Lord Pleads for Better Manners

“Strange to see how a good dinner and feasting reconciles everybody.” -Samuel Pepys. Famous for his diary and being a 17th century gentleman. – “Why did men of the early seventeenth century emphasize courtesy and good manners? I take it for two reasons. First that they were models of courtesy and good manners themselves. The men of the seventeenth century were, I suspect, the greatest breed of Englishmen that England has ever produced, partly because they poed good manners themselves and partly because they realized the enormous importance of courtesy and good manners in the common transactions of life.”

Lord Rosebery Denounces the Decay of Manners Throughout the World as a Bad Sign

Lord Rosebery recently talked to the boys of the Royal Grammar school at Guildford on the subject of manners. He founded his discourse upon one of the statutes of the school framed 300 years ago, which he believed required much more attention than was usually paid to it. The statute said that assemblies without just cause must be punished. Honesty and clean speech, humility, courtesy and good manners were to be established by all good means. “Now, the point I wish to labor for the moment,” Lord Rosebery proceeded , "is that of courtesy and manners. Why did men of the early seventeenth century emphasize courtesy and good manners? I take it for two reasons. First that they were models of courtesy and good manners themselves. The men of the seventeenth century were, I suspect, the greatest breed of Englishmen that England has ever produced, partly because they possessed good manners themselves and partly because they realized the enormous importance of courtesy and good manners in the common transactions of life. 

“I think there has been a decay of manners in England and Scotland and all over the world. It is not limited to our own people by any means. You see it on the continent just as much —but depend upon it— it is a bad sign. If people have not the spirit of reverence themselves, even if it be only an outward reverence, they are not going the right way, but possibly going the wrong way. “Manners have an enormous commercial value in life. I sometimes wonder why it is not harped on more on these occasions. No one can have lived as long as I have without noticing the weight and value of manners in the ordinary transactions of life, in public life, and having seen men by appearance and manners get such a start of very much abler fellows, that they have been able by appearance and manners to keep their place much higher in public life than their own abilities or service would entitle them to. “Good appearance, you may say, is not at our command. There I do not agree. Good looks are not at our command. They are the gift of the gods and are the possession only of a small percentage, of mankind. But good appearance, straight-forward appearance, manly appearance without self consciousness, which is the most agreeable feature perhaps of all appearance, is within the command of everybody. 

“So much for appearance, but let us take manners, which I think are even more important. I will not put my appeal for manners on the higher consideration, such as sure signs of a noble nature expressed in outward form, though that is true enough. I will only put it today on the question of the commercial value of manners, and I ask every boy who hears me to bear away with him in mind the enormous value of manners from this day onward through his life, and they will give him a value which he will never possess without them, and give him a start over other boys, who neither strive to nor attain good manners.” — Morning Press, 1913

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

Etiquette: An Edwardian Look Back

Even at so late a period as the Restoration, 1660, it was the custom for the guests to take their own knives and forks to an English banquet.

“Old Time Etiquette”

Even at so late a period as the Restoration, 1660, it was the custom for the guests to take their own knives and forks to an English banquet. Pepys records that he did this when he went to the Lord Mayor's feast in the Guildhall. 

In the previous reign, the Lord Chamberlain had found it necessary to issue regulations for the benefit of the officers invited to dine at the royal table. They were required to wear clean boots, not to be half drunk on their arrival, not to drink more than one goblet to every two dishes, not to throw the bones under the table, not to lick their fingers. 

 Mary, Queen of Scots, introduced to the UK, etiquette and customs she had learned in France.

The Stuarts undoubtedly did much to refine English table manners, for it was one of the points admired by Mary Queen of Scots that the customs she introduced from France made her court and royal banquets more exquisite and genteel than those of her rival, Queen Elizabeth. 

As forks came into use, the old-time importance of the table napkin began to wane. From being a necessity it became a luxury, on the fastidious use of which etiquette has at various times placed strange values. Under the third empire in France, St. Beuve brought disgrace upon himself because at breakfast at the Tuilleries he carelessly opened his napkin and placed it over his two knees. To this he added the crime of cutting his egg in two at the middle. 

Etiquette at Versailles and the Tuileries Palace dictated the rules for everything from use of napkins to eating one's eggs.

Court etiquette prescribed that the half-folded napkin should be on the left knee, and the top of the egg was to be merely broken with the edge of the spoon and drained with the tip of the spoon. For his failings in these respects St. Beuve's name was struck off the imperial visiting list.–The Los Angeles Herald, 1909

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

Etiquette and Protocol in Government Circles

Eleanor Roosevelt

On the Question of Rank

The question of rank and precedence has always been a touchy one in government circles, yet these apparently ridiculous or archaic rules agreed upon among the nations have a strong practical reason for their existence. In 1661 a sword battle in London between the attendants of the French and Spanish ambassadors, over whose carriage should precede the other's, brought France and Spain dangerously close to war. In 1756 a violent quarrel between the French and Russian ambassadors at a ball in London over precedence led to a duel and a serious threat of war between Russia and France. A slight to an ambassador is not a personal affront, it is an insult to his nation.

"Monday 30 September 1661 ~ This morning up by moon-shine, at 5 o’clock, to White Hall, to meet Mr. Moore at the Privy Seal, but he not being come as appointed, I went into King Street to the Red Lyon to drink my morning draft, and there I heard of a fray between the two Embassadors of Spain and France; and that, this day, being the day of the entrance of an Embassador from Sweden, they intended to fight for the precedence!" From the famous diary of Samuel Pepys 

Even in the Democratic United States of America, where rank is of less importance than it is in Europe, many famous quarrels over precedence have occurred in Washington. During the administration of President Theodore Roosevelt, when Miss Helen Cannon, daughter of "Uncle Joe" Cannon, a widower and Speaker of the House, demanded precedence over the wives of Senators and Representatives and was overruled, she announced that she would send regrets to further invitations to the White House if she were not given at least equal status with the wives of the members of Congress. During the Hoover administration Dolly Mann, sister and hostess of Vice-President Curtis, created a long-drawn-out controversy by her demand that she be given precedence over Alice Roosevelt Longworth, wife of speaker Nicholas Longworth. Admiral of the Navy George Dewey precipitated a similar commotion when he demanded (in vain) that he be given precedence over foreign ministers because he rated a salute of seventeen guns as compared to only fifteen for the foreign ministers.

The Bryan Times called Miss Helen Cannon, daughter of then widower and U.S. Speaker of the House, “One of the First Ladies of Official Society at National Capital” and referred to her as a “Famous Housekeeper” 

Some of these controversies have brought about modifications in the orders of precedence; others have left them unchanged. Sometimes other factors have brought about modifications. The intent has always been to arrange the order of precedence in such a way as to indicate properly the degree of vested authority represented.

From Eleanor Roosevelt's 1962, “Common Sense Book of Etiquette”

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