Versailles Etiquette

The point about Versailles was that there was no escape: the courtiers had to "make it" where they were. The stage was Louis's, and the roles that could be played were designed by him. It was up to each courtier to fit himself – or herself – into one of the slots provided.  The leaders of all the other towns and villages of France were made, largely through the use of etiquette, and more specifically through rudeness and judicious slighting by the tax-collecting intendants, to feel their subordination, the distance from the court.  Once, the nobility had relied on strength, swagger, and vigor, even violence, personally to make their mark and uphold their honour; at Versailles, the way to success became discretion, observation, cunning, and the dissembling of one's aims and passions. 

"During the 17th century, in France, manners became a political issue. King Louis XIV and his predecessors, in collecting together the nobility of France to live with the sovereign at Versailles, instituted a sort of school of manners. At the palace, the courtiers lived under the despotic surveillance of the king, and upon their good behavior, their deference, and their observance of etiquette their whole careers depended. If you displeased a Louis, he would simply "not see you" the following day; his gaze would pass over you as he surveyed the people before him. And not being "seen" by the king was tantamount to ceasing to count, at Versailles. A whole timetable of ceremonies was followed, much of it revolving around the King's own person. Intimacy with Louis meant power, and power was symbolically expressed in attending to certain of the king's most private and physical needs: handing him his stockings to put on in the morning, being present as he used to chaise percée, rushing when the signal sounded to be present as he got ready for bed. It mattered desperately what closeness the king allowed you - whether he spoke to you, in front of whom, and for how long. 

The point about Versailles was that there was no escape: the courtiers had to "make it" where they were. The stage was Louis's, and the roles that could be played were designed by him. It was up to each courtier to fit himself – or herself – into one of the slots provided. The leaders of all the other towns and villages of France were made, largely through the use of etiquette, and more specifically through rudeness and judicious slighting by the tax-collecting intendants, to feel their subordination, the distance from the court. Once, the nobility had relied on strength, swagger, and vigor, even violence, personally to make their mark and uphold their honour; at Versailles, the way to success became discretion, observation, cunning, and the dissembling of one's aims and passions. At Versailles, and at the courts all over Europe which imitated it - everything was done to make it very clear who was superior to whom; and of course, each time anyone was polite, he or she was simultaneously acknowledging rank and demonstrating who stood where.

The new manners - both the formal rules of protocol and precedence and the unspoken, more profoundly enculturated rules like table manners - were seen increasingly, according to Elias, as ways in which one did not offend other people. You were controlling yourself, so as to prevent other people from being disgusted or "shocked." People lived very closely together at Versailles; everyone was watched by everyone else, and actual physical proximity helped raise some of the new sensitivity to other people's real or imagined susceptibilities. 

Men were expected on the whole to give up physical force as a means of getting their way, and - as always when "the graces" are preferred over brute strength - women begin to count for more. Within the aristocratic court circle, people became, in spite of the obsession with rank, far more equal. Secure in the knowledge that just being at court was the pinnacle of prestige, from which most of society was shut out, courtiers could permit themselves to respect each other.

As the bourgeois became richer and more indispensable even at court, they demanded - and were given, by self appointed experts who wrote manuals for them - instruction in how to behave as people did in "the best circles." In 1672, Antoine de Courtin produced "Nouveau trait' de la civilité' qui se pratique en France parmi les honnestes gens" or The "New Treatise of the Civility Which is Practiced in France Among Honest People." ("Honest" -hônnete- kept its original association with honour and the opposite-but-supporting motion, shame.) De Courtin writes about manners for both hosts and guests, and invite advises his bourgeois readers on how they should address the nobility. The church in France also produced handbooks of manners and talk to precept in schools. Gradually gentility spread down from the court to the bourgeois, and finally trickled further down to the rest of the population.

The bourgeois were even stricter about standards of civility than were the nobility were; having no ever-present King do enforce the rules, they imposed restraints on themselves. Being more anxious to rise, they had more to lose by making slips and gaffes; so their self-inhibiting mechanisms had to be deeper rooted, less obviously the donning of an external personna than the nobility could permit themselves. The policing of emotions became internal, and finally invisible even to themselves: they were able to think that they acted, not in obedience to power and self-interest but for purely moral reasons." –Margaret Visser, in "The Rituals of Dinner"

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

More Mourning Etiquette

“To go to the opera, or a dinner, or a party, before six months have elapsed, is considered heartless and disrespectful. If one chooses, as some do, to wear no mourning, then he can go, unchallenged, to any place of amusement, but if he put on mourning he must respect its etiquette.”– Scarlett O'Hara seemed to be in mourning through a third of the film, "Gone with the Wind," yet she still sought amusement at social gatherings.

The duration of a mourner’s retirement from the world has been much shortened of late. For one year no formal visiting is undertaken, nor any gayety. Black is often worn for a husband or wife two years, for parents one year, and for brothers and sisters one year; a heavy black is lightened after that period. Ladies are beginning to wear a small black gauze veil over the face, and are in the habit of throwing the heavy crape veil back over the hat. It is also proper to wear a quiet black dress when going to a funeral, although not absolutely necessary. Friends may call on the bereaved family within a month, not expecting, of course to see them. Kind notes expressing sympathy are welcome from intimate friends; and flowers, or any similar testimonial of sympathy, are thoughtful and appropriate.

Cards and note-paper are put in mourning, but very broad borders of black are in bad taste. A narrow border of black is correct. The use of handkerchiefs with a two-inch square of white cambric and a four-inch border of black is to be deprecated.

Mourning which soldiers, sailors, and courtiers wear is pathetic and effective. A flag draped with crape, a gray cadet-sleeve with a black band, or a piece of crape about the left arm of a senator, a black weed on a hat, are in proper taste.      

Advertisement for mourning attire from a Victorian publication

Before a funeral the ladies of a family see no one but the most intimate friends. The gentlemen, of course, see the clergyman and officials who manage the ceremony. It is now the almost universal practice to carry the remains to a church, where the friends of the family can pay the last tribute of respect without crowding into a private house. Pall-bearers are invited by note, and assemble at the house. They, accompanying the remains, after the ceremonies at the church, to their final resting-place. The nearest lady friends seldom go to the church or to the grave. This is, however, entirely a matter of feeling, and they can go if they wish. After the funeral only the members of the family return to the house. It is not expected that a bereaved wife or mother will see any one other than the members of her family for several weeks.

All the preparations for a funeral in the house are committed to the care of an undertaker, who removes the furniture from the drawing-room, filling all the space possible with camp-stools. The clergyman reads the service at the head of the coffin, the relatives being grouped around. The body, if not disfigured by disease, is often dressed in the clothes worn in life, and laid in an open casket, as if reposing on a sofa, and all friends are asked to take a last look. The body of a man is usually dressed in black.

The custom of decorating the coffin with flowers is beautiful, but has been overdone, and now the request is frequently made that no flowers be sent.

No one in mourning for a parent, child, brother, or husband, is expected to be seen at a concert, a dinner, a party, or at any other place of public amusement, before three months have passed. After that one may be seen at a concert. But to go to the opera, or a dinner, or a party, before six months have elapsed, is considered heartless and disrespectful. If one choose, as some do, to wear no mourning, then he can go, unchallenged, to any place of amusement, but if he put on mourning he must respect its etiquette. –From How to Behave and How to Amuse, by G. H. Sandison, 1895

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

Mourning Etiquette

Downton Abbey's Dowager Countess in early 20th C. period mourning attire.

Death comes to all alike and custom has long established a conventional observance in dealing with the presence of death, in our own homes or elsewhere. In our own country black is worn as the typical attire of sorrow, and it has come to be regarded as a token of respect to the lost one. It is now decreed that crape shall only be worn six months, even for the nearest relative, and that the duration of mourning shall not exceed a year. A wife’s mourning for her husband is the most conventionally deep mourning allowed. Bombazine and crape, a widow’s cap, and a long, thick veil—such is the modern English idea. Some widows even have the cap made of black crêpe lisse, but it is generally of white. 

In this country a widow’s first mourning dresses are covered almost entirely with crape. There are now, however, other and pleasanter fabrics which also bear the dead black, lustreless look which is alone considered respectful to the dead, and which are not so costly as crape or so disagreeable to wear. The Henrietta cloth and imperial serges are chosen for heavy winter dresses, while for those of less weight are tamise cloth, Bayonnaise, grenadine, nuns’ veiling, and the American silk.

Mourning is expensive, and often costs a family more than they can well afford; but it is a sacrifice that all gladly make. Many consider it an act of disrespect to the memory of the dead if the living are not clad in gloomy black.

Widows wear deep mourning, consisting of woolen stuffs and crape, for about two years, and sometimes by choice for life. Children wear the same for parents for one year, and then lighten it with black silk, trimmed with crape. Half mourning gradations of gray, purple, or lilac have been abandoned, and, instead, combinations of black and white are used. Complimentary mourning is black silk without crape. 

The French have three grades of mourning—deep, ordinary, and half mourning. In deep mourning, woolen cloths only are worn; in ordinary mourning, silk and woolen; in half mourning, gray and violet. In France, etiquette prescribes mourning for a husband—six months of deep mourning, six of ordinary, and six weeks of half mourning. For a wife, a father, or a mother, six months—three deep and three half mourning; for a grandparent, two months and a half of slight mourning; for a brother or a sister, two months, one of which is in deep mourning; for an uncle or an aunt, three weeks of ordinary black. Here, ladies have been known to go into deepest mourning for their own relatives or those of their husbands, or for people, perhaps, whom they have never seen, and have remained for seven or ten years, constantly in black; then, on losing a child or a relative dearly loved, they have no extremity of dress left to express the real grief. Complimentary mourning should be limited to two or three weeks.
                                                               

Lady Mary of Downton Abbey in jet jewelry – In the Victorian era, there was a wide variety of materials used to mimic Whitby Jet for mourning jewelry. Some was made from genuine jet, onyx, French jet (black glass), obsidian, black garnets, black amber, vulcanite, dyed horn or gutta percha. – Source "cleopatra*s_boudoir"            

For light mourning, jet is used on silk, and makes a handsome dress.

Elegant dresses are made with jet embroidery on soft French crape, but lace is never “mourning.” During half mourning, however, black lace may be worn on white silk; but this is questionable. Diamond ornaments set in black enamel are allowed even in the deepest mourning, and also pearls set in black. Gold is never worn in mourning.

The Swedish kid glove is now much more in use for mourning, and the silk glove is made with such neatness and with such a number of buttons that it is equally stylish, and much cooler and more agreeable. Mourning bonnets are worn rather larger than ordinary bonnets.

People of sense, of course, manage to dress without going to extremities in either direction. Exaggeration is to be deprecated in mourning as in everything. The discarding of mourning should be effected by slow stages. It shocks persons of good taste to see a widow change into colors hurriedly. If black is to be dispensed with, let its retirement be slowly and gracefully marked by quiet costumes, as the grief, yielding to time, is giving way to resignation and cheerfulness.

A woman may wear mourning all her life if she choose, but it is a question whether in so doing she does not injure the welfare and happiness of the living. –From How to Behave and How to Amuse by G. H. Sandison, 1895

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

Etiquette and Evolving Social Customs

On Technology – "While I counsel conservatism in these changes, I am convinced that the new dynasty of wire and wireless is destined to dominate us; and as discovery continues and inventions multiply, the time is near when immediate communication will be had at long range..."  
On Invitations – "It is still considered better to adhere to the more respectful written form if there is any doubt about the new way being acceptable to the party of the second part." 

“The universal use of the telephone is another factor in the modification of social customs. Among familiar friends, the little chat over the 'phone largely takes the place of the informal call. Also, invitations to any but strictly formal functions are now sent by telephone, if agreeable to both parties; though it is still considered better to adhere to the more respectful written form if there is any doubt about the new way being acceptable to the party of the second part. 

While I counsel conservatism in these changes, I am convinced that the new dynasty of wire and wireless is destined to dominate us; and as discovery continues and inventions multiply, the time is near when immediate communication will be had at long range; possibly telepathy—who knows? Or, possibly tele-photography with it—why not? Then, the slow, laborious writing of messages will be as much out of date as the super-annuated stage-coach.

But—not yet; we are still in the process of evolution. It is still safe to heed Pope's famous advice:

"Be not the first by whom the new is tried,
Nor yet the last to lay the old aside.”

– From Agnes H. Morton's, 1919 book, “Etiquette.”

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

Etiquette, Marriage and Divorce?

He looked and acted "like a longshoreman."  He wielded a toothpick in company and broke the rules of etiquette in other ways! – Longshoreman on strike in New York, circa 1910

Husband Acted "Like a Longshoreman" Says Wife

Suit of Wealthy Riversider for Divorce Is Denied


Judge Houser of the divorce court yesterday rendered judgment for the defendant In the suit of Thomas Morehouse for a divorce from his wife, Emma I. Morehouse, a wealthy property owner of Riverside, whom the plaintiff charged with cruelty and desertion. Morehouse alleged there was no community property, but his wife, in her response to the suit, declared there was $50,000.

The case was marked with testimony regarding complaints made by Mrs. Morehouse against her spouse because of his manners. She alleged he looked and acted "like a longshoreman," and that he wielded a toothpick in company and broke the rules of etiquette in other ways. He alleged cruelty on the grounds that he was "called down" continually as to his manners. The defendant alleged that he deserted her on critical occasions when she required his presence, and her evidence showed she tried to keep him from leaving her. On the latter ground the verdict was rendered against Morehouse. — Los Angeles Herald, 1910

On Etiquette and Social Happiness of the Day

“There is in every human nature the desire for social happiness—which is, frankly, in other words, the desire so to impress by one's manner that one will be welcome and respected wherever one chances to be. And it is only by adhering to the fundamental laws of good society that this social happiness can ever be attained.

In observing the established etiquette of modern society it is necessary to pay particular attention to one's appearance, manner, and speech. It must be remembered that the world is a harsh judge and is perfectly willing to condemn us by outward appearances. In the street-car, in the ball-room, at the theater—every day people are reading the story of our characters and ideals.” – Book of Etiquette / Volume I

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

Etiquette and Table Settings

3 Ways to Set a Dinner Table 

from ProFlowers.com

Food? Check. Drinks? Check. Table setting? Almost. While a simple plate, fork, spoon and knife set-up may do the job, if you really want to impress your dinner guests, take the extra time to set a formal dining room table. Before you feel the need to start shopping around for an oyster fork, ProFlowers has outlined the three main table settings—basic, informal and formal—for you to choose from based on your style and dinner plan.

They’ve also included some fun table-setting trivia so you can spend your meal impressing guests after setting the perfect tablescape. Bon Appétit!

A basic setting need not have a spoon, unless it is for a particular food or course.

A cup and saucer are only proper at informal dinner settings, at lunch settings and breakfast settings. 

The fork is the only utensil allowed at all 3 sides of a setting. A maximum of 3 are allowed on the left, 1 is allowed on the right for the appetizer, and 1 is allowed above the plate for a dessert course.

Ultimately, good food and good company make for the best dinner parties. Bring together your table setting with a fabulous bouquet. From rustic to elegant, a floral centerpiece can set the tone for your meal.

ProFlowers sells a wide variety of fresh-cut flowers, mixed bouquets and potted plants, shipped fresh from the grower.

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

Etiquette and Hands at the Table

Renaissance etiquette and one's hands at the table– On the Continent of Europe, propriety enjoins diners to sit with both hand in full view of the company; most correctly, unused hands should rest on the table's edge, being visible only from the wrists. 

Anglo-Saxon table manners allow, even prefer, the diner should eat where only one hand need be used, with the left hand lying on his or her lap.  It is a limitation upon one's ability to grab things, like the decision to use only the right hand, or only three fingers.  On the Continent of Europe, however, propriety enjoins diners to sit with both hand in full view of the company; most correctly, unused hands should rest on the table's edge, being visible only from the wrists.  (Erasmus had commanded boys to “have both hands on the table, not clasped together, nor on the plate.”)  The Anglo-Saxon custom of permitting guests to sit with one hand hidden seems, to Continentals, at best a sad sign of naiveté.

One reason for hands being kept in sight used to be the people had to learn not to scratch at table. Della Casa’s, “Galateo” says, for instance, that waiters were not to scratch their heads– or anything else –“nor place their hands on any part of the body which is kept covered, nor even appear to do so, as do some careless servants who hold them inside their shirt or keep them behind their backs hidden under their clothes. They must rather keep their hands in sight and out of suspicion... .” 

This rule holds even more strongly for diners, who are constantly warned not to stroke their beards, twiddle their mustaches, rub and pat themselves, or scratch their heads. Erasmus says it is unsightly to scratch, especially if it is done through habit rather than necessity. John Russell's “Boke of Nurture” counsels against “clawing your back as if after a flea; or your head as if after a louse.” Fleas, like gristle in the mouth or fibers wedged between the teeth, are to be ignored by polite people. The discomfort they cause must be heroically endured and not only hidden from view, but kept from the suspicions of others. – Margaret Visser’s, 1991, “The Rituals of Dinner” 

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

Etiquette and Art of Introduction

"The debatable question as to whether a woman should shake hands with a man who is being presented to her, has been solved by making it only obligatory, for the woman to offer her hand to the man when the occasion is informal, and the man is being introduced to one person at a time."

Art of Introduction

There are few people who have not suffered at one time or another by the off-hand manner in which they were introduced to others. This kind of introduction is likely to embarrass some people, just as the careful and gracious introduction is one of the essentials in putting strangers at ease.

In introducing people the greatest care should be taken to pronounce both names distinctly.  If one name has escaped the introducer's memory it is safest and best to excuse oneself, and ask for the forgotten name. The most delicate sensibilities should not be wounded by such a slip of memory, for who is there who has not at some time or another quite forgotten a well-known name?

The debatable question as to whether a woman should shake hands with a man who is being presented to her, has been solved by making it only obligatory, for the woman to offer her hand to the man when the occasion is informal, and the man is being introduced to one person at a time. When he is meeting a group of people, it makes it embarrassing and awkward to shake hands with all. – Los Angeles Herald, 1906

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