I may be allowed to note some of those changes in social habits which give a colour to history, but which the historian has the greatest difficulty in recovering.
At that time the dinner-table presented a far less splendid appearance than it does now. It was ap- propriated to solid food, rather than to flowers, fruits, and decorations. Nor was there much glitter of plate upon it; for the early dinner hour rendered candlesticks unnecessary, and silver forks had not come into general use: while the broad rounded end of the knives indicated the substitute generally used instead of them.[1]
The dinners too were more homely, though not less plentiful and savoury; and the bill of fare in one house would not be so like that in another as it is now, for family receipts were held in high estimation. A grandmother of culinary talent could bequeath to her descendant fame for some particular dish, and
- ↑ The celebrated Beau Brummel, who was so intimate with George IV.
as to be able to quarrel with him, was born in 1771. It is reported
that when he was questioned about his parents, he replied that it was
long since he had heard of them, but that he imagined the worthy
couple must have cut their own throats by that time, because when he
last saw them they were eating peas with their knives. Yet Brummel's
father had probably lived in good society; and was certainly able to
put his son into a fashionable regiment, and to leave him 30,000/.¹
Raikes believes that he had been Secretary to Lord North. Thackeray's
idea that he had been a footman cannot stand against the authority of
Raikes, who was intimate with the son,
- Kaikes's Memoirs, vol. ii. p. 207.
