Etiquette Ignorance and Finger Bowls

 

Another patented design for a new finger bowl, from Christmas of 1900 — “ Like most Americans, he hesitated to own that he did not know everything, but while counting his change he said shyly: “Two is enough, I think.”  He was not the first who had failed in understanding the finger-bowl mystery.”

Ignorance Cleared Up in the Finger Bowl Section of the Shop 

A man who had heard either of the Oriental fashion of pouring rose water on the fingers after a meal, or else of the French style, not very generally, adopted in this country, of passing around a large bowl of rose water, into which each guest dips his napkin and wipes his fingers therewith, went into a well-known china shop the other day and selected, and paid for, two finger-bowls.Like most Americans, he hesitated to own that he did not know everything, but while counting his change he said shyly: “Two is enough, I think.” 

“Certainly,” said the saleswoman, “if you have but one person beside yourself at the table.” “But I want these for a dinner party,” he said, “one at each end of the table!” “And one tumbler at each end of the table, too?” she asked, not pertly, but gently. “Why, no,” he said, light breaking in upon him. “I want —well, I only want four or five more, but I'll take a dozen. What a fool I am!” Before he went out he heard enough stories of queer blunders to convince him that he was not the first who had failed in understanding the finger-bowl mystery. — Boston Transcript, 1888

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

Hands Off Chicken, Not Lobster

People are less lenient than they used to be… The only thing that could soil the fingers and is not tabued by the meticulous are lobster claws. And when such lobster is served, finger bowls of hot soapy water should be provided at once.– Aside from the erroneous fictional accounts of Henry VIII, Emily was correct. Unless finger bowls are in use, keep your hands off the chicken at a dinner party.

Hands Off Chicken, Modern Code Insists

DEAR Mrs. Post: Is it incorrect, according to eliquette, to eat even the slightest bit of chicken in the fingers? I don't mean whether it is correct to take up what can be cut off the bone easily enough, but I am referring to the very small bones from which it is impossible to cut meat loose with knife and fork. Aren't good table manners to-day more lenient about these foods, especially if finger bowls are provided?

Answer: No, people are less lenient than they used to be. That is, if we go back to the descriptions given us by the writers of long ago, and as copied for instance in the moving picture of Henry the Eighth, who picked up a whole chicken in his hands and tore it apart, our table manners have become positively finicking. The only thing that could soil the fingers and is not tabued by the meticulous are lobster claws. And when such lobster is served, finger bowls of hot soapy water should be provided at once. Perhaps, if this practice were followed when serving chicken, there would be no objection to taking the wings in the fingers. — Emily Post, 1937

🍽️Etiquette Enthusiast, Maura J. Graber of The RSVP Institute of Etiquette, is the Site Editor of the Etiquipedia© Etiquette Encyclopedia

Etiquette for Eating Shrimp

“A jumbo is about four or five inches long and one could never be put whole into the mouth. Are these eaten in the fingers? The cocktail fork seems so tiny for such a big shrimp.”

A Question for Amy Vanderbilt 

Dear Miss Vanderbilt: In a library recently I read in your excellent etiquette book, “Unshelled shrimp should be conveyed whole to the mouth.” Are you speaking of a dish of shrimp for the person to shell themselves? I have never seen this and was wondering about the “sand vein.” You didn't mention it since cocktail shrimp are deveined in the kitchen, does one do this with the fingernail before eating the shrimp? One would need to wash one’s hands afterward! I saw literally tons of jumbo shrimp being deveined (not in a factory). A jumbo is about four or five inches long and one could never be put whole into the mouth. Are these eaten in the fingers? The cocktail fork seems so tiny for such a big shrimp. – Mrs. Fort Lauderdale, Florida

Dear Mrs. Fort Lauderdale –For aesthetic purposes the sand vein in shrimp should be removed. If the shrimp are eaten cooked, the vein is not removed. If you encounter it in a shrimp cocktail, you should realize that it is harmless. Don't attempt to remove it, certainly not with the fingernail. Cocktail shrimp are served in a variety of ways. They are offered with toothpicks; in which case you spear them. If they are very large, you bite off a manageable mouthful after having dipped me shrimp in the sauce. Then eat the rest of the shrimp. If you dip it again, you should be careful to turn it around so that the part you have bitten is not dipped into a communal sauce bowl. 

When shrimp cocktail is served with a cocktail fork, you use the fork even though it is tiny. You may either put the whole shrimp in your mouth, or take manageable bites. Sometimes shrimp cocktails or shrimps prepared in the Oriental fashion have the tail left on to be used as a handle. If you have an Oriental dish, you may use chopsticks if you are able to do so; in Louisiana and in various Italian dishes, shrimp is often served with the shell on. In this case, you remove the shell with your fingers but you don't bother to remove the vein. When a shrimp dish is served this way, of course, a finger bowl or folded wet towels (Oriental fashion) or scented paper towelettes are essential. –Amy Vanderbilt, 1963

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

Finger Bowls No More in Oregon?

The death of finger bowls was predicted very early in the 20th century, as more and more people traveled by rail and fewer people entertained with grand, multi-course meals. The use of finger bowls wouldn’t truly become uncommon until the 1960’s. Sixty years later, they are a welcome surprise at an exceptionally fine dining event. It’s too bad that very few people have the opportunity to use one, or even the knowledge of how to use them properly. 

SALEM, Ore., Feb. 19. (United Press)— The dear old finger bowl, which was to a restaurant waiter what the whisk-broom is to Pullman porter - the reminder that a generous tip is expected - is joining the Oregon elephant in blissful extinction. It is still used to some extent, but it is not so obvious as of yore.

Early in January the State Board of Health in conference assembled put its germ-killing heel down upon the post-prandial ablution. The board gave restaurateurs thirty days in which to store all finger bowls and ordered them never to allow bowls to appear on patrons' tables again.

The bowls spread germs, these guardians of the state's health maintained. Even scalding fails to kill the little fellows that know no union hours but work the clock around.

Because they were detremental to the state's health, particularly he health of those portions of the state which could afford restaurants where the finger bowl was an important adjunct to the cuisine, the bowls were ruled off the boards by the anti-germ campaigners.

Nowadays— in Oregon - upon the completion of a successful meal, one must seek the nearest sanitary drinking fountain and surreptitiously permit the limpid fluid to trickle over the fingertips in cleanly abandon. And then one uses one's handkerchief to do the drying, or waves the hands about in the air much in the manner affected by the young lady in "The Dance of the Fairies."

Some people doubt if the bowl ever will go out completely in Oregon. Some restaurateur may work up a test case, in which event the evidence introduced in court promises to be interesting. — Madeira Tribune, 1923

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

A bit of Finger Bowl Etiquette Humor

Load! Aim! Fire! 

The Deadly War on the Finger Bowl!!

Gen. T. Bone Riley Hurries to Defend Baby Bathtubs at Eat Counters

Led by T. Bone Riley and Sheriff Hammel, gastronomical Los Angeles is threatening revolution and secession from California.

Mr. Riley, who is known to "pork and beaners" throughout world and the said to be the innocent model for Van Loan fiction, claims the state is interfering with life and liberty and the pursuit of cleanliness.

Sheriff Hammel has doubled the guards at the county jail and declares his prisoners shall never be subjected to unnecessary torture.

THIS IS THE REASON

A demand has been made before the state board of health by State Sanitary Inspector Edward T. Ross that a regulation be adopted specifying that no finger bowl shall be used more than once.

Finger bowls of the ordinary type gather germs, the inspector says, and the only way to preserve the health of the human race is either to stop eating outside of your own kitchen or compel cafés to supply never-to-be-used-again finger bowls.

Finger bowls — for the benefit of those who do not know — are small tubs in which one may bathe publicly without fear of arrest. They are usually accompanied by an attendant who mops up the water if you tip the bowl and who is disappointed if you fail to tip.

Reports from Sacramento, where the protest has been made before the state board of health, fail to state the dread disease germ for which the finger bowl is the favorite vehicle, but the general belief among Los Angeles hotel and café proprietors is that appetite and hunger are closely associated diseases often to be found lurking in the vicinity of the fateful bowl.

'WIPE 'EM ON THE TABLE'

"This ain't the flowing bowl that's prohibited in the Bible," said T. Bone Riley today in an imaginary interview. "Nothing of the kind. They tell me the finger bowl is made of glass or copper, and that a waiter brings it to you after you eat and you dip your fingers in it and then wipe them on the table cloth. Sounds to me real sanitary and I think it ought to be encouraged. Even at home you have to wash before you eat. And it isn't asking too much for you to do the same thing when you get through — especially when you're out in company. The state board will have a hard time taking the finger bowls off of my pie counter."

Sheriff Hammel, whose boarders at the county jail are the most varied and steady in the city, is bitter in his stand against the antifinger bowl campaign. He said: 'OUTRAGEOUS! OUTRAGEOUS!'

"Never use a finger bowl but once? Why, it's an outrage! That's what it is an outrage! If that law goes into effect it will cost the taxpayers of this county a lot of money. All the finger bowls in the county jail are stationary. They use the same ones all the time. If you took them out every time they are used the plumber's bills would bankrupt Rockefeller. Never-to-be-used-again finger bowls? Slush! Why, the next thing they'll be saying we must have never-to-be-used-again bathtubs."

Al Levy, who knows more about bowls than any other man in the southwest, says if the law passes every person will have to carry his or her own finger bowl.

"Women will wear them for bangles," said Mr. Levy today, "and men will have them fitted on the heads of their canes. In a short time, instead of buying your wife a wrist watch, you'll get her a wrist finger bowl. Or you'll see the bald-headed chap pull off his skull cap and the waiter pour it half full of water while the finger-rinsing process goes on."

Nat Goodwin, founder and for some time principal patron of the famous Nat Goodwin café, telegraphed the following comment from San Francisco, where he is reiterating "Never Say Die" in solo with Marjorie Moreland as an accompanist:

"I never cared for finger bowls. They are too small for a regular drink and hold too much for a chaser."

The only word of encouragement to the state board comes from Vernon Goodwin, manager of the Hotel Alexandria.

"It really makes no difference, anyway," he said. "Finger bowls are de trop. However, we have always served a separate finger bowl to each consumer and our waiters are instructed to use every effort to discourage large parties using the same finger or families’ bowl, even when dining in private rooms. Finger bowls are for single dips and should never be used either for plunge or shower." — Los Angeles Herald, 1914

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

Mid-20th C. Finger Bowl Etiquette

Above is a selection of antique picks and forks for crab legs and lobster, along with a pâté spreader and an individual caviar knife.– “When one has eaten lobster, the finger bowl is quite necessary. Usually a slice of lemon is served with the finger bowl of warm water, for lemon rubbed over the fingers will take away the unpleasant fishy odor.”

• Finger bowls are not often used, but one needs to know what to do when a finger bowl is provided. 
• At very formal dinner parties, hotel-dining rooms, and with sea-food dinners, it is brought to the table before the dessert.
• At the formal dinner party the finger bowl arrives on the dessert plate, a small doily under it, and the dessert fork and spoon resting on each side of the bowl. When it comes to the table, the guest removes the silver, putting the fork at the left of the plate, the spoon at the right. Then he lifts the bowl and doily from the plate and sets them on the left side of the plate.
• The proper way to use the finger bowl is to dip the tips of your fingers in the water, rub them over your lips if you like, then wipe both your fingers and your lips with the napkin. Do it as inconspicuously as possible. 
• When one has eaten lobster, the finger bowl is quite necessary. Usually a slice of lemon is served with the finger bowl of warm water, for lemon rubbed over the fingers will take away the unpleasant fishy odor.

– From Emily R. Dow’s 1957, “Brooms, Buttons and Beaux”

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

The Royal Finger Bowl

Above: The finger bowls for the fruit or dessert course, currently being used for royal dinners at Buckingham Palace.— These early 19th century bowls were originally known as ‘wine rinsers’ and, occasionally, ‘wine coolers’. They were designed to rinse one’s wine glass in between the serving of various wines at a multi-course, formal dinner. A rinser would be placed within reach of each diner, filled 1/4 to 1/3 of the way up the bowl, with the coldest water possible, for rinsing and/or cooling a glass. Like miniature Monteith bowls, the wine glass would be inverted into the water. The stem of the glass would rest there in the water, until the next wine was poured, hence the “lips” on either side for resting the stems of the glasses. Theses bowls are sitting upon small, cocktail-sized napkins, placed atop the plate for the dessert or fruit course, along with the utensils for the course. It is more common to see a doily accompanying the finger bowl, however the word “doily” once referred to any small piece of woven linen. In either case, these should not be used to wipe or dry one’s hands. They are merely “seats” for the finger bowls once they are moved from the plate to the table.

—Photo source, “For the Royal Table: Dining at the Palace”

It is said to be a point of etiquette that when a member of the royal family dines, only the royal guest is supplied with a finger-bowl. The origin of this custom is perhaps not generally known, and is both curious and interesting. In the early days of the present dynasty, it was a matter of doubt who was loyal, and, when the toast of “The King” was given, all the Jacobites, as a matter of conscience, secretly passed their glasses over any water that happened to be near generally the finger-bowl. This action signified that the person so doing drank his toast to“the King over the water” —the exiled Stuart. When this became known the Court made a decree that no water was to be within reach of any of the guests, and singularly enough this rule holds till to-day. — The Weekly Calistogan, 1902

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

Gilded Age Table Novelties

 

It would be possible to duplicate this arrangement by combining two sizes of bowls already in possession in these days, when many glass closets show shelves well-stocked in this line. 

Many asparagus servers do not serve satisfactorily to the purposes for which they are designed. It remains to be seen if this will. It certainly has a plausible appearance.

A Floral Finger Bowl and One More Sort of Asparagus Dish

Housekeepers will be glad of a look at the two novelties shown. The double finger bowl is a simple arrangement of two bowls, one inside the other, the larger one holding a little water, enough to moisten the few flowers needed to give the upper and actual finger bowl the appearance of resting in a wreath. 

It would be possible to duplicate this arrangement by combining two sizes of bowls already in possession in these days, when many glass closets show shelves well-stocked in this line.


The second novelty is an asparagus rack for serving that rather difficulty-handled vegetable, with a sauce boat at each end, in which may be offered respectively, the plain melted butter and white sauce served with the course.


Manufacturers seem weary of offering improvements and suggestions in the way of asparagus dishes, tongs, forks, and spoons. Many of them do not serve satisfactorily to the purposes for which they are designed. It remains to be seen if this will. It certainly has a plausible appearance. — The New York Times, 1894

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

Proper Use of the Finger Bowl

For less formal use, the finger bowl is set up on a doily on the dessert plate and is removed with its doily and set at one side to wait until needed. It is bad form to pass a finger bowl without a plate and doily underneath it. The latter should never be omitted, though it is sometimes done ignorantly.

We have all laughed at the story of the country guest who drank from his finger bowl, and his hostess, to put him at ease, followed suit. It would scarcely seem possible in these days for such a mistake to occur, but many well bred people are uncertain as to finger bowl etiquette. Finger bowls are now used at every meal. At breakfast, they are sometimes on the table with the fruit plates and removed with the doily to the side. In some families they are only used with the fruit course; and in others, fresh ones are passed at the close of the meal, after the breakfast plate is removed. 

For lunch or dinner, the finger bowl is passed at the close of the meal; though occasionally it is used if grape-fruit in the rinds is a first course. And in formal families, where servants are trained never to have a vacant space in front of the guest, except just before the dessert course, when the table is brushed, a finger bowl on its plate is set down in front of each guest at the other hand. For less formal use, the finger bowl is set up on a doily on the dessert plate and is removed with its doily and set at one side to wait until needed. It is bad form to pass a finger bowl without a plate and doily underneath it. The latter should never be omitted, though it is sometimes done ignorantly.


A finger bowl doily may be as plain or as elaborate as the taste of the hostess and her pocketbook dictate. For ordinary use, those of fine linen or damask, embroidered with a simple scallop and with the initials of the hostess at one side, are very nice. The popular crocheted doilies are also liked for steady wear, or those in Madeira embroidery. Sheer lace doilies, or heavier ones of fine Cluny, Russian lace, or combinations of filet and eyelet embroidery on fine linen, are in best taste.


When the finger bowl is passed by itself, it is allowed to remain on the doily on the plate; when it is passed on the dessert plate, the bowl and doily are removed together. A finger bowl doily should about cover the center of the plate and must be spotless and well laundered. The fingers should never be wiped on it. A finger bowl is filled with clear, cold water, to a little more than a third of its depth. It can have a slice of lemon in it, a rose geranium, or other scented green leaf. Lemon verbena is delightful in season. Occasionally, a single flower of those used in the table decorations, floats in the finger bowl. Nasturtium blossoms are especially effective. 

If you have not enough finger bowls to go around, better do without them. One bowl shared by two persons is absolutely impermissible. Do not feel it necessary to take a bath with your finger bowl. Dipping the tips of the fingers in the water or rubbing them over the scented leaf, should be all that is needed for a dainty eater. Some well bred persons run their moistened fingers over their lips, but its propriety is a mooted question. Dry the fingers on the napkin unobtrusively. — The New York Times, May, 1909

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

Gilded Age Stupidity and Etiquette

The objectionable features of the after-dinner finger-bowl arise principally in the stupid idea that they add to the elegance of the table, as much as does an épergne, and from the other fact that those using them, in order to do homage to the host, who has provided them with much récherché utensils, deem it incumbent on themselves to perform an elaborate after-dinner toilet. —The New York Times, February 1880

FINGER-BOWLS

The objectionable features of an after-dinner toilet

The subjects of finger-bowls, and mouth-cleansers are apparently again agitating the minds of the diners-out. Quite a long time ago, in the Household columns, an opinion was advanced in regard to after-dinner ablutions. Considered as a matter of dinner etiquette, it may be roundly asserted that finger washing after dinner is really an over refinement, and rather disagreeably suggestive than otherwise. If this system of cleansing the hands were pushed a l’outrance, we might require that the servants between the different courses, should go through the same operation, for a good many doubtful thumbs concealed under dingy cotton gloves might be the better for it. Practically considered, however, finger-bowls after dinner are rather useful than ornamental. 

Possibly it is too much for the latter cause that they are used. There are certain fruits which cannot be eaten without sticking the fingers. Confectionery — marron glacé and such things — when partaking of, does make the fingers feel uncomfortably. It is, then, perfectly legitimate to use a finger-bowl and small napkin; even further use may be made of the bowl by dipping the end of the napkin in the water and applying it to the lips. Such as are masculine, with mustaches, find such use of the finger-bowl is comforting to a degree.

All the trouble about it is in the display. Why do people who give dinners, insist on having such highly decorative small-sized hand basins at their tables? The simpler, the less obtrusive they are, the better. In fact, when introduced, they should be brought in last, just as the curtain falls on the dinner, not advanced while the play is going on. Those who use these finger-bowls are often at fault in the way they employ them. They make too much of a business of it. They repeat, on a minor scale, the tubbing process. 

The best table manners are those which are the most quiet. If there is any one thing more uncomfortable than any other, it is to hear your neighbor at the table swishing away, scrubbing his hands, and flicking his napkin around as if it were a jack-towel on a kitchen door. All you have to do is dip your fingers in the water, but you must be a very clumsy feeder if the palms of your hand are sullied; then the business is over. You may, before you begin, dip your napkin in the water and wipe your mouth. But the use of that extra cup inside of the bowl is to be inveighed against as a disgusting thing. No screen made with the hands avails to hide this repulsive act. 

There is something horrible in the idea of one’s rinsing out their mouth at dinner, which recalls the toothbrush or the dentist’s chair. The act of gurgling, and the final expulsion of the fluid, is simply nauseating. This filthiness was never intended, as the usage of the smaller glass. What it was put there for was to wash the outside of the mouth only. The nasty use of it may be called one of the false developments of civilization, and should be held up to scorn. As it is a temptation in the way of the ignorant, it would be wiser to abandon the small glass entirely, and then no mistakes could be made. 

Unusual things at a dinner table are not to be recommended to be recommended; nevertheless there is an Eastern custom, sometimes used in the south of France and in Spain, derived undoubtedly, from the Moors, which is not so much out of the way. At the conclusion of a dinner a servant presents to each guest a large copper basin, which he holds in one hand while with the other he pours from a large metal vessel, which has a spout with a small aperture, a thin stream of water. A very little water, without splashing falls on the fingers of the guest, who then uses his napkin, or takes one from another servant who follows. It is the parade of the thing, however, which renders it objectionable, though it is sensible enough. 

The objectionable features of the after-dinner finger-bowl arise principally in the stupid idea that they add to the elegance of the table, as much as does an épergne, and from the other fact that those using them, in order to do homage to the host, who has provided them with much récherché utensils, deem it incumbent on themselves to perform an elaborate after-dinner toilet. —The New York Times, February 1880

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

Etiquette After “Sweets Course”

The French ‘Sweets Course’ is known as the ‘Dessert Course’ in the USA, and the ‘Pudding Course’ in the U.K. Above is a vintage British, double-layered, boxed set of silver plated, pudding forks, pudding spoons and a serving fork and spoon.
——————————————
“Just at the close of dinner, after ice cream, pie or pudding has been disposed of and when fruit is about to be served, a dessert plate, with doily and finger bowl upon it is placed before each guest ...”

The Embroidered Doily and Finger Bowl 

That fashionable little embroidered doily is not meant for use. It is laid over the fruit dessert plate and serves as a mat for the finger bowl, which is placed upon it. Just at the close of dinner, after ice cream, pie or pudding has been disposed of and when fruit is about to be served, a dessert plate, with doily and finger bowl upon it is placed before each guest, who removes the finger bowl and the doily and places them at the left of the plate. The finger bowl contains a little water and a bit of lemon. After dipping the fingers in the bowl, they are dried on the dinner napkin, or a regular fruit napkin, provided for that purpose. —San Diego Bee, 1887

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

Chicken, Lobster and Finger Bowls

“People are less lenient than they used to be. That is, if we go back to the descriptions given us by the writers of long ago, and as copied for instance in the moving picture of Henry VIII, who picked up a whole chicken in his hands and tore it apart, our table manners have become positively finicking.” Au contraire, mon frère!!!
—————— 
When it comes to table manners, we have no grounds to feel superior to Henry VIII. He observed complex etiquette. Emily Post’s knowledge of Tudor era etiquette, along with the portrayal of Henry VIII’s dining manners, were both incorrect. Henry VIII acted like an animal at times, but not while dining. Yes, even many “etiquette experts” get it wrong. One was quoted as saying this, upon the release of his 2013 book of etiquette: “In Henry VIII’s time, it was good manners to chuck lamb bones over one’s shoulder for the greyhounds to feed. That would cause raised eyebrows these days.”

Hands Off Chicken, Modern Code Insists

Dear Mrs. Post: Is it incorrect, according to etiquette, to eat even the slightest bit of chicken in the fingers? I don’t mean whether it is correct to take up what can be cut off the bone easily enough, but I am referring to the very small bones from which it is impossible to cut meat loose with a knife and fork. Aren’t good table manners today more lenient about these foods, especially if finger bowls are provided? 

Answer: No, people are less lenient than they used to be. That is, if we go back to the descriptions given us by the writers of long ago, and as copied for instance in the moving picture of Henry VIII, who picked up a whole chicken in his hands and tore it apart, our table manners have become positively finicking. The only things that could soil the fingers and are not tabooed by the meticulous are lobster claws. And when such lobster is served, finger bowls of hot soapy water should be provided at once. Perhaps, if this practice were followed when serving chicken, there would be no objection to taking the wings in the fingers. — Mill Valley Record, 1937

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

Table Manners on the Rails

Good manners, evidently! — The finger bowl, according to Pollock, is only one of a number of table refinements popularised by the dining car. Steak knives and a large variety of cutlery and silverware are included in the list. 

Americans Excelled In 1920’s Table Manners

Evolution in the table manners of the nation is laid at the door of the railway dining car, by Allan Pollock, manager of dining car service for Southern Pacific Company. The finger bowl, according to Pollock, is only one of a number of table refinements popularised by the dining car. Steak knives and a large variety of cutlery and silverware are included in the list. 

Equipment of the new $60,000 dining cars, eleven of which have been ordered especially for the company’s new 63 hour trains to the East this Fall will include such novelties as individual silver butter dishes with tiny ice compartments beneath the butter. “Twenty years ago,” says Pollock, “finger bowls were practically unknown in the homes and restaurants of America. People first became accustomed to using them on dining cars. Now few homes are without them. 

“Ten years ago dining car stewards seldom came in from a trip without telling of some passenger who carefully squeezed the segment of lemon into his finger bowl and tossed off the contents, as a sort of after-dinner chaser. It doesn’t happen today. American people now exhibit the best table manners of any nation.”— Eagle Rock Sentinel, 1926

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

Finger-Bowls Won’t Replace Napkins

He is doing this incorrectly– One is only supposed to dip the fingers of one hand at a time into the bowl, and then, the other. Never should one dip both of their hands into the finger bowl at one time.

The practice, which has been attempted in England, of doing away with the use of table napkins, is not likely to prevail here to any extent soon. The idea in not using napkins, is that table manners should be so perfect, that the fingers will be as daintily clean at the close of a meal, as at the beginning. But we still have here the woman who finds it necessary not only to dip her fingers in the finger bowl, but to moisten her lips from it, and she is usually a lady in other respects. It is a practice only a shade more reprehensible than that of the woman who uses her drinking glass for a finger bowl. The individual who needs further ablutions than the ordinary use of the finger bowl will give, should take to a bib, and be relegated to the care of a nurse. – Sacramento Daily Union 1898

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

A Healthy 1930 Etiquette Suggestion

While finger bowls, and finger bowl usage, have fallen in and out of fashion over decades and centuries, clean fingers at the dining table have always been fashionable.

Finger Bowls First

Though it is contrary to the book of etiquette, finger bowls ought really to be served at the beginning rather than at the end of a meal. The present practice serves an aesthetic end, the recommended one would serve as a measure of better personal hygiene. But there is nothing very novel in this suggestion. In fact, it is an old idea. The Mosaic law which includes so many good rules for the protection of health, forbids an orthodox believer to touch food before his hands have been washed. 

Keen observation had no doubt impressed the author of those sanitary laws that unclean hands are a source of, and a means of, transmitting disease. Indeed, the observations need not to have been so very keen to appreciate the point, for in the course of an hour the hands come in contact with a vast multitude of things which in themselves had previously been touched by scores if not hundreds of others, and each contact represents a possible source of danger. 

Now the matter is simple and yet! A large number of our schools have lunch rooms for their pupils, or cafeteria services, where those that cannot, or will not go home for their midday meal, may eat. How many among these schools provide washing facilities? How many shops, factories, or offices have a place where the workers might wash their hands before eating, without having to stand in line for half the lunch period? And also how many parents insist upon having their children come to the dinner table with hands freshly washed? 

Consider the care we bestow upon our foods, how we protect our milk, our meat and our water from contamination and pollution, and then consider how all of the precautions bestowed upon our food substances turn to naught by the soiled hands that transport the victuals from table to mouth. – Edited by Dr. lago Galdston for the N. Y. Academy of Medicine, 1930

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

Etiquette of British Royal Dining

Don't think about asking the Queen to “Please pass the salt.” She has her own salt dip, or salt cellar, and it is not part of the 2,000 plus silver pieces used for a State Dinner. The Queen’s is a salt dip that was made by Nicholas Clausen in 1721

If by chance there is ever an opportunity for you to go to dinner with HRH at the palace, here are a few things you may find interesting... The silver service (aka “The Grand Service”) is so large, and so complete with every type of utensil imaginable, it takes eight (yes... eight) palace employees at least three weeks to get ready for setting on the tables. Though the Grand Service is kept by the Yeoman of the Silver Pantry (that is the actual title) in a controlled atmosphere, each piece still needs to be washed, shined and polished to perfection prior to a State Dinner.

Don't think about asking the Queen to “Please pass the salt.” She has her own salt dip, or salt cellar, and it is not part of the 2,000 plus silver pieces used for  a State Dinner. The Queen's is a salt dip that was made by Nicholas Clausen in 1721.

Page from the excellent book, “For the Royal Table: Dining at the Palace”

All of this comes from a wonderful book entitled “For the Royal Table: Dining at the Palace” and was created by “The Royal Collection” in Great Britain. It includes historic menus, royal traditions, the silver, the crystal, the china... everything the royal family has used for the past 500 years. From the Royal Collection website, in 2008 announcing the publication of the book there is this... “The style of dining has changed considerably over the centuries, as can been seen from the elaborate menus and recipes from past royal banquets. At a lavish dinner given by Charles II for the Garter Knights at Windsor Castle in 1671, guests were served 145 dishes during the first course, and the catering included 16 barrels of oysters, 2,150 poultry, 1,500 crayfish, 6,000 asparagus stalks and 22 gallons of strawberries” and much more.

The book shows the finger bowls set out with the accompanying knife, fork and spoon, for the dessert or fruit course.

Menu for the Wedding Breakfast of King George VI and Queen Elizabeth in 1923

The table gets the white glove treatment.

 And the white bootie treatment too, for walking the length of the table, checking on perfection. 

Here is more from “The Royal Collection” website: “Contemporary photographs show how Royal Household staff, including chefs, footmen, pages, florists and housemaids, guarantee the highest standards of presentation at a State Banquet. The laying of the table begins two days before the dinner, and each place-setting measures exactly 45cm (18in) across. During the meal, a system of ‘traffic lights’ keeps the team of footmen and pages synchronised; a blue light communicates ‘stand by’ and an amber light signals ‘serve the food’. Each guest has six glasses (one each for red wine, white wine, water and port, and two for champagne – one for the toast and one for the pudding course). A diagram of the arrangement of the glasses guides those who are unfamiliar with the sequence of service.

From the Royal Photograph Collection is a charming series of portraits of Queen Victoria’s footmen and pages, many of whom had started in royal service under her uncle, William IV. Serving food in a royal palace presented particular challenges. Staff were instructed that ‘trays must be kept level so that there is no spilling of gravy or sauces’. At Windsor Castle every dish had to be carried up narrow stairs from the Great Kitchen to the State Apartments. The chefs always made twenty extra dishes for each course in case of a disaster. Following the devastating fire of 1992, the restoration of the Castle included a complete refitting of the kitchen quarters, adding lifts to deliver the food. Royal Household staff still prepare food in the Great Kitchen, the oldest working kitchen in England, where traditional copper pots from reign of George IV stand alongside high-tech catering equipment.” The book is a great read for anyone following the Royal Family or who is interested in history. 

This post was previously posted on the Etiquette Sleuth Blogspot in 2011 

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

Finger Bowl Etiquette

“They became ridiculously polite by carving bread with knife and fork, but the climax came when I set two bowls of rosewater before them as finger glasses...” – The finger bowls at Buckingham Palace, fom the book, “Dining at the Palace” 

Staggered by Finger Bowls

A very amusing scene occurred once while I was serving a lady and gentleman of the unmistakable upstart type. They were grossly ignorant of the most elementary rules of table etiquette, shoveling the food into their mouths with their knives, which were constantly loaded half-way up to the handles. They managed to struggle through their dinner, sometimes casting aside knives and forks and attacking game and poultry by cutting them in halves and eating from their hands, holding the leg. Sometimes, too, they became ridiculously polite by carving bread with knife and fork, but the climax came when I set two bowls of rosewater before them as finger glasses.  

They looked at each other, and then cautiously around the room, trying to find some solution of the mysterious dish before them, not having the sense to ignore it altogether. Whispered consultations took place, which presently grew into a suppressed quarrel, the lady reproaching her lord for his ignorance. Suddenly she was seen to shake the water around and around, and finally, with a look of contempt and superior wisdom, she raised the bowl to her lips and drank all the contents. Needless to say, that the hearty laughter of the other diners made them feel the mistake, and they beat a hasty retreat. —London TitBits, 1893

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