20 Bizarre Etiquette Rules People Once Took Seriously

The Italian cleric and diplomat Giovanni Della Casa wrote the etiquette guide Il Galateo, published posthumously in 1558. One of his peeves was directed at people who blow their nose and then inspect the handkerchief as if expecting “pearls or rubies” to fall out. He considered this a repulsive act. Yikes. It is gross, I admit. On the other hand, it’s just our fluids, people.

Today, in a cafe or restaurant, when a salad is served, a knife and fork will accompany the dish, but there was once a time when using the knife for salad was discouraged. Until the early 20th century, knives were commonly made from carbon steel. The acidic vinegar-based dressings tarnished and discolored knives. Therefore, it was written into 19th-century etiquette that lettuce should be folded or torn, never cut, and that salads should be eaten using only the fork.

You might think you know what it’s like to deal with picky eaters — but Victorian etiquette guides took it a step further. Etiquette guides said you should take at least a minuscule amount of anything offered at dinner because it might be taken as an insult to the host, a criticism of his dinner and his cook. However, it was not impolite to leave food on your plate, so you could simply shift the food around instead of eating it.

The 4th Earl of Chesterfield wrote in a letter to his son in 1748 that “frequent and loud laughter is the characteristic of folly and ill manners.” He goes on to say smiling is better, as cackling is “illiberal” and “ill-bred.” If Chesterfield were alive today, he would hate me. I giggle at everything.

Drinking tea from a saucer may seem odd in the modern era, but in the 18th century it was normal to sip from one. This was because early teacups often lacked handles and tea was typically served at a scalding temperature. Pouring the beverage into the saucer helped it to cool more quickly. Handled cups became the norm in the 19th century, but drinking from the saucer continued (though it became seen as a lower-class practice).

As a kid, I was told that it was bad etiquette to put my elbows on the table at mealtimes. The reasoning was twofold: slouching over one’s plate was considered boorish, and spreading one’s elbows took up table space needed by other diners. I think that logic still applies today!

Emily Post and other twentieth-century etiquette authorities suggested not keeping the spoon in the cup while you take a drink, but rather setting it down on the saucer after stirring your tea. The reason? To avoid poking yourself in the face with the spoon handle. I have to admit that, contrary to my personal preference of mid-sip stirring, I totally agree with this logic. It would be a little… difficult, to drink with a metal spoon handle pointed at your eye.

In the Victorian era, men commonly wore gloves when they were out, but etiquette demanded that they remove their right-hand gloves before shaking hands. Bare hands represented openness. Gloved hands could be perceived as aloof. If they could not dislodge their gloves immediately, men used a stock phrase: “Excuse my glove.” Women, by contrast, had more leeway on this custom.

Have you ever felt bad about checking your phone in the middle of a conversation? Apparently we’re not alone. It’s incredibly impolite to reach for your watch while someone is talking to you, even back in Victorian times. It could imply that you’re bored, impatient, or just flat-out rude (even if you have a genuine need to know what time it is, it’s better to wait).

Nowadays, we’re quick to use a person’s first name upon first meeting them, but in the 19th century, this was only done with close relatives and intimate friends. Everyone else was referred to by last name, preceded by an appropriate title, like Mr., Mrs., Miss, or Doctor. And in some situations, one had to ask permission before using someone’s given name.

Victorians also seem to have been highly intolerant of any bodily noise. In the proper parlor, any unnecessary physical noise, whistling, tittering, spitting, was off-limits. Whistling, in particular, seemed to rankle etiquette writers, who saw it as appropriate only in the workplace and on the street, but never in the presence of polite company. Some authors even equated whistling with spitting (eew!). You basically had to remain silent about your own corporeal existence.

It has been suggested by certain etiquette authorities that you should ignore the sneeze and continue with the conversation. The logic here is that sneezing itself isn’t embarrassing; it is the acknowledging of one’s sneeze that draws attention to an embarrassing bodily function. I have a hard time figuring out how to ignore a sneeze in the middle of a conversation. “Bless you” just comes out on autopilot.

I was surprised to read that a yawn, if not concealed, was indicative of a lack of self-control, so some etiquette guides recommended leaving the room if you felt a yawn coming on. Yikes. So much for a little self-control then! More generally, though, Victorian etiquette frowns on gestures that attract undue attention: an extended pointing finger aimed at someone might be considered aggressive, for example. (Maybe they were sensitive people in those days.) But an open palm is perfectly acceptable.

There were also rules about sitting, particularly for women: it was perfectly acceptable to cross your ankles (given the length of skirts at the time) but frowned upon to cross your knees, as this would shift the fabric of the dress more than polite, delicate Victorian society felt necessary to see.

In the 19th century, because the shirt was still considered to be a man’s undergarment to some degree, it was improper to appear before women in just one’s shirtsleeves, which meant that a man was expected to keep his jacket on in the parlor and the dining room, even if the room was uncomfortably hot. However, when men were alone together, etiquette was much more relaxed and they could doff their coats. Today, of course, it is perfectly normal to remove one’s jacket at dinner.

In the 19th century, wearing all black in daytime would generally be an indication of mourning. Widows were subject to stages of grief with strict clothing rules pertaining to color, fabric, jewelry, and duration. To wear black for any other reason would invite speculation as to whether someone in the wearer’s family had met with tragedy. By contrast, today’s black wardrobe ranges from very formal to perfectly practical, not the least bit affected by rules of mourning, and even practical from a laundry point of view.

Typing had become the norm in the workplace by 1922, and while Post acknowledged the efficiency of the typewriter in the business world, she deemed it unacceptable in the personal realm. In her book Etiquette, Post recommended hand-writing thank-yous and social notes. Typewritten notes could be cold and mechanical and, in her estimation, hardly the epitome of courtesy to anyone who had been gracious enough to offer a gift or warm hospitality.

In the 1890s, the bicycle alarmed doctors, clergymen, social critics, and etiquette writers alike. The real scandal wasn’t “bicycle face,” that supposedly unbecoming expression of concentration, a concern that was entirely unsupported by medical evidence. The real scandal was that on bicycles, women could move freely on their own. Indeed, some women began wearing more practical clothing, like bloomers or divided skirts, as long skirts were not exactly feasible for two-wheeling. This raised alarm bells of its own.

On November 9, 1938, a Los Angeles kindergarten teacher named Helen Hulick showed up in slacks at the Los Angeles court where she was scheduled to appear. The judge ordered her to come back wearing a dress. She did come back, but she still wasn’t wearing a dress, so he jailed her for 5 days for contempt of court. The sentence was appealed and overturned, and Hulick went on wearing her pants.

In 1004, Maria Argyropoulina was married into the Orseolo family of Venice. Her vanity and love of perfumes and fancy utensils later scandalized the cleric Peter Damian, who wrote about her disapprovingly. One of these was a small, two-pronged golden fork which she had brought along from home. Eating with forks was much more common in the Byzantine world than in Western Europe. Forks spread slowly at first in Italy, but eventually were widely adopted elsewhere.

This content was created with the help of AI.