Past Dining Etiquette, Foods and Customs of the British Royal Meals

What makes a dish fit for a Queen? If past royal delicacies are anything to go by then pretty much anything, including seagull, marigolds or peacock - with the skin and feathers put back on after cooking, of course.

Lavish banquets and feasts have always been part of royal celebrations and as part of the Queen's Diamond Jubilee, schoolchildren in the UK were asked to create a special menu for Her Majesty. The winning school saw its recipes served to the Queen at a special reception.

But what was on the menu in times gone by and would serving a canape directly to the monarch have resulted in you losing your head?

There was a very well established etiquette. Victoria's famous line “we are not amused” was uttered when someone told her a joke at the dinner table, breaking strict rules.  Ironically, Queen Victoria had fairly poor dining manners by today's standards, but many of today's rules about manners were formalised in the "Victorian era" named for her reign.

Queen Victoria 1837-1901

There were big changes in service style through Queen Victoria's 63-year reign, says food historian Annie Gray. Towards the end food was served to guests at the table sequentially, known as “a la russe.” It's silver service as we now know it.

There were four to six courses, with seven to nine dishes in each. For big occasions dishes often included cod with oyster sauce, ballotines of duck in Cumberland sauce and roast lamb. There would be a dessert course, with dishes like chocolate profiteroles. A buffet of hot and cold meats was also kept on a sideboard during the meal, just in case you got hungry between courses.

What was unusual about Victoria was the speed with which she ate. Usually a banquet would last for hours, but she could put away seven courses in 30 minutes, says Gray.

The Victorian Era is regarded as one of gentility and graceful manners, though Queen Victoria herself was known to have very poor table manners.  A speedy-eater, Queen Victoria could eat seven courses in 30 minutes, while a number of dinner guests of hers were left hungry.  Royal protocol was that Queen Victoria was served each course first.  Her numerous guests were then served as well.  Protocol dictated that after Queen Victoria finished eating each course, all guests' plates were to be cleared for the next course.  As Victoria didn't wait for guests to be served before eating, her guests were barely served before their plates were taken.  Many guests of Queen Victoria's considered invites to dine at the palace, onerous honors; Dining, yet not really dining at all with the Queen.

"For many people eating with her was purgatory. Everyone was served after the Queen and when she had finished all the plates were cleared for the next course. If you were the last person served often you wouldn't get a chance to eat anything before your plate was taken. She also insisted on all the windows being open whatever the time of year because she got hot."

Like all monarchs Victoria had a master chef, but on big occasions help was bought in. For her Diamond Jubilee banquet 24 chefs were brought over from Paris to help, according to the Royal Collection.

There was a very well established etiquette. Victoria's famous line “we are not amused” was uttered when someone told her a joke at the dinner table, breaking strict rules, says Gray. Many of today's rules about manners were formalised in the Victorian era.

Top table: For the most important guests, with the most favoured at the Queen's direct right.

Other guests: Seated in order of importance, highest ranking closest to top table.

Food: At start of Victoria's reign food would be placed on table and guests would serve themselves.
 
Flowers: After self-service went out of fashion and dishes were not left on table, elaborate flower displays were used as decoration.
 
Drinks: Fine wine and Madeira would be served, but Victoria often had whiskey with her meal.
 
Minor guests: Furthest away from the Queen and served last, they often hadn't even eaten by the time plates were cleared for the next course.
 
Public gallery: On big occasions members of the public were allowed to watch the banquet from viewing galleries.

By Charles II's reign, a dessert course had developed. Charles loved fruit and was one of the first people in the country to eat a pineapple.  This painting depicts Charles II being presented with a pineapple, a rare and exotic fruit for the time period.

Charles II 1660-1685

For Charles II dining was extremely important, it was one of the things that defined him as a king.

At a banquet he would sit at a top table, under a canopy. The table would be raised so he could be seen by everyone and to show his status. Only a very select group of people could sit with him, a maximum of just six.

The King would always be served on bended knee. He had three "officers" to attend to him - a carver, a server and a cup bearer. Cleanliness was extremely important and Charles would have someone whose sole job was to dab his mouth during the meal.

“At that time dining was one of the things that absolutely defined royalty,” says English Heritage's Dr Anna Keay. "Even when Charles was in exile and living in poverty in Germany, he followed the royal form of dining and was served on bended knee."

At state banquets no table decorations were needed as elaborate dishes did the job. They included a 2ft-high, silver salt cellar, made in the shape of a castle and encrusted with jewels. Often there were also silver fountains on the table flowing with wine or water.

There were not courses as we know them, more stages of service. Each could involve hundreds of plates. At one banquet in 1671, guests were served 145 dishes alone during the first course, says Kathryn Jones, curator at the Royal Collection and author of For the Royal Table: Dining at the Palace.

By his reign a dessert course had developed. Charles loved fruit and was one of the first people in the country to eat a pineapple.

Charles II

Seating: Only people who could sit with the King were his own family, royalty from another country and high-ranking officials.

Table: Fine linen, gold and silver plates and crystal glasses. No decoration due to amount of food and ornate serving dishes. 

Dishes:  First recorded mention of ice cream is on a banquet menu for Charles II. Root vegetables were considered common. 

Customs: Dinner would start at about 3pm. It was someone's job to design exactly how food would be laid out in front of the King.

"We have a lot of mistaken ideas about how the Tudors ate. They didn't gnaw chicken greedily and throw bones on the floor, and there were no dogs fighting over scraps under trestle tables.  In a well-conducted house, the dogs - except for little spaniels - were exiled to kennels. Table manners were strict and refined.  Knowing how to cut your bread and what to do with your napkin was an infallible social signal that separated a gentleman from an oik, and every young noble learned to serve at table and to carve." Writer, Hilary Mantel

Henry VIII 1509-1547

Food in the Tudor era was very exciting, say historians. Big feasts could include venison, swan, peacock, heron, porpoise and seagull.

"Sometimes the skin of a peacock would be carefully removed along with the feathers," says Peter Hammond, author of Life In A Medieval Town. "Once cooked they were replaced, as if it were still alive. They did this to show wealth."

While a lot of meat was served, there were also vegetables. Whatever could be grown was served, including cabbage, peas and lettuce. Flowers were also eaten, such as marigolds. They were used in salads and as a garnish.

There was a top table and the highest ranking and most highly favoured guests would sit on the right of King Henry VIII. Everything was about hierarchy, even the way you walked into the room. Gold and silver dishes were also displayed on sideboards to show wealth.

Food was served in stages called "removes". These consisted or up to 20 dishes. They were not all served together, individual dishes would be served in procession. Only the King's table was offered all the dishes.

It's a misconception that banquets were raucous and messy. "The way banquets are portrayed in many films is ridiculous," says Hammond. "They were extremely civilised, with a very firm code of etiquette."

Dining with Henry VIII ~ If you were wealthy, your cakes would be decorated with marzipan, and after dinner there would be nuts, thin and delicate wafers, and sweets made with aniseed and ginger to help digestion.

Henry and his guests would have eaten with a knife and fingers, as forks hadn't been introduced. This would have been very delicately done and again involved very complicated rules about what could be touched with fingers. 

Henry VIII

Seating: Top table including King and the most important guests, the most favoured to the King's direct right.

Table: Fine linen tablecloths, laid with gold and silver plates, dishes and crystal glasses. No forks.

Dishes:  Sweet dishes were served throughout the meal, not at end. Fruit and nuts were eaten at the end.

Customs:  Definitely no bone throwing or feeding dogs from the table. That would have been the height of bad manners.

A medieval banquet

Edward IV 1461-1470 and 1471-1483

Royal banquets got a lot more elaborate under Edward IV and the whole notion of behaviour more complex, says Chris Woolgar, professor of history and archival studies at Southampton University. Courtesy books were produced to explain the etiquette.
 
Edward would have "servants of honour" to tend to his needs at banquets. These were people senior in rank. Often their tasks were menial, but it was still considered a great honour.

A very important servant was the carver, who would cut the King's meat at the top table. Guests would have their meat carved in the kitchen and brought up to them.

One of the "servants of honour" would test the King's food using a "unicorn's horn", basically a fossil shell. In an elaborate performance they would use the "horn" to touch the food, then deem it safe.
 
Elaborate silver salt cellars would be on the table. Often shaped like a ship, they would be encrusted with jewels. Fine wines were served for the higher ranking guests and ale for others.
 
In between the stages of services there would be dramatic performances, usually with a political message. Some were more entertaining, like someone jumping out of a cake, says Prof Woolgar.

Edward IV

Seating : A top table seating the King and important guests, most favoured to the King's right.

Table : Fine linen tablecloth, with gold, silver and silver-gilt plates and cups. No glass or forks.

Dishes : The finest meats and fish. Sweet dishes were served with meat and fish, not separately.

Customs: The King and guests would sit for a banquet from 11am and it could last for up to four hours.

William the Conqueror traveled with a very large household .  If they stayed a long time, it could nearly bankrupt the lord who was their host.

William the Conqueror 1066-1087

During William the Conqueror's reign a trestle table was used and it would only be set up after the King was seated. It would then be laid with a linen table cloth and the finest gold and silver. Lower ranking guests would have eaten out of a trencher, this was a piece of stale bread cut into a square shape and used as a plate. At the end of the meal, having soaked up all the juices from the food, they were frequently given as alms to the poor.

The top table would seat high-ranking guests, with a cleric seated directly to the right of William. Sometimes it was his almoner, an official who gave out alms to the poor on the King's behalf.

All of the King's food would be cooked separately from everyone else. He would often give out food from his plate to guests, this was considered a great honour and a sign of favour.

There were several stages of service, with many dishes. Food would get more elaborate as each dish was served. Only the top table would have roast meat, those of junior ranks would be served boiled meat.

Banquets in Norman times were very dignified affairs, with strict etiquette rules. Noise and mess were not acceptable, neither was burping.

William the Conqueror

Seating: King would sit at a top table with senior guests, including important religious figures 

Table: Elaborately embroidered linen, gold and silver plates and cups. No glass or forks 

Dishes: The finest meat, including venison and game birds, and fish, including turbot, were served

Customs: Would sit from 11am. The King would often give out alms to the poor from the banquet . –Originally printed January 2012, By Denise Winterman BBC News Magazine

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

Etiquette, Italian Renaissance Style

They dine and hold court with sprezzatura. "Sprezzatura" is an Italian word originating from Baldassare Castiglione's The Book of the Courtier, where it is defined by the author as "a certain nonchalance" or "slightly contemptuous indifference." 

Even before Louis XIV contained the nobility of France at court, groups of French aristocrats had performed an important experiment in manners. They were following in the tradition of Italian Renaissance treatises on behaviour, such as "Il Libro del Cortegiano" (The Book of the Courtier) by Baldassarre Castiglione, (published: two years before Erasmus's book "de civilitate"), the Galateo of Giovanni della Casa (the word for "etiquette" in Italian is still "il galateo") (1558), and "La Civil Conversazione" by Stefano Guazzo, (1574). These works --more philosophical, ethical, and political then regular manners books had set out to be -- were addressed to aristocrats only, although like Erasmus's treatise they soon became much more widely read, translated, adapted, copied, and discussed.

They emphasized the uniqueness, the grace, the innate good taste of the ideal courtier. You do not learn these graces, you just have them, and you know them when you see them; you recognize them in yourself and the people you choose to associate with. People who do not possess them are pitiable perhaps, but most probably irredeemable. You try your best to keep them out of your life.

An essential part of the charm of those with taste is its effortlessness: you must, says Castiglione, show "sprezzatura", a word meaning slightly contemptuous indifference. You are not trying to be charming --to try is to ruin the entire effect, for you become thereby pretentious. To "reach" in this manner is by definition to pretend to a level you have not attained. Indeed, the very fact that you are pretentious means you can never achieve it. Pretentious people sweat and struggle in their attempt to be what they are not -- whereas the elect, the born "powerful because best" (which is the original meaning of the Greek term "aristocrat"), must achieve nonchalance, literally, the state of "not being heated." Apart from the quality of being cool (that is, relaxed and unpretentious), it was very difficult to say in what, exactly, such charm consisted. One was forced to fall back on admitting that it could not be explained. The person in question just had a je ne sais quoi, an "I don't know what."- By Margaret Visser, from "The Rituals of Dinner"

Judith Martin, aka “Miss Manners”

“Galateo” by Giovanni Della Casa, published in 1558 

Of the three most prominent surviving Italian books on conduct, “Galateo,” by Giovanni Della Casa, published in 1558 and now out in a new translation by M. F. Rusnak, is the one that promotes civilized manners for their own sake. The respective aims of Baldassare Castiglione’s “Courtier,” which recommends sprezzatura, the Renaissance equivalent of being cool, and Machiavelli’s “Prince,” devoted to realpolitik (and therefore stressing effective, rather than genial, behavior), are admiration and glory.

Don’t Be Disgusting
A book review by Miss Manners

In Renaissance Europe, Italy was Etiquette Central, attracting all the fascination and ridicule that go with that honor.

English readers in the early 17th century assumed Tom Coryate, a professional jester turned travel writer, was joking when he reported that Italians did not attack their food with hands and hunting knives as did normal people, even normal royalty. Those finicky Italians wielded forks, a nicety that did not become common in the rest of Europe for another two centuries.

Italian princes, courtiers and patricians sought instruction on improving their behavior toward others. That was not a goal that often appeared on the to-do lists of the power elite elsewhere.

Although “Galateo” is addressed to a favorite nephew, only in passing does Della Casa, an ecclesiastical diplomat, mention career advancement as an incentive to learn the ways of society. Nor, although he was an archbishop, albeit a worldly one who wrote salacious poetry, does he evoke God as his source, as did the earliest writers of rules of behavior. Rather, as a classics scholar, he uses an aesthetic standard.

Della Casa’s message is: Don’t be disgusting. Pretty much everything that comes out of a bodily orifice meets his definition of disgusting — so much so that the mere sight of someone washing his hands would upset people, as their minds would leap to the function that had necessitated that cleansing.

“Don't be disgusting.” Giovanni Della Casa 

Spittle is not the only unpleasant thing emerging from the mouth, he warns. People who recount their dreams or brag about their children or sing off key are also offensive. Other unfortunately surviving etiquette problems he mentions include checking mail when in company, monitoring what others are eating, grooming in public and joking about disabilities.

Another one is targeting individuals for correction, always a conundrum for the etiquette writer. Della Casa squeaks himself through as a father figure who wishes someone had so instructed him in his youth. But he also excuses his hero, Galeazzo Florimonte, the bishop whose Latinized name he gave to this book. It seems the original Galateo, whose name even now is a synonym for good manners in Italy, once ran after a departing guest to inform him that he ate disgustingly. But because the complaint was bathed in compliments, Della Casa classifies it as a kindness.

A worse handicap is the general belief, then as now, that concern with how people mistreat one another, short of violence, is trivial and pretentious. The author, already known for his writing on subjects considered serious, anticipated that his latest interest would be considered frivolous. Being “appropriate, pleasant and polite,” he writes in response, “is either virtue or something very like virtue. And even though being liberal-minded or loyal or generous is in itself undoubtedly more important and laudable than being charming and courteous, nonetheless perhaps pleasant habits and decorous manners and words are no less useful to those who have them than a largeness of spirit and complete confidence.”

But he might not have expected his subject to be ridiculed by someone who took the trouble to translate “Galateo” (as dozens of others have, in many languages, over the centuries). In his introduction, Rusnak suggests that the book is intended to be comic, not only in its charmingly related examples but also in the above defense of etiquette, which he considers “too presumptuous to be anything but ironic.”

He then claims that “Giovanni Della Casa would be shocked” to be classified with the early- and mid-20th-century etiquette writers Emily Post and Amy Vanderbilt, having nothing in common with their presumed preoccupation with “finishing schools, regulations for place settings, bridesmaids’ gifts and formal invitations to showers.”

On the contrary. The Americans emphasized the underlying moral impetus of kindness and consideration. And while Della Casa was unfamiliar with bridal and baby showers, he stresses the necessity of observing prevalent customs and even fashions, and he devotes a chapter to the importance of ritual. The Americans kept making the point that etiquette could be acquired by all; Della Casa, being of his time and station, declared that gentle ways are not for the lower classes and that “silly and tender manners are best left to the ­women.”

Therefore, implying that etiquette has lately taken a turn for the foolish and snobbish is not the way to tout “Galateo.” It holds an important place in the long and rich history of etiquette books, written at a time when the medieval openness about bodily functions was being discouraged. From Erasmus of Rotterdam, in his “On the Civility of Children’s Behavior,” to the late-16th-century Jesuits who wrote rules that are often mis-attributed to George Washington (because he copied them), Renaissance etiquette writers were all begging their readers to stop spitting and touching themselves in public.

More significant, they were coaxing people — or rather, the upper classes — into the modern idea of refined urban life. This is what makes the book of interest historically — its vivid picture of the widespread behavior being condemned. Della Casa’s explanation for his rules of dress, table manners, gestures and speech is the need to avoid offending others. That is the basic bargain required to live in peaceful communities.

Naturally, it never happens without a struggle. Although the fork had been introduced in France by the Italian Catherine de’ Medici when she married the future Henry II, Louis XIV was so annoyed to see a court lady use one a century later that he had hair put in her soup. In “Richard II,” Shakespeare has the Duke of York complain to the dying John of Gaunt about “proud Italy, / Whose manners still our tardy apish nation / Limps after in base imitation,” surely a violation of Galateo’s rule against lecturing people to death.

So the French and the English disparaged Italian etiquette, only to lay claim in succeeding centuries to being Etiquette Central themselves; the translator of “Galateo” disparages American etiquette, and Della Casa writes that snobbery and “affected ceremonies have been brought into Italy from Spain.”

Can’t we all just get along?

—Originally printed on NYTimes.com- Judith Martin writes the Miss ­Manners books and newspaper and internet columns.

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

American Dining Etiquette History

Manners for Colonists and Early Travelers

Depiction of Thanksgiving at Plymouth Colony 

At Plymouth Colony standards of deportment were established from readings of the poet Richard Braithwait's The English Gentleman and Description of a Good Wife, (1619). From the beginning, American society struggled with questions of identity, debating whether to create a uniquely American code of etiquette or merely to perpetuate the customs of the mother country. Eleazar Moody's School of Good Manners, (1715) did little to differentiate New Englander's manners from those of their cousins in Britain.

In 1883, People's Publishing Company compiled Australian Etiquette or the Rules and Usages of the Best Society in the Australian Colonies, a standard home guidebook concerning dinner parties, table conversation, and requirements a fine dining. The book served a self-conscious populous generally ridiculed by the supercilious English for its convict and laboring-class backgrounds. As Victorian manners reach the island nation, those who were moving up from billy tea to silverware and china had reason to study manners in private lest they humiliate themselves in public.

Mandan Feast ~ “The simple feast which was spread before us consisted of three dishes only, two of which were served in wooden bowls, and the third in an earthen vessel of their own manufacture, somewhat in shape of a bread-tray in our own country. This last contained a quantity of pem-I-can and marrow fat; and one of the former held a fine brace of buffalo ribs, delightfully roasted; and the other was filled with a kind of paste or pudding, made of the flour of the "pomme hlanche", as the French call it, a delicious turnip of the prairie, finely flavored with the buffalo berries, which are collected in great quantities in this country, and used with divers dishes in cooking, as we in civilized countries use dried currants, which they very much resemble.” –from Catlin's Letters and Notes 

Travelers and explorers sometimes encountered customs that, although different from their own, prompted admiration. While living alone among the Mandan, the US artist George Catlin, known for his depictions of Plains Indian life, remarked on the style of dining that allowed sitting cross-legged or reclining with the feet drawn close under the body. He noted that the Indian women gracefully served the diners and reseated themselves in a movement that allowed them modesty and poise at the same time that it left their hands free for lifting and maneuvering dishes.

A Canadian Inuit 

More common for those traveling or living in unfamiliar climes were manners that struck the visitors as unsanitary-- or worse. Sir William Edward Parry, Arctic expeditioner to the Canadian north from 1819-1822, saw Eskimo etiquette from the point of view of a polite Englishman from the Regency Period. He describes how, when serving of food from the "ootkooseek" (cook pot) during a meal, the woman of the house lifted a lump of cooked meat with her fingers and handed it to the man of the house, who began the repast. After clenching the mass between his teeth, he sliced of a portion and passed both knife and remaining meat to the next diner.

Another traveler, George French Angas, author of A Ramble Through Malta and Sicily in the Autumn of 1841, recoiled from the energetic eating style of villagers in Scaletta, Sicily. Upon arrival at a family cottage, he received a large dish of macaroni, which he thought was his personal serving: "To my surprise and astonishment, the whole family stood round me and began to demolish it with wooden forks, cramming in as much as possible into their mouths as fast as possible, then dexterously pushing in the depending filaments with their fingers. This is the true Sicilian mode of eating macaroni, though certainly not the most polite." When the hostess served him an individual trencher, he noted that she sprinkled some salt on top of the portion with her fingers, another example of plebeian manners.

Communal American family dining 

The communal dining style common in farm families of North America dictated an etiquette suited to time and place. The absence of serving pieces required some restructuring of formal rules of table service. Aunt Betsy's Rule, and How It Worked, 1863, issued by the Presbyterian Board of Publication and Sabbath-School, explained the use of personal knife and fork for removing meat, potatoes, vegetables, and pudding from a single shared dish. The text added, in the same way, a piece of bread or better was cut, and the tip of the knife dipped in the salt. The pitcher of water was passed around the table, and all drank from it.

The Shakers, who lived and worked in communes in New England, New York, Pennsylvania, Kentucky, and Ohio, observed a strict separation of the sexes in the commune refectory. Rules for the clan required that all wait until the elder begin eating. Diners cut their meat into square and equal parts and took some of all foods on their plates. They clean their plates and "shakered" them by laying knife fork and bones to one side before scraping up crumbs. The rules of the table mandated covering the nose and mouth with a handkerchief when sneezing or coughing, using a clean knife to cut butter, and swallowing chewed food and using a napkin before speaking or drinking.

In the 1880s, works such as social etiquette of New York demonstrated that the ongoing debate between traditional European manners and new American ways favored the Continent. In the late 19th century however, Americans began to become comfortable with themselves and formulate their own rules for formal table setting, serving, and eating.

Mid-19th to Early 20th Century items designed for eating Victorian green corn 

The serving in eating of corn on the cob has been an enduring issue for American authorities on table manners. In Hints on Etiquette, 1844, Charles Day decreed that rather than gnaw at the cob, the diner should scrape the kernels into his or her plate and eat them with a fork. Frederick Stokes, Good Form: Dinners Ceremonious and Unceremonious, 1890, contrasted the crude gnawing from end to end with the more polite grasping with a folded napkin or doily. Food writer and Ladies Home Journal editor Sarah Tyson Rorer, America's first dietitian, proposed more demanding method of scoring each row of kernels and pressing out the content with the teeth, leaving the hulls attached to the cob. The ever practical Emily Post simply discounted corn on the cob as suitable food for formal dining.

Cross-Cultural Etiquette Quandaries into the Twentieth Century 

Making blue tortillas 

Meetings between cultures often produced table quandaries. On first contact with Southwestern cuisine, Susan Shelby Magoffin, the prim well bred daughter of Governor Isaac Shelby and author of Down the Santa Fe Trail and into Mexico, 1846, was dubious of a blue tortilla wrapped in a napkin. Knowing better than to insult her hosts, she ate the odd colored dish without protest but wrote of the experience, “Oh, how my heart second, to say nothing of my stomach.” it did not take long for her to discover that refinements such as eating utensils could easily be dispensed with: As Southwestern Native said done for centuries she learn to fold a tortilla and use it as a food scoop.

Toward the end of the twentieth century, as the global economy pressed more Western business people into contact with the cultures of Japan, West Africa, India, and the Middle East, a demand rose for guides to unfamiliar dining experiences. American and English visitors ponder the proper way to remove their shoes before entering a Japanese or Turkish home and how to signal the chopsticks were unfamiliar and awkward. One of the most surprising taboos of the Sahara, India, Pakistan, and the Middle East, the prohibition against the use of the left hand for eating, seemed strange to people accustom to dining with both hands. Once foreigners learned that people in these societies traditionally used the right hand for dining and left hand to perform toilet hygiene, the custom became understandable. To assist guests with these one-handed operations, Bangladeshi hostesses is typically distributed basins for before-and after-dinner hand washing and remained on hand to serve plates rather than to join diners. In Botswana, before the table blessing, the business of the ritual hand washing fell to young girls, who filled a basin from an urn and extended a towel to diners.

In compliance with Islamic law, dutiful Muslims have traditionally welcomed any strangers seeking hospitality. Food writer Claudia Roden, author of A New Book of Middle Eastern Food, 1985, explained the obligation of the Muslim cook to cater to diners' tastes. Guests customarily acknowledged the cook's effort and tasted what was offered to them, eating from the edge of a communal platter rather than serving themselves from the middle. Before ending a meal, the host circulated the communal “guerba” (beverage container) of milk or water – but not wine, which the Koran forbids. The polite diner refrained from breathing into the liquid. After the vessel made its round, participants relaxed with coffee and tobacco.

–From Encyclopedia of Kitchen History by Mary Ellen Snodgrass

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

Early Etiquette and Table Manners’ Books

... in Medieval Times, the Renaissance and Beyond

The Term “Etiquette”

Rules of Court affixed to a post... Did our use of the word “etiquette” actually originate from the Old French, “esquiter”?

The term etiquette may derive from the old French 'esquiter' (to affix), a reference to the daily rules of a royal court, which were affixed to the wall for all to read. Such rules explained the seating of honored guests on the host's right in southern Europe and on the left in Scandinavia.

The earliest medieval etiquette document, Count Anthimus's Letter to the Frankish King Theodoric, written around 530 CE, instructed the King about the dangers of gluttony and intemperance. The underlying principle to avoid extremes derives from the familiar Roman dictum nihil nimis (nothing in excess). Anthemis insisted on self control and invade against over indulgence at the table. One polite custom he initiated, the use of no more than three fingers to pick up meat, put an end to unsightly grabbing.

Theoderic the Great, often referred to as Theodoric, was king of the Germanic Ostrogoths, ruler of Italy, regent of the Visigoths, and a viceroy of the Eastern Roman Empire.

Alfonsi’s fame rests mainly on “thirty-three tales” composed in Latin, at the beginning of the 12th century. This work is a collection of oriental tales of “moralizing character” or manners. The storyteller and moralist Petrus Alphonsi's Disciplina Clericalis, or Training for a Gentleman, (ca 1100 CE) written in the form of a dialogue between father and son, explained the rudiments of offering guests water for washing hands. Rules for diners explained a necessity of eating only from one's own bowl, taking small bites, wiping the mouth before drinking, and emptying the mouth before speaking. Similar guidebooks reminded the polite guest never to dredge food in the salt cellar. Correct salting required lifting grains of salt by means of a clean knife blade or extracting a pinch a time with clean fingers. An Italian guide, The Treatise on Courtesy, (ca 1200 CE), of Tomasino di Circlaria (or Thomasin von Zerklaere), rooted its advice in musings on gentility and correct behavior a table. The sensible precepts set forth in and other early European books on manners has changed little up to the present time. 

In Syria, the theologian Gregor Bar Hebraeus (also Gregor Bar'Ebraya or Gregor of Abulpharagus) summarized in table wisdom and effects in Ethicon, (ca 1265 CE).  Mindful of the spiritual value of food, he urged diners to be clean, eat quietly and sparsely, and welcome outsiders to the family table. He recommended that meals be preceded by a religious blessing and instructed diners to maintain an upright posture while eating. He also urged that, out of respect for God's bounty, no crumb should be left uneaten.

Gentility at Table

The Luttrell Psalter; Sir Geoffrey at table surrounded by his family and two Dominican friars. Two servants wait on them...

In the late Middle Ages, European behavior manuals introduced a new generation of advice to gentility and deportment.  These guidebooks derived from the code of courtly manners intended to suit royalty and to quell altercations arising from the dispute over proximity to the king at table. Representative of these many volumes, which paralleled each other in tone and scope, were the German Der Winsbeke (ca 1200's), The Advice of a Knight to His Son: the Spanish Castigas y Doctrinas que in Savior Dava a Sus Hijas (Admonitions and Doctrines from a Wise Parent to His Daughters, 1406) in which a father advised his offspring on restraint in drinking and eating, and fairness in dealing with table servants; and the essayist Christine de Pisan's Enseignements`a Son Filz Jean de Castel (Instruction to Her Son Jean de Castel, ca 1430), and Livre des Trois Virtus (Book of the Three Virtues, 1405).

The English issued similar texts - Boke  of Curtasye, 1440, The Book of Curtesey of Lytel John 1477, and Wynkyn de Worde's Boke of Kervinge (Book on Carving, 1513) which assisted kitchen workers and table servants with the proper placement of meats and vegetables on platters, slicing of tarts and pies, and ladling of sauces.

Unlike medieval etiquette specialists, Baldassare Castiglione, author of Il Libro del Cortegiano  (The Book of the Coutier, 1528), emphasized grace and elegance over pragmatism. One mark of elegance was the male diner's spreading of his napkin over one shoulder as opposed to the female custom of covering the lap.

The friar and rhetorician Bonvesin della Riva (or Bonvicino da Riva), author of De Quinquaginta Curialitatibus ad Mensam, (Concerning Fifty Gentilities for the Table, ca 1290), encouraged guests to speak graciously to others at table before sitting down to eat. He advocated courtly manners, proper attire, affability, good posture and self-control.  Among the most intolerable behaviors, he included overfilling the mouth, drunkenness, slurping, sneezing and coughing in the direction of other diners, and criticizing the food. He considered picking over dishes a disgrace and abhorred the practice of sopping bread in wine. As a gesture of chivalry, he suggested that a man should cut up meat for any woman with whom he shared a platter. To ensure polite conversation, he forbade swearing and the raising of unpleasant, vulgar, or controversy all topics.

Francesc Eiximenis, one of the most relevant writers of the 14th century.

Some of the guidelines for good manners sprang from sound principles of health and safety. For example, Petrus Alphonsi's admonition about chewing thoroughly before swallowing is sensible advice to prevent choking. For the conclusion of the meal, he admonished: “After eating, ask for hand-water, for this is required by medical teaching and it is the decent and easy thing to do.” A fourteenth-century treatise on dining by Arnaud de Villaneuve, a physician and chemist from Montpellier, France, explained the role of sobriety and moderation in alleviating dullness and lassitude.

Arnaud de Villaneuve, explained the role of sobriety and moderation in alleviating dullness and lassitude.

One author of a courtesy book, Francesc Eiximenis, a Franciscan friar from Catalonia, inveighed strongly against gobbling food and drinking too much. Chapters 29 thru 37 of his text covers rules of conduct similar to those of Bonvesin.  Concerning women, Eiximenes thought it best to sit beside rather than opposite a lady. He warned about spraying other diners with food, picking the teeth, and over doing compliments to the host.  He suggested that guests go to the toilet to rid the body of gas before sitting down at table. Serving with style and avoiding rude behavior during meals was, to Eiximenis, a form of patriotism -- A way of elevating Catalonia among other European states.

In Germany, Tischzuchten (table etiquette guides), including author Sebastian Brant’s satiric “Das Narrenschiff” (Ship of Fools, 1454) established the importance of propriety at table, including hand washing before meals. Renaissance guides moved from simple admonitions against unseemly behavior in serving and dining towards matters of deference to lords and ladies.  Unlike medieval etiquette specialists, Baldassare Castiglione, author of Il Libro del Cortegiano  (The Book of the Coutier, 1528), emphasized grace and elegance over pragmatism. One mark of elegance was the male diner’s spreading of his napkin over one shoulder as opposed to the female custom of covering the lap.  Less pretentious and status conscious was the Dutch humanist scholar Erasmus, who published De Civiltate Morum Puerilium (On Civility in Boys in 1530), which took up such matters as the wiping of greasy fingers and blowing the nose at table.

To avoid excesses and indignities, the English consulted such texts as Youth's Behavior, or Decency in Conversation Among Men, 1640, an anonymous work that remained a handy touchstone into the time of George Washington. The first printed guide, The Fine Gentleman’s Etiquette; or Lord Chesterfield’s Advice to His Son Verified, 1776, established pecking order between underlings and their superiors who could retaliate against discourtesy with a vengeance or ostracism.  In 1800, Domestic Management offered such instruction to the house wife as to how to improve servants' manners. The footman, according to the text, should learn to open lobster claws in the kitchen rather than in the view of the dining room door. Gradually, the rules of proper behavior trickled down to the middle class via such books as Etiquette, or A Guide to the Usages of Society, 1836, which offered warnings against vulgarity or improprieties that would offend their betters. Thus, newcomers to wealth learned how to conceal their social inexperience. –From Encyclopedia of Kitchen History - Mary Ellen Snodgrass, 2004

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

Guest “Jetiquette”

Whether chartering your own flight or guesting on someone else's plane, there are unwritten rules for the friendly skies.

Etiquette 101 For Guest Jetters

Arrive Early: People fly private so they don't have to wait. Get there before your host does.

Give A Gift, But Don’t Show Up With One: Sure, you want to show your appreciation with something special. But don't let your present be a drag on your host's luggage or — even in a G5 — relatively tight space. “If you are bringing a gift on a plane, you are just asking your host to carry it himself. It's lovely to send something like a case of wine the day before or the day after,” says etiquette expert Alex Hitz.

Hanky-Panky Is Hard to Hide: In particular, hookers need to use their real names on board, just as anyone else would have to be listed on the passenger manifest. Sorry, it's an FAA regulation, bud. “I've had guys ask me, ‘Do these names have to show up on the itinerary?’ The answer is yes,” says a broker. But another one claims a jet crew “that's flown with you a long time” will sometimes look the other way.

Avoid the "Master Seat": The power player who chartered the flight is known as the principal. He or she always gets first dibs on a preferred chair, which typically is the first on the right side upon entrance and has most of the lighting and AV controls. “Let whomever the jet is for sit down first,” advises Irena Medavoy, wife of producer Mike Medavoy.

Don't Smoke Anything: You theoretically could smuggle your stash onto the plane because bags don't go through security, but think of whom that secondhand smoke affects — the ones flying the plane. One charter broker recalls a prominent rapper lighting up: “The pilots couldn't have drugs in their system, so they put on their oxygen masks for the rest of the flight.”

Just Hold It: “Don't go No. 2 — ever,” says a veteran guest in good standing, noting the relatively cramped quarters on even midsize equipment.

Originally printed in The Hollywood Reporter

Submitted by Follower “Sophie.”  —Thank you, Sophie!

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

Early Chinese Etiquette and Confucius

“Forget injuries, never forget kindnesses.” Confucius 

Confucius has always been, and remains today, China's most famous philosopher. Born June 19th, 551 B.C. at Shang-ping, in the country of Lu. His name was Kong, but his disciples called him Kong-fu-tse, (i.e. Kong the Teacher, or Master). Jesuit missionaries Latinized that into Confucius. His father died when he was only three, so he was very carefully brought up by his mother, Yan-she. He displayed an extraordinary love of learning, and a veneration for the ancient laws of his country, even from an early age. Later, as a government official and through his travels, Confucius witnessed a growing disorder and chaos in the Ancient Chinese system. This was during the Zhou Dynasty. 

Perhaps due to injustices and all of the turmoil, Confucius he set it upon himself to develop a new "moral code" for mankind. This code was based on education, respect, kindness, honesty and strong family bonds. The teachings of Confucius would later became the basis for religious and moral life throughout the whole of China.

The Book of Etiquette and Ceremonial is a Chinese classic text about Zhou Dynasty social behavior and ceremonial ritual as it was practiced and understood during the Spring and Autumn Period. The Book of Etiquette and Ceremonial, along with the Rites of Zhou and the Book of Rites, formed the "Three Rites" which guided traditional Confucian understandings of propriety and behavior.

How important is li (propriety; rites; manner) in Chinese societies/culture?
"Confucius can truly be said to have molded Chinese civilization in general" (Wing-Tsit Chan, 1963:14). (The following translation is from Chan, 1963.)

Analects (Lun Yu) is practically accepted by all scholars are the most reliable source of Confucius' doctrines. The following translation is from D.C. Lau (1979).

On filial piety from Analects: 1:2 Yu Tzu said, "Few of those who are filial sons and respectful brothers will show disrespect to superiors, and there has never been a man who is not disrespectful to superiors and yet creates disorder. A superior man is devoted to the fundamentals (the root). When the root is firmly established, the moral law (Tao) will grow. Filial piety and brotherly respect are the root of humanity (jen)."

1:6 Young men should be filial when at home and respectful to their elders when away from home. They should be earnest and faithful. They should love all extensively and be intimate with men of humanity. When they have any energy to spare after the performance of moral duties, they should use it to study literature and the arts (wen).

1:11 Confucius said, "When a man's father is alive, look at the bent of his will. When his father is dead, look at his conduct. If for the three years [of mourning] he does not change from the way of his father, he may be called filial."

2:5 Meng I Tzu asked about filial piety. Confucius said: "Never disobey." [Later,] when Fan Ch'ih was driving him, Confucius told him, "Meng-sun asked me about filial piety, and I answered him, 'Never disobey.'" Fan Ch'ih said, "What does that mean?" Confucius said, "When parents are alive, serve them according to the rules of propriety. When they die, bury them according to the rules of propriety and sacrifice to them according to the rules of propriety."

2:7 Tzu-yu asked about filial piety. Confucius said, "Filial piety nowadays means to be able to support one's parents. But we support even dogs and horses. If there is no feeling of reverence, wherein lies the difference?"

4:18 Confucius said, "In serving his parents, a son may gently remonstrate with them. When he sees that they are not inclined to listen to him, he should resume an attitude of reverence and not abandon his effort to serve them. He may feel worried, but does not complain."

4:19 Confucius said, "When his parents are alive, a son should not go far abroad; or if he does, he should let them know where he goes."

4:21 Confucius said, "A son should always keep in mind the age of his parents. It is an occasion for joy [that they are enjoying long life] and also an occasion for anxiety [that another year is gone]."


On Ceremonies and Music:

1: Yu Tzu said, "Among the functions of propriety (li) the most valuable is that it establishes harmony. The excellence of the ways of ancient kings consists of this. It is the guiding principle of all things great and small. If things go amiss, and you, understanding harmony, try to achieve it without regulating it by the rules of propriety, they will still go amiss."
2:5 Meng I Tzu asked about filial piety. Confucius said: "Never disobey." [Later,] when Fan Ch'ih was driving him, Confucius told him, "Meng-sun asked me about filial piety, and I answered him, 'Never disobey.'" Fan Ch'ih said, "What does that mean?" Confucius said, "When parents are alive, serve them according to the rules of propriety. When they die, bury them according to the rules of propriety and sacrifice to them according to the rules of propriety."

3:3 Confucius said, "If a man is not humane (jen), what has he to do with ceremonies (li)? If he is not humane, what has he to do with music?"

3:4 Lin Fang asked about the foundation of ceremonies. Confucius said, "An important question indeed! In rituals or ceremonies, be thrifty rather than extravagant, and in funerals, be deeply sorrowful rather than shallow in sentiment."

3:17 Tzu-kung wanted to do away with the sacrificing of a lamb at the ceremony in which the beginning of each month is reported to ancestors. Confucius said, "Tz'u! You love the lamb but I love the ceremony."

3:19 Duke Ting asked how the ruler should employ his ministers and how the ministers should serve their ruler. Confucius said, "A ruler should employ his ministers according to the principle of propriety, and ministers should serve their ruler with loyalty."

6:25 Confucius said, "The superior man extensively studies literature (wen) and restrains himself with the rules of propriety. Thus he will not violate the Way.

8:8 Confucius said, "Let a man be stimulated by poetry, established by the rules of propriety, and perfected by music."

8:9 Confucius said, "The common people may be made to follow it (the Way) but may not be made to understand it."
[Cheng Hsuan said "the common people" refers to ignorant people and Chu Hsi said that ordinary people do things without understanding why.]

From "Rites of Passage in Chinese Society"

Confucius was said to have exceptionally good manners even as a child, and to have been very interested in rules of etiquette throughout his life.

Li is the “appropriate manner of overt behavior needed to express one's inner thoughts or intentions.” Archie J. Bahm on
Confucius and "Li"~

Li is better referred to as politeness and social etiquette rather than religious ritual. Confucius tried to revive past etiquette. People must therefore act consistent, being polite at all times with no deviation or lowering of standards for the sake of fitting in or out of laxity. Confucianism does have some rituals, though people can be both Confucian and of another religion like Buddhism or Taoism, they usually follow the other religion's rituals.

It includes socially proper ways of acting, and also acting toward others in ways such that they will not mistake your intentions. One's outer expression should reflect one's inner nature, or at least one's intention in this situation. This involves a measure of chung, described below. There is considerable subjectivity involved in determining li, but yi, jen, and hsin all require li.

For Confucius, li included proper etiquette or good manners, as agreed on by thee family and community. One who fails to make use of them is more likely to be misunderstood. However, deceivers can also make use of such rules of etiquette, and someone who is taken in by a false use of good etiquette is likely to become mistrustful.

Learning the customary forms of external behavior should not be done blindly, but with an explanation and understanding of their inner significance--why they are important. Formalism occurs when one's external forms do not correctly reveal one's internal attitudes, and this shoud be avoided. But the ideals and principles suggested by Confucius ultimately gave rise to much that is formalistic, and as a result many have forgotten that antiformalism was an important principle in his teachings.

(We may note that Confucius was said to have exceptionally good manners even as a child, and to have been very interested in rules of etiquette throughout his life.)

From Sonoma State University

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

Emily Post on Etiquette and Race Relations

and the tragedy of the lovers’ lives Emily Post and her family pulled apart in order to save New York’s “Best Society” and its Social Register.

“No matter who he may be, whether rich, or poor, in high life or low, the man who publicly besmirches his wife’s name, besmirches still more his own, and proves that he is not, was not, and never will be, a gentleman.” — Emily Post, (presumably referring only to those husbands who's wives were of the same racial background?) 

Blue Blood Marries “Colored Girl,” Emily Post Frowns - Judge Orders “Nipple” Check     

by William Norwich

Above- Domestic worker, Alice Beatrice Jones “Are the candidate’s friends as well as his family likely to be agreeable to the present members of the Club? If not, he is not admitted.”  Emily Post on Private Clubs

IN 1921, WHILE OUT motoring, society’s Leonard Kip Rhinelander met Alice Beatrice Jones, a domestic worker who lived near Stamford, Connecticut’s Orchard School, an inpatient clinic where young Leonard was seeking the cure for a variety of “nervous conditions” including stammering and extreme shyness.

Leonard Kip Rhinelander, right, in court

While Alice had a curative effect on Leonard, his family hoped it was just an upstairs-down- stairs dalliance. They hoped wrong. In 1924, shortly after Mr. Rhinelander turned 21, the couple married. Unbeknownst to all, Mrs. L. Kip Rhinelander became the first black woman in the New York Social Register—but not for long.

A reporter discovered that she was the daughter of “a colored man,” a former taxi driver who was almost unrecognizably mixed-race. Newspapers ran with headlines like “Blue Blood Weds Colored Girl.” For a few weeks, Leonard defended his wife, but his family won, urging the couple to separate “because of the Ku Klux Klan,” reported the New York Times. His lawyers filed for an annulment, claiming that Alice had hidden her race from Leonard.

Artist's depiction of Alice Beatrice Jones in the judge’s chambers

In the judge’s chambers, Alice, crying and holding on to her mother, was forced to remove various articles of clothing so the all-male and all-white jury could see, by the appearance of her nipples, back, and legs, that Leonard must have known prior to the marriage that she was not entirely of white blood. To the jury’s credit, the annulment was denied, the marriage up- held. Under a subsequent agreement, Alice received a sum of $32,500 plus $3,600 annually for life. (She and Leonard never reunited.)

The annulment was denied.  Even worse?  Mrs. L. Kip Rhinelander became the first black woman in the New York Social Register. But not for long, as Emily Post was on the case!

It was Emily Post, otherwise the champion of kindness and courtesy, who pushed the Social Register to drop Alice. Personalities over principles: Her people in Tuxedo Park were related by marriage to the Rhinelanders, you see. Mrs. Post got more than she bargained for. She sought only Alice’s ouster, but with it came Leonard’s as well.

A product of her time undoubtedly, even Emily Post couldn't quite figure out what she meant by “Best Society.”

 In the 1945 edition of Emily Post's book “Etiquette,” Post quoted a disgruntled reader of her work, bridling at the prospect of imitating New York's “Cafe Society,” a group known to be less mannerly than “pretentious and vulgar.” Just who, the reader demanded to know, are these Best People, whose example Post commends throughout her book? Her answer follows: “There is nowhere to go to see Best Society on parade, because parading is one thing the Best Society does not intentionally do. And yet it is true (and this is one of the things harder to make clear) that in the forefront of the public parade are to be found a certain few who are really best. But they are best in spite of, and not because of, the publicity they attract. When I say that ‘people of taste do this or think that,’ I naturally have in mind definite people whose taste is the most nearly perfect among all those whom I know. Or on occasion, perhaps, I go back in memory to the precepts of those whose excellence has remained an ideal. In other words when I write of people of quality or fashion or taste, I always select the individual people who ideally serve as models... In other words... Best Society, Best People, or People of Quality can all be defined as people of cultivation, courtesy, taste, and kindness -- people, moreover, who are very rarely disassociated from their backgrounds.” – Emily Post
–From “A Short History of Rudeness” by Mark Caldwell

Selections from Emily Post's “Etiquette”

THE FUNDAMENTALS OF GOOD BEHAVIOR 
Far more important than any mere dictum of etiquette is the fundamental code of honor, without strict observance of which no man, no matter how "polished," can be considered a gentleman. The honor of a gentleman demands the inviolability of his word, and the incorruptibility of his principles; he is the descendant of the knight, the crusader; he is the defender of the defenseless, and the champion of justice--or he is not a gentleman. 

DECENCIES OF BEHAVIOR= 
A gentleman does not, and a man who aspires to be one must not, ever borrow money from a woman, nor should he, except in unexpected circumstances, borrow money from a man. Money borrowed without security is a debt of honor which must be paid without fail and promptly as possible. The debts incurred by a deceased parent, brother, sister, or grown child, are assumed by honorable men and women, as debts of honor. 

A gentleman never takes advantage of a woman in a business dealing, nor of the poor or the helpless. One who is not well off does not "sponge," but pays his own way to the utmost of his ability. One who is rich does not make a display of his money or his possessions. Only a vulgarian talks ceaselessly about how much this or that cost him. 
A very well-bred man intensely dislikes the mention of money, and never speaks of it (out of business hours) if he can avoid it. 

A gentleman never discusses his family affairs either in public or with acquaintances, nor does he speak more than casually about his wife. A man is a cad who tells anyone, no matter who, what his wife told him in confidence, or describes what she looks like in her bedroom. To impart details of her beauty is scarcely better than to publish her blemishes; to do either is unspeakable. Nor does a gentleman ever criticise the behavior of a wife whose conduct is scandalous. What he says to her in the privacy of their own apartments is no one's affair but his own, but he must never treat her with disrespect before their children, or a servant, or any one. 

A man of honor never seeks publicly to divorce his wife, no matter what he believes her conduct to have been; but for the protection of his own name, and that of the children, he allows her to get her freedom on other than criminal grounds. No matter who he may be, whether rich, or poor, in high life or low, the man who publicly besmirches his wife's name, besmirches still more his own, and proves that he is not, was not, and never will be, a gentleman. 

No gentleman goes to a lady's house if he is affected by alcohol. A gentleman seeing a young man who is not entirely himself in the presence of ladies, quietly induces the youth to depart. An older man addicted to the use of too much alcohol, need not be discussed, since he ceases to be asked to the houses of ladies. 

A gentleman does not lose control of his temper. In fact, in his own self-control under difficult or dangerous circumstances, lies his chief ascendancy over others who impulsively betray every emotion which animates them. Exhibitions of anger, fear, hatred, embarrassment, ardor or hilarity, are all bad form in public. And bad 
form is merely an action which "jars" the sensibilities of others. 

=THE HALL-MARK OF THE CLIMBER= 

Nothing so blatantly proclaims a woman climber as the repetition of prominent names, the owners of which she must have struggled to know. Otherwise, why so eagerly boast of the achievement? Nobody cares whom she knows--nobody that is, but a climber like herself. To those who were born and who live, no matter how quietly, in the security of a perfectly good ledge above and away from the social ladder's rungs, the evidence 

of one frantically climbing and trying to vaunt her exalted position is merely ludicrous. 

All thoroughbred women, and men, are considerate of others less fortunately placed, especially of those in their employ. One of the tests by which to distinguish between the woman of breeding and the woman merely of wealth, is to notice the way she speaks to dependents. Queen Victoria's duchesses, those great ladies of grand manner, were the very ones who, on entering the house of a close friend, said "How do you do, Hawkins?" to a butler; and to a sister duchess's maid, "Good morning, Jenkins." A Maryland lady, still living on the estate granted to her family three generations before the Revolution, is quite as polite to her friends' servants as to her friends themselves. When you see a woman in silks and sables and diamonds speak to a little errand girl or a footman or a scullery maid as though they were the dirt under her feet, you may be sure of one thing; she hasn't come a very long way from the ground herself.

Emily Post on Country Clubs

Country clubs are as a rule less exclusive and less expensive than the representative city clubs, but those like the Myopia Hunt, the Tuxedo, the Saddle and Cycle, the Burlingame, and countless others in between, are many of them more expensive to belong to than any clubs in London or New York, and are precisely the same in matters of membership and management. They are also quite as difficult to be elected to as any of the exclusive clubs in the cities—more so if anything, because they are open to the family and friends of every member, whereas in a man's club in a city his membership gives the privilege of the club to no one but himself personally. The test question always put by the governors at elections is: "Are the candidate's friends as well as his family likely to be agreeable to the present members of the Club?" If not, he is not admitted.

Nearly all country clubs have, however, one open door—unknown to city ones. People taking houses in the neighborhood are often granted "season privileges"; meaning that on being proposed by a member and upon paying a season subscription, new householders are accepted as transient guests. In some clubs this season subscription may be indefinitely renewed; in others a man must come up for regular election at the end of three months or six or a year.

Apart from what may be called the few representative and exclusive country clubs, there are hundreds—more likely thousands—which have very simple requirements for membership. The mere form of having one or two members vouch for a candidate's integrity and good behavior is sufficient.

Golf clubs, hunting clubs, political or sports clubs have special membership qualifications; all good golf players are as a rule welcomed at all golf clubs; all huntsmen at hunting clubs, and yet the Myopia would not think of admitting the best rider ever known if he was not unquestionably a gentleman. But this is unusual. As a rule, the great player is welcomed in any club specially devoted to the sport in which he excels.

In many clubs a stranger may be given a three (sometimes it is six) months' transient membership, available in some instances to foreigners only; in others to strangers living beyond a certain distance. A name is proposed and seconded by two members and then voted on by the governors, or the house committee.

The best known and most distinguished club of New England has an "Annex" in which there are dining-rooms to which ladies as well as gentlemen who are not members are admitted, and this annex plan has since been followed by others elsewhere.

All men's clubs have private dining-rooms in which members can give stag dinners, but the all men's clubs have private dining-rooms in which members can give stag dinners, but the representative men's clubs exclude ladies absolutely from ever crossing their thresholds. –Excerpt From: Post, Emily. “Etiquette.”

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