Rules of manners can be found in every culture. They are meant to regulate the behaviour of the individual in everyday life and social intercourse. There are rules for walking, sitting, laughing, eating, speaking, greeting, etc. Manners are not identical (though closely related) to either rites or morals. Although some of them are very refined and change with fashion, manners probably reflect a more primitive level of behaviour than rites such as sacrifice, or moral commandments such as the Ten Commandments. In general, rules of manners focus either on neatness (which may have hygienic origins) or respect: two examples of the latter are elaborate systems of salutation, and a rule not to stare into another person's eyes.
Francis Bacon has given one of the best definitions: 'The whole of decorum and elegance of manners, seem to rest in weighing and maintaining, with an even balance, the dignity betwixt ourselves and others' (
The Advancement of Learning, 1605).
Many of these aspects of behaviour can also be found in higher animals. Dogs and cats have elaborate rules of greeting which also determine the order of rank. Many animals — for example, rhesus monkeys — interpret fixating the eyes as aggressive behaviour. A subordinate animal would instantly turn away with some submissive gesture, while an animal with a higher rank might start an attack. Monkeys display such behaviour not only towards other monkeys but also towards man. The existence of certain basic modes of behaviour which can be instantly understood by man and by some higher animals suggests genetic determination. However, one should not conclude that manners are genetically fixed; rather, the potential that manners develop seems to be genetically fixed in man. The individual rules are determined by tradition and can differ widely. Also, rules of manners for men usually focus on ideals, which may be very different from actual behaviour.
1. History 2. Manners at table and in conversation1. History
European antiquity does not have special books on manners. There are, however, several hints in the Bible as well as in writings on morals by Plutarch, Epictetus, and Cicero. Two concepts characterize the ancient ideal of the good-mannered man: the concept of propriety and the concept of urbanity.
Acting 'properly' — that is, with propriety — means doing the right thing at the right time in the right place. The Greek idea of propriety belongs to the ideal of universal harmony; the rule itself seems to arise from the more primitive rules of obeisance and submission to society. That the definition of 'proper' could be a matter of public opinion and therefore be changed is a discovery of later times. Urbanity may be defined as the courteous and elegant and therefore charming behaviour of (educated) citizens. The frequent social intercourse of those who live closely together might have made it a necessity that people should not only respect but also please each other. The aim to please is reflected in the ancient art of rhetoric, which acquired so much importance during the urban democracies of ancient Greece and Rome. It was a work by Cicero,
De oratore (On the Orator), which inspired the Renaissance author Baldassare Castiglione to write one of the first widespread books on manners:
Il libro del cortegiano (The Courtier, 1528), stressing the courtier's duty not only to submit to the rules of propriety but to do so gracefully. Indeed, in most of the conduct books following
Il libro del cortegiano the art of good behaviour has been reduced more or less to an 'art of pleasing'. At court the meaning of propriety sometimes changed to simple conformity, and, since the decisions of the monarchs were often influenced by sudden humours or moods, the art of pleasing degenerated to open flattery. Consequently the art of compliments — which forms an important part of the older books on manners — was later heavily criticized, and even banned, during the ages of bourgeois democracy.
Life at court also for the first time set forth rules to respect and even worship women, an idea unknown to ancient moralists. From the Middle Ages women had an increasing influence on the refinement of manners, though there can also be observed a strong tradition of misogyny, especially in England.
The first important books on manners for the bourgeoisie were written by Erasmus,
De civilitate morum puerilium (On the Civility of Boys' Manners, 1528), and Giovanni della Casa,
Il Galateo (1558). Both books were translated into the main European languages and often imitated. Rather detailed rules were given, such as: comb your hair, clean your ears and nose, wash your hands, lift your hat. In the English tradition of conduct books of the 16th and 17th centuries, a puritanical attitude towards 'pleasing' manners predominated; the books mostly taught moralistic and religious maxims or principles, and the first American books on manners were based on this tradition. In the age of Louis XIV (1638–1715), France became the leading nation on questions of conduct. Several treatises were translated into most of the European languages, for example the
Art de plaire dans la conversation (The Art of Pleasing in Conversation, 1688) by Pierre d'Ortigue. The moral pressure of court life 'to please' was even apparent in the famous
Letters by Lord Chesterfield (1694–1773), who wrote to his son: 'By
manière I do not mean bare civility; everybody must have that, who would not be kicked out of company: but I mean engaging, insinuating, shining manners: a distinguished politeness, an almost irresistible address' (19 April 1747). Since the 19th century, books on etiquette, which were simply guides in how to conform to the rules of society, have enjoyed a wide distribution. Good manners were no longer considered to be an 'art'.
2. Manners at table and in conversation
To select two of the many possible aspects of manners,
table and
conversational manners will be described: two forms of civilized behaviour which were closely connected in the ancient institution of the symposium. From the 15th century the upper class developed highly restrictive rules, not only for the more natural needs but also for the use of napkins, handkerchiefs, and cutlery. Many table-books were published, in which detailed instructions for the use of spoons and especially of knives were given. By the end of the 18th century the use of individual plates and cutlery (knife, spoon, and for the first time also fork) was general. Until then it had been quite usual to eat communally from the same plate. Similarly the manner of how meat was served changed considerably. In the Middle Ages the entire animal (often decorated with its own fur or feathers to suggest the illusion that it had been hunted down on the spot) was presented and carved in front of the family or the guests, either by the host or by somebody especially trained. Whole books on the art of carving were written — strangely enough sometimes combined with the 'Art of Compliments', as if hungry people could have been calmed down only by compliments while waiting. Then, later, the carving of the meat was largely banned from the table and delegated to the cook in the kitchen or even to the butcher himself.
Conversational manners also have a well-documented history. Characteristic human behaviour has been described by types: the chatterer, the flatterer, the silent man, all of whom are familiar in all societies. One of the most influential works in antiquity was Cicero's book
De officiis (On Duties). Cicero reprimands those who speak too long, too loud, or too aggressively, and those who praise themselves or criticize others. He also stresses an important point of good conversational manners: respecting the right of everybody to take part. Interest in the
theory of conversation awoke only in the Renaissance, i.e. around 1500. Castiglione in
Il libro del cortegiano differentiates between conversation with monarchs and with equals. Conversation with monarchs should consist mainly of information, flattery, or respectful silence — witticisms are allowed only in conversation with equals. The bourgeois conduct books give Ciceronian rules and prescriptions: do not interrupt other people, do not speak in riddles, do not hurt anybody with jokes (the last-mentioned rule became a typical bourgeois taboo). At the time of Louis XIV, conversation meant the opposite of 'talking on serious matters'; in the drawing rooms of French gentlewomen, it degenerated to more or less brilliant chat. Since the rules of conversation have always aimed at the protection of mutual respect, conversation theory consequently tends to demand not only social but also intellectual equality in those who converse with each other. In fact in the 18th century the ideal of Henry Fielding gained increasing influence: 'Certain it is, that the highest Pleasure which we are capable of enjoying in Conversation is to be met with only in the Society of Persons whose Understanding is pretty near on an Equality with our own' (
Essay on Conversation, 1742). Real development of conversational ideals in the 19th century seems to have taken place only in so-called intellectual circles. At least in America and Germany a certain distrust of conversation began to prevail: 'Good as is discourse, silence is better, and shames it,' wrote Ralph Waldo Emerson (
Circles, 1841). On the other hand, there was a tendency to confine conversation not only to equals but to the privacy and intimacy of dialogue: 'The best conversation probably takes place between two persons' (Emerson,
Clubs, 1847).
Conversation in all its possible forms has never ceased. Books on conversational manners are written nowadays as never before. The concentration of theoretical interest towards the end of the 19th and the beginning of the 20th centuries on the most private dialogue (and even the soliloquy) may have been due to the development of a democratic society, in which conversation between equals, i.e. public discussion, is now taken for granted.
(Published 1987)— Claudia Schmölders
