lead. Then, there are the public displays of affection. Never, previously, would royal couples dream of kissing in public, as the Prince has kissed the Princess.” 

On their Washington trip, Brooks-Baker said, the royal couple are keeping to the “royal, and upper class, tradition of separate bedrooms, though never before would there have been photographs of royal sleeping arrangements as there have been recently, ostensibly to publicize English design. Royalty should never be used for advertising.” He said the choice of Palm Beach for the couple's next stop also surprised many Americans, especially the poor and homeless. “Palm Beach is a symbol of the thoughtless, vulgar, nouveau riche, careless of the plight of others,” the U.S.-born Brooks-Baker said. “It is like asking the Pope to go to Sodom and Gomorrah.”  — (By Edith M.Lederer, AP) San Bernardino Sun, 1985

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

Etiquette and Diplomacy Gone Awry

Baron Saverio Fava founded the Italian Ministry in Washington, D.C.. He served as the first Italian Ambassador of the then recently unified Italy to the U.S. from 1881-1893. As Ambassador, Baron Fava also served as the Dean of the Diplomatic Corps. Prior to service in the U.S., Fava served Italy as an Ambassador in Brazil and Romania.

The Baron vs the Lieutenant

“A Story of American Independence and Official Etiquette” ???

The Washington Capital publishes the following story of Lieutenant Lucien Young, the naval officer who is not permitted to publish his book on Hawaii, because it is considered to reflect on the record of the Cleveland administration. That scene of the present incident is laid during the Harrison regime, when Benjamin P. Tracy was Secretary of the Navy.
             
It was Lieutenant Young, according to the story, who a few years ago offered to teach Baron Fava, the Italian Embassador, a lesson in American manners. The international episode was the request made by the Embassador to the Secretary of the Navy for a report upon a subject of great importance to him, which he begged might be delivered the same evening, in order that he could forward it to his Government in the morning mail. Lieutenant Young was detailed to prepare the information. 

He worked all day and all the evening, with only a sandwich and a cup of coffee, excused himself from a dinner party and from an engagement he had made to take some ladies to a ball. The memorandum was completed about midnight, when he got a cab and drove to the Italian legation. It was closed and dark, and no one answered his summons. Then he went to Baron Fava's residence, where he was told that the Embassador was dining out. He went to the house where the dinner had been given and learned that the Baron was at the ball which he himself wanted to attend, but found there the Baron had left a few minutes before.

Then Young gave up the search and went to his club. The first man he saw after entering the door was the Italian Embassador drinking wine with a party of friends. Lieutenant Young approached him with a proper salute and, after a few words of explanation, offered him the. papers. The Baron haughtily declined them. "You impertinent fellow," said he; "why did you follow me all over the town? I am the Embassador of Italy, and I do my business at the legation of my Government. You should have had the papers there before I left this afternoon. Instead of that you disturb my friends by entering their houses and intrude upon my club. I will report your impertinence to the Secretary of the Navy tomorrow."  

Lieutenant Lucien Younger has an interesting and colorful history, complete with a ship being named in his honor and complaints of anti-semitism.

The sea dog from Kentucky was very red in the face by this time, and made the following remarks: "You ungrateful old macaroni-chewing monkey tamer, I am a member of this club and you are only a guest, but if you will come out into the street for five minutes I will teach you a lesson in North American manners. There are the papers I have spent fifteen hours in preparing for you," and he threw them on the table. "You can take them or leave them, as you like." The Baron called upon Secretary Tracy the next day and complained that Lieutenant Young had insulted him. The Secretary sent for the offender, who related the affair as I have told it, including the benediction he had pronounced. The Secretary had pressing business in the next room for a few moments and when he recovered himself asked what the Embassador had to suggest. Baron Fava demanded that the lieutenant be reprimanded. "Consider yourself reprimanded," said the Secretary gravely, and Lieutenant Young bowed and left the room.
—The Washington Capital, 1895

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

Etiquette and the Art of Listening

Humorous depiction of men talking about their feelings. 

-Image source, Pinterest

To converse, is not to talk continually, as prattlers suppose; it is to listen and speak in our turn; we must not acquit ourselves the less well in the one than in the other. To do this, we should attend half of the time to the person who is addressing us, (on this account it is impolite to do any work while talking;) if they hesitate or are embarrassed you should appear not to notice it, and in case you are a little acquainted, after a few moments, you should, in a very modest manner, supply the word which seems to have escaped them. If they are interrupted by any incident, when the cause of the interruption shall have ceased, you will not wait until they resume the conversation, but with a smile of benevolence, and an engaging gesture, request them to proceed; "please to continue; you were just saying?"...

If we are obliged in this manner, to palliate any such interruption, much more, ought we never to allow ourselves to be the cause of it. This is so rigorous a rule, that if, in the warmth of conversation, two persons commence speaking at once, both ought to stop immediately, when they perceive it, and each, while excusing themselves, to decline proceeding. It is proper for the one worthy of the most respect to resume the conversation.

If a person shall relate anything to you, who, without having any pleasantry, makes attempts at it; and without being affecting, endeavors to move you, however wearied you may be, appear pleased and assume an air of interest. If the narrator wanders into long digressions, have patience to let him extricate himself alone from the labyrinth of history. If the history is interminable, be resigned, and do not appear less attentive. This condescension is especially to be observed, if you are listening to an elderly or respectable person. If the merciless story-teller is your equal or friend, you may say to him, in order to induce him to finish his narration, "and finally... ."

Novices in the customs of the world, think they can abruptly interrupt a conversation which is begun, by asking to have some incidents, which they have not understood, explained, or by making the person who is telling the story repeat the names; this should not be done until after some consideration, and in the most polite manner. If the narrator pronounces badly; if you see that other hearers are in the same situation as yourself; if you foresee that for want of having followed him in his narration, you will not be able to reply with politeness, you can in this case, interrupt; but in some such manner as this; "I ask your pardon, Sir, I fear I have lost some part of your interesting conversation, will you be kind enough to repeat it," etc... . It is necessary also, to choose a favorable moment, as for instance, when the narrator pauses, hesitates for a word, or stops to take his handkerchief.

When a person relates to you a plain falsehood, the art of listening becomes embarrassing, for if you seem to believe it, you would pass for a fool, and if you appear to doubt it, you will pass for an uncivil person. An air of coldness, a slight attention, an expression like the following, "That is astonishing," will extricate you honorably from your embarrassment; but when an event is narrated which is only extraordinary, or not improbable, your manner should be otherwise. Your countenance should express astonishment, and you should reply by a phrase of this kind; "If I did not know your strict regard for the truth, or if any person but you had told me this, I should have hardly believed it." Under no circumstances should you interrupt him.

It happens sometimes that you foresee some incident in an interesting story; and the pleasure that you find in this; the desire of showing that you have guessed correctly, and the intention of proving how much you are interested, induce you to interrupt suddenly in this manner, "I see it, it is so, exactly." An interruption of this kind, although well meant and natural, will offend old persons, who like to tell a story at full length, and will confound formal narrators, who will be in despair that a phrase is taken from them which they had intended for effect; these interruptions are only allowable among our intimate friends, or inferiors, for otherwise you will have an ill-humored answer to your, "I see it," etc... as with a triumphant air, "egad, but you can't see it," etc... which is always embarrassing.

The worst kind of interruption of all others, is that which hauteur dictates. A clever person seizing hold of a story which another is telling, and with the intention of making it more lively, becomes, notwithstanding his eloquence, a model of impertinence and vulgarity. It is, doubtless, hard to see a fool spoil a good anecdote, of which he might have made something interesting; but if we should not be restrained by politeness from expressing our feelings, we ought to be by interest. Now hearers of delicacy will remain silent to the conclusion of the recital, and will address themselves with good feelings to the poor narrator who is injured in his rights.

Interruption is pardonable if it is made to prove or clear up a fact in favor of a person who is absent. When they accuse you, you can, according to strict rules, interrupt by an exclamation, but it is better to do it by a gesture. There is often much art and grace in listening, while you gesticulate gently; for example, by counting upon the fingers; by making a gesture of surprise; by a motion of assent, or an exclamation. This is a tacit manner of saying, "ah, I recollect, you are right," and charms the narrator without interrupting him.

In a lively, animated and friendly dialogue, we can interrupt each other by turns, in order to finish a sentence which is begun, or to improve an epithet; this contributes to vivacity in discourse, but it ought not, however, to be too often repeated. There are many shoals to be avoided in listening, and which always betray inexperience in society. To say from time to time to the narrator, "Yes, yes," by nodding the head, making motions with the hand, a custom of old persons, and which is a good representation of a pendulum ; to keep the eyes fixed and the mouth gaping open; to have an air of an absent person or of one in a reverie; to point the finger at persons designated by the narrator; to gape without concealing by the hand or the handkerchief, which is by no means flattering to the speaker; to cast your eye frequently towards the clock--all these habits are offences against good *ton.

* The ton is a term commonly used to refer to Britain's high society in the Regency and reign of George IV, and later. During the eighteenth century, it was borrowed from the French word meaning "taste" or "the highest style" and is pronounced the same way as "tone." The full phrase is "le bon ton," meaning good manners or "in the fashionable mode" – characteristics held as ideal by the British beau monde. –From "Etiquette" 1866

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

Court Etiquette and Diplomacy in France During the Crimean War

Purportedly representing the interests of the Greek Orthodox Church, Russia sought to serve as the protectorate of the Christian Holy Places lying within Turkish territory. The general opinion in Europe at that time, was that Czar Nicholas I used Turkey’s refusal to grant Russia this privilege, as a pretext to carry out his true desire - namely to destroy the Ottoman Empire. This depiction of Czar Nicholas I puts him as a devil within a religious setting. Note his cloven hoof in place of a left foot. A satirical John Leech cartoon, from "Punch" January 28, 1854

Diplomacy and the Te Deum

Diplomacy is a curious study. The etiquette which governs a diplomatic corps a first-class Court like that of France, would make a book if published, as big as Chesterfield or Jefferson's manual, and would require as many commentaries as Blackstone has furnished the lawyers, or Adams the Clergy. One half of the time of a diplomat is consumed on points of Court etiquette, a quarter on the social department of his legation, and the other quarter on the business proper of his office. And yet there is no published law of etiquette to guide the Minister through the labyrinth of curious customs, compacts, decrees, prohibitions and traditions, which make up the law of Court etiquette. It is all traditionary, and when a doubtful case arises, the whole corps resort to the oldest member, the doyen or dean, whose acknowledged right it is to settle the point in dispute. The contests which often take place within the body of the corps, on minor points of etiquette, must be amusing to those even who are engaged in them. 

Recently, the American Minister at the court of France was invited to attend a Te Deum at Notre Dame in honor of the fall of Sebastopol, and he went. My predecessor, of the TIMES, and our colleague of the Tribune, characterized the act of Mr. Mason as improper and unnecessary; while the journals which have just arrived from the United States, condemned the act in the strongest terms. But it so happens that this is one of those very cases which enter into the labyrinthine field of difficulties referred to above and while I believe that Mr. Mason might've avoided attendance on that occasion, the reasons which guided him ought to be known. 

A Minister is sent abroad to preserve peace, not to provoke war. The first line of his instructions from his government is, to cultivate at all times friendly relations with the Government to which he is accredited. It is a well understood rule at all Courts that an invitation from a Sovereign to the diplomatic corps to be present at any ceremony are which he (the Sovereign) intends to go, is paramount to an order to that effect, and cannot be disobeyed without a good reason. Nothing but absence or ill-health are considered valid excuses. This is one of the most ancient rules which prevail at Courts, and ought to be modified or abolished; but it remains in activity, and it is to be supposed that the American Minister has received no orders to disobey it. 

The American Minister in this instance regarded the invitation as he would an invitation to attend the Emperor's fête, or an official ball, or any other of the Court shows, where the diplomatic corps are always invited, and which could not by any possibility be made to compromise the neutrality of those who attended. He believed that he could only be compromised by remaining away from the Te Deum, for then an explanation would be required, and an explanation in the present state of affairs would've been an embarrassing document to write. Staying away would have committed him, while going there was a mere formality, a civility (in the estimate which Court etiquette puts upon it) which committed nobody. If the American Minister had written a note to the French Minister, saying that he declined to attend the Te Deum, because he did not wish to compromise his neutrality, he would undoubtedly have received for answer, "Sir, we do not consider that your attendance upon the ceremony will compromise your neutrality in the least; we offer you a seat with the diplomatic corps, as is usual on all occasions where His Majesty attends any public ceremonies as a civility; the French Government has no special need of your presence on the occasion, and cares little to whom you give your sympathy in the present war." And then the American minister would've stood in a really compromised position.              

The Emperor Napoleon leaving the Tuileries on the morning of the Te Deum

The great body of the diplomatic corps went to the Te Deum, and evidently viewed it as a civility which for them was without political signification; but, knowing the feeling which existed in the United States in regard to the war and the difficulty which generally exists in understanding the exigencies of Court etiquette, in a country where the people know little and care less about it, the American Minister and his Secretary, and down to his last attaché, if necessary, should've been taken suddenly and individually on the day in question with an uncontrollable migraine. That is a diplomatic dodge of the most orthodox kind; it is been approved by whole centuries of exercise and is eminently worthy of the absurd system of etiquette in which it finds its origin. It is the system which needs censure more then the act; it is the Minister who has been compromised more than the country.

From "Affairs in France 

The American Minister and the Te Deum

Political, Literary and Miscellaneous Gossip 

Special Correspondence of the New York Daily Times" 

 Paris, Thursday, November 1, 1855

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