Modern manners, codes of behaviour, decorum and rules of etiquette matter in every culture and society – they illuminate and respect the human experience. Observing manners when out and about in society is ‘cool’, even in a casual setting. It is all about established conventions of morality and about developing, and being sensitive to, a fine sense of decorum. Whether you agree or not the guidelines are there. They have been honed over a very long period of time as society has met morphed from being bullying brash, uncouth and uncaring to being bold, beautiful, courteous and concerned.

A common concern in the past and present is avoiding the embarrassment of social stigma. Obsessions about how we look, what we weigh, what we eat, what we are wearing, what others are wearing, how our hair is arranged, what restaurant we eat at and the modes of transport we choose would suggest that we have, as yet, not been released from such burdensome worries. The tradition of honouring and respecting others socially, or culturally, is a matter of good form. While not immediately obvious, there are many forms manners take and simple ways of offering respect to each other; most especially to those younger or older than us. Etiquette implies an observance of formal requirements governing many types of behaviour in all societies and all cultures. Considering others should be simple, right and proper behaviour in any society, and under all circumstances.

Many people are asking what has happened in the last decade or so to good sense and courtesy? Why is it that so many people seem to flounder about offering continual offense to others? Why is it that some parents and teachers are not reinforcing good behaviour patterns in their children that make life pleasant for all?

One thing I do know is that if children haven’t learned the common courtesies of life prior to becoming a teenager, then it becomes increasingly difficult for them to acquire them as they grow older. They need to learn how to be in-society, because it is important for their success and happiness throughout their life.

How we conduct ourselves in any arena should align. Hiding false behaviour behind a veneer of ‘being professional’ is never acceptable. What and who you are at home, in the workplace or when you are out and about should be seamless and naturally effortless, because it is an aspect of who you are. And that is as true for an executive as it is for a tradesman, a man in a mine a woman in a dress shop. It is about respect of self – codes of behaviour and manners matter.

It is good to see that so many sporting bodies are fiercely maintaining and reinforcing young players respect for each other. It helps children to learn how to accept difference. Organized sport provides valuable team building experiences, that are important for any child as it means considering and respecting others and their point of view.

Reinforcing Codes of Best Practice in Youth Sport is very important

By value adding manners into the milieu such as remembering simply to say please or thank you, to stand on public transport for someone older or in more need than you and yes, even opening the door for someone else. Whether it is a man or a woman who performs this simple task is all about courtesy, and nothing to do with gender issues.

A habit that offends many in public is when people yawn or sneeze all over everyone else without covering their mouth. This reflects their blatant disregard for others but most especially, it is about halting the spread of airborne diseases.

Picking your nose, spitting, urinating or farting in public, or being crass and coarse when you are out and about is always ugly. There is no two ways about it. This might sound ‘nit picking’, which is another practice among humans that was outlawed eons ago, and in many ways it is. But underpinning the details add up to society being in harmony.

Then there is acceptable etiquette designed for contemporary use, such as that surrounding mobile phone use, which is still in its evolving process.  Technology has produced many tools for making our professional and personal lives easier, but they are just that tools that we can and should control.

Breaking societies rules can command respect, but only if there is a genuine belief you are doing the right thing and not offending others. Having a mobile phone go off in the middle of a funeral service, under any conditions is quite simply inexcusable.

Society is not easy today because there are more and more people on the planet. Considering others has become a reality part of the here and now, as well as the future. For those unsure of what the rules are it can seem daunting. The higher up the scale you go too they often seem to be part of a secret code understood by only a select few.

This is in many respects true. As leaders in society move in ever-ascending spirals up the ladder of success they constantly re-invent the rules to test the mettle of those wanting to ride along with them, to join them or, above all to keep undesirable elements out.

Rising above one’s station in life may be encouraged in community, but in high society it is still not admired. In the 21st century unless you can bring along impeccable credentials and a fine reputation with you then you will find that admission is not easy.

This is true in the corporate life of executives, managers and office workers, all of whom form ‘cliques’ within cliques. Those who have reached the top of the spiral don’t really relish the idea of going back down.

Accessing them once they are up there ‘where the air is rarefied’ in reality will often prove difficult. Those at the top put in place mechanisms that help to keep them safe. Trying to break in can be a mighty task.

For those people who survived the Great Depression and World War II fear became integral to their lifestyle and their code was ‘survival’. However their children were brought up when confidence was returning and ‘self expression’ encouraged. It became a necessary skill to acquire to aid career success.

The Christian ethic that had held sway for nearly 2000 years had long demanded obedience of the Law of Moses. The main tenets of faith-included ten rules that said we should honour our father and mother, not do murder, commit adultery, steal or bear false witness against our neighbour.

The really big one was ‘you shall not covet your neighbour’s house, your neighbour’s wife, his servants, his ox, his donkey, in fact anything that is your neighbour’s. This was serious stuff.

An ox and a donkey at the time were among a man’s most prized possessions. The first was a beast for burden to help him earn his living, the second had strong legs and a stoic heart to carry him far. So if we transpose that into something we understand today, like someone stealing our identity, lives and possessions, then we might begin to understand how serious it was, and still is.

The law system governing western society were based on these first rules of society and its ideas and they remain relevant.

Following World War II when man’s inhumanity to man reached a zenith the aftermath saw enormous change in basic values as the rules governing politics, work, religion, family and sexual behaviour were re-interpreted and re-invented for a whole new age.  Many Christian laws and rules of behaviour from the 1960’s onward disappeared to re-emerge as part of a new code for a society that considered itself non-religious or sceptical.

During the 1970’s, 80’s and 90’s the ‘baby boomer’ generation led change. The period saw the rise of a so-called creative class, which contained thinkers, scientists, architects, engineers, artists and artisans. All over the world they combined to transform every day life and the economies of our cities. They cast off their religious affiliations, set out to raise community spirits, attract investment in commodities, consumerism and economies and in just fifty short years changed the world.

According to leading American public intellectual Richard Florida, the cities that appeal to a ‘creative vanguard prospers best in an economy driven by inventiveness’. Talent, technology and tolerance became the new black for the new age.

Having an ability to make choices redefined how people behaved, made love and went to war. With wealth came a desire to enjoy other aspects of life, including ease of travel. Being able to fly around the world in a day meant that parts of the world, about which little was known, were suddenly opened up not only to an influx of visitors, but also to public scrutiny on both a local community and global community scale.

Coming up close and personal with other cultures people had only read about in books, was in many ways a confronting experience. Especially if they didn’t understand its language, specific rules or codes of behaviour.

When my family was traveling in Egypt in 1989 our guide informed us about how confused her people were. They were crowding around a television set at night in their energy efficient mud houses along the Nile, topped with a new fangled television antennae watching glamorous Hollywood star Joan Collins, with her co-stars in the soap opera ‘Dynasty’.

Joan, bless her, was often clothed in a skin tight glittering sequin dress, with her face made up heavily, her hair carefully coiffured and her ears drenched in diamonds. As she stepped into a chauffeur driven car as long as a city block, with people opening and shutting doors for her along the way they sat wide-eyed in wonder.

While in the west, being used to such spectacles we may have taken this all in our stride, the people watching in Egypt included women with a veil covering their faces whose lives had been, at least up until that time, very simple and protected from such worldly influences.

Our guide, whose father was a minister in the government had been educated in Europe and was alarmed at what observing typical western ‘behaviour’ might mean for an Egyptian family in the long term and how it might change their centuries old culture.

Change in a progressive society is always constant, yet it is something we all endeavour to resists because it is also something that first and foremost, always invokes fear. If there is to be change, then it must be about improving society for all, not about change for changes sake.

In the 80′s and 90′s advances in efficiency for the growing technology market meant that people all around the world who had never seen a computer, a telephone or home appliances before were now involved in making them for everyone else. So they began to question why such technology was not available to their culture and society. They wondered how they could acquire the trappings and things that would make their life easier too.

Sharing information on the Internet, especially in the last two decades has rapidly changed the ideologies of world cultures and codes of acceptable behaviour. It has also changed views on how society deals with great and sudden changes.

An example: in our time is that many people have still not come to terms with England’s Prince Charles having an affair with another woman, when he was married to the public’s favourite, and most popular Princess Diana. That it impacted on his relationship with the woman who was in the eyes of God and the law his wife, seemed not to have fazed him at all, until there was a public outcry.

The behaviour of taking a mistress was one prevalent among aristocrats in Europe for over three centuries. For a man to secure a mistress in seventeenth and eighteenth century Europe there was an unwritten rule that she must be married and cuckolding a husband looked upon as a person of nobility’s right.

By the time of Edwardian England, and post World War 1 in Australia this type of behaviour had filtered down to wealthy merchants and upper middle class people. World War II would change many attitudes towards acceptable codes of behaviour in many societies and cultures after it was over.

While he has had many accomplishments in his life Prince Charles will one day have to face up to swearing to uphold the laws of the Anglican church if he wants to be King of England. This has been a done deal for centuries.

In the past however he has said he will only swear to be a defender of ‘all faiths’, which many people would see as admirable. Interestingly however many faiths I know about frown upon, or condemn adulterers. Some even relieve them of their lives. As England is today a rapidly expanding multi racial society the Prince might face more opposition than he is counting on.

When the time does come it will be about how he has caused a huge shift in the succession, as well as the high regard and respect for the English monarchy so excellently forged by his mother over the past 60 years. In her Diamond Jubilee year she must be busy reflecting on the future.

While the public may have seemed to have ‘forgiven’ her son’s indiscretions and seemingly moved on, crunch time will come if he wants to make his former mistress Queen. While forgiveness for people’s failures or indiscretions should be at the top of all our agendas, surely such a decision, if allowed would seem to make a mockery of whole idea of what ‘royalty’ is and should be about; setting the example of a code of honour for people in society to live by. Everyone expects their leaders, whether in a palace, country, corporation or community to rule by example.

Royalty and its offshoots, including Governor Generals, Governors and their like, all have an ultimate responsibility to society, whether its members like it or not. If it forgets them then the danger is that society may judge them very harshly. They may even decide that they are no longer relevant or needed, as they did at the time of the French revolution or more recently in some countries around the world, where despot rulers have been torn down off their pedestals.

It has become very evident, at least over the last two decades, that society does not like either a prince or a priest who breaks their trust. Society also does not like a man who abuses his children or beats his wife and, vice versa. Yet these were behaviours, hidden for years behind a veil of silence, only became appalling and unacceptable to society once they were known.

Everyone wants to see happy couples and families who trust and respect each other.  Taking those we love for granted, or treating our families or workplace colleagues badly will never be acceptable in any society, culture or company. It is simply not acceptable for a woman to knowingly sleep with another woman’s husband or vice versa, whatever the circumstances. Unless the person has freed themselves of their vows, sacred or secular, misconduct is just simply that.

As our world becomes more and more overcrowded conduct, manners and behaviours will be and remain huge issues of concern. In Australia, as in America modern society was originally founded on the tenets of the Christian faith. Today, having pursued ambitions more in line with society during pagan times, when the art of pleasure, self aggrandisement and greed is good were popular themes, points of reference such as ‘do unto others as you would do unto you’ seem in the main to have been forgotten. This was a simple credo my grandmother’s generation lived by.

There are many official observances, performed by government officials for and on behalf of the many. A code of ‘ethical’ behaviour regarding professional practice, or action among members of the medical and law arenas are bound up in trust between client and patient just as between priest and confessor. This behaviour is similar to what should happen between a mother, father and child; but so very often this seems to be the first intimate trust broken with sometimes-dreadful consequences.

Sharing family decisions is important. No matter how small your children are if you are making a decision that will affect all the members of the family, then a good idea is to hold a ‘family conference’ and ensure that everyone knows the facts that led to the decision taken. This valuable method is one children can learn through from an early age. It teaches them about how a democratic, considerate, caring and well mannered society works.

Respect for self and others starts within the family fold and grows. Whether that family is a private or professional one, like a modern prince and his children or a giant corporation. Children and adults of all ages need to understand that when they make significant decisions, that it is not just about them as individuals, but about family and friends – all those in their circle who will be affected by that decision now and in the future.

Carolyn McDowall, The Culture Concept Circle 2012

Related posts:

1. Changing Politics, Policy, Practice and Human Behaviour
2. The Culture Concept Circle – You Tube Channel
3. Health, Wealth, Wit & Society during the Age of Elegance

Painting by Hendrik Danckerts 1675 depicting Charles II being presented with a pineapple by his gardener John Rose. Pineapples at this time were a symbol of luxury and hospitality

During the seventeenth century in Europe and England, expansion of trade and industry led to a period wherein costume was influenced more by currents in art and intellectual thought than by any other factor. King Charles II of England abandoned puritanical coldness following his restoration to the throne in 1660, revitalising both the English people and the economy. It is not surprising Charles wanted to wear fashionable clothes. Following the years in exile he would have still had vivid memories of the Battle of Worcester in 1651 when he been forced to wear ‘nothing but a green coat and a pair of country breeches on and a pair of country shoes, that made him sore all over his feet that he could scarce stir’. On his return from living abroad following the beheading of his father King Charles I and subsequent civil war in England he gave himself up completely to luxury and pleasure, adorning his stylish person with sumptuous textiles and jewels.

Cupid firing his arrow for love...V & A Museum, London

It would have to be said he wore his fur trimmed breeches very stylishly indeed, especially in this portrait where he is receiving a gift that was not only very fashionable, but also very expensive – the ‘king of fruit’ the pineapple which took up to two years to grow in his greenhouse. This love token shows Cupid about to fire an arrow from his bow. It is a relatively inexpensive piece of jewellery made from silver which weights little. In England jewellers made very similar lockets as a souvenir celebrating the marriage of Charles II to Catherine of Braganza in 1662. It seems Catherine had to endure a great deal in terms of infidelity to receive her love jewellery. We know this through the detailed private diary kept from 1660 – 1669 by a Member for Parliament and English naval administrator Samuel Pepys. His eyewitness accounts of events, such as the Great Fire and Great Plague are a rich legacy from this period in history and also provide an insight into the intrigues surrounding the court of Charles II and how Queen Catherine was treated…

Barbara Palmer (née Villiers), Duchess of Cleveland by Sir Peter Lely

…’The court of the second Charles of England fluttered with dazzling and frivolous beauties. They obscured the softer light of other women who boasted only such trite and gentle virtues as womanliness, the fear of God, modesty, honesty and truth. Queen Catherine’s contemporaries detested her …and have left her portrait to posterity painted in malignant colours…

…Catherine lived in her husband’s court as Lot lived in Sodom. …she was one of the best and purest women who ever shared the throne of England. She had equal qualities of head and heart, and both were beyond the average. It has been a pleasant and wholesome labor to trace her blameless life, and to unfold the wrappings that have long hidden the character refined and ennobled by much unnecessary suffering’.

Luscious, lascivious and lovely ladies, many of whom were well known to Charles, were more than often painted by court painter Sir Peter Lely. They always wore pearls as they were considered the essential accessory for the loose state of ‘undress’ ladies of rank at this time generally wore.

Mid seventeenth century court etiquette demanded that only someone of a superior rank could receive a person of lower rank when in a state of undress. By way of contrast a person of inferior rank had to be fully and formally attired when attending a person of superior rank. Wearing a state of undress in a portrait then underlined the fact that the sitter belonged to a very exclusive group of superior people.

The format was so successful and so pervasive that within thirty years everyone, irrespective of rank, was depicted in a similar way so those currently ranked in the upper echelon of society were then forced, once again to change their style preferences.

Ann Maria de' Medici - during the seventeenth century in Europe and England, expansion of trade and industry led to a period wherein costume was influenced more by currents in art and intellectual thought than by any other factor.

When she was 23 Ann Maria de’ Medici (1667-1743) married the Elector Palatine Johann Wilhelm.  The Medici workshops created an exemplary trousseau of works of art, which she took to Dusseldorf with her.

However when she returned to Florence a childless widow she brought back an outstanding collection of jewellery now known as the ‘Electress’ Jewels. They originally numbered just on 1000 objects. Today there are only a few dozen, with many pieces taken apart, melted down, or dispersed at auctions. She did her best to keep the family collections intact and her will clearly specified ‘that nothing was to be transported and removed from the Capital and the State of the Grand Duchy‘. She was the last of the famous Medici family of Florence and her death in 1743 brought their dynasty to an end.

Introduced by the Venetian gem-cutter Vicenti Peruzzi at the end of the 17th century, the modern brilliant cut evolved slowly until the present round form came into use after 1919. The original brilliant cut for diamonds had many facets of different shapes and sizes that were meant to increase its brilliance by minimising the amount of light that escaped from the bottom of the stone.

The Regent Diamond

At the Ball of the Clipped Yew Trees at Versailles in 1745 the Queen of France wore the Regent diamond, which weighed in at 140.50 carats, in her hair. This amazing gem had been found by a slave in an Indian mine in 1698 and concealed inside a large wound in his leg.

Stolen by an English sea captain it had an exciting journey until it joined the collection of jewels belonging to the Royal Family of France, was stolen at the Revolution, recovered and has been on display at the Louvre since 1887.

Marquise de Pompadour Louis XV of France's Mistress

However brilliant The Regent diamond was, it could not stop Louis XV from leaving the ball for a secret assignation with the Jeanne Antoinette Poisson, the lady who became the mistress of his heart for twenty years,

Jeanne Antoinette Poisson gained the title of the Marquise du Pompadour and she successfully attended to Louis every need leading a society whose parties co-existed easily with the intellectual ardour of the philosophes, who were endeavouring to give birth to an age of enlightenment and reason.

Louis gave this mistress of his heart a superb cameo of himself. Diamonds and emeralds surrounded it and she wore it on her bracelet. (pictured). A cameo was originally a gemstone having layers of different colours (eg. Sardonyx and cornelian) carved to show in relief the design and background in contrasting colours.

1st Century Cameo Set c1730 Onyx with gold, amber, tuquoises and rubies

Originating in Roman times the cameo regained its popularity during the Renaissance in Europe when Italian gem engravers working for prominent connoisseurs and collectors such as Lorenzo de Medici and his family started producing them once more.

Since then, with intervening periods, they have been made and mounted in articles of jewellery. This cameo pendant is inset with an onyx carved head of Dionysus in a gold surround set with amber, turquoises and rubies; the back engraved. From the collection of the V & A the cameo is 1st century AD; the setting probably German.

(The deeper the relief the more expensive these jewels were and they would reach their optimum in the second half of the 17th and 18th centuries when they were collected by many an English gentleman on his Grand Tour because they were not only very desirable but also easily transported.)

Madame du Barry

After the Marquise de Pompadour died the King was inconsolable. The Queen Consort was also dying and so the story goes Louis XV was passing through the Hall of Mirrors at Versailles one day and Aaong the crowd who came to see him, or sought to petition him, he caught sight of a young woman standing tall and straight, looking him full in the face and daring to smile.

At their first meeting there is a story, more than likely apocryphal but it’s great anyway, ‘that the beautiful lady curtsied three times as required by protocol and then went straight up to him and kissed him full on the mouth’.

Whatever, the truth of the meeting it certainly had an extraordinary effect on the extremely sad Louis and Jeanne Bécu became his last Mistress, and the infamous Comtesse Du Barry.

Hilary Swank (The Affair of the Necklace) wearing a reproduction of the infamous piece of 'love jewellery'

Visitors crowded into Paris during the years 1784 and 1785 to buy luxury goods when the harvest yielded more than enough wheat. One Charles Bohmer was appointed jeweller to her Majesty.  He desired to sell the most opulent piece of diamond jewellery he had ever made to King Louis XV for Mme du Barry.

He had collected 647 brilliants weighing 2800 carats and assembled it into a four-tier necklace; but the King died before he could conclude the sale.

He then tried to sell it to Marie-Antoinette, who refused it, so not to be outdone, he tried again through a distant relation of the now Louis XVI, not knowing this particular lady had an axe to grind with the Bourbons.

Jeanne de la Motte was so dazzled by the galaxy of diamonds spread before her she conceived a plot, which became the most audacious swindle in French history. It brought undone a great many people, including the King’s Cardinal and damaged the reputation of the monarchy, who became pawns in the ‘affair of the necklace’… (Movie starring Hilary Swank and Australian Simon Baker (The Mentalist).

Queen Marie Antoinette

France and Italy had both developed successful silk trades during the sixteenth century and by this time silk was one of France’s biggest industries centred at Lyon. Louis XIV had also established a manufactory of luxury goods that supplied all the other royal courts of Europe that was also thriving.

Marie Antoinette was, as are all first ladies of state even today, looked upon by the court and country as a leader of style. Her attitude toward the luxury trade threatened France’s economy,  employment and all those who relied on Royal Patronage. On the other hand the general populace wanted the royal family not to live in luxury but to share their wealth.

In real life Marie Antoinette preferred to wear simple muslin dresses and very little jewellery at all. As Queen she wore diamonds and silk on state occasions, including those given to her by Louis XVI as a token of his love. An avid gardener she particularly loved the rose, which was sacred to Venus and stood for love which is nearly always accompanied by the danger of hurt.

Mme du Barry was known for her refined and lavish taste and famous for the fabulous love jewels given to her by Louis XV, which she buried in her garden during the Reign of Terror. She refused to tell her accusers where they were until they said they would let her go if she did.  She and Marie Antoinette both paid the ultimate price, the so-called ‘Wages of Beauty’ (check out the novel by Joan Haslip).

Osterley Park Middlesex England

At the turn of the eighteenth in England and Wales three quarters of the population was still living in the countryside and also had a residence in town.

The success of the English Grand Tour meant that an increasing amount of gentlemen were exposed to a range of influences as well as other cultures. The pride and prejudices of the English Milordi were reflected in how they dressed, dined, performed and were entertained in a selection of social settings.

English eighteenth century literary wit Horace Walpole commented on his return from his Grand Tour in 1741. “I perceive… there is peculiar to us middling houses; how snug they are” ‘Middling houses’ were lived in by country gentry who were busy cultivating an ambience of politeness with a keen, though one must say ‘delicate sense and sensibility, well balanced by common sense’.

Keira Knightly as The Duchess

The age of light and elegance in the decorative arts and mind was lit by candlelight, and advances in mirror plate technology and its reflection encouraged the creation of lavish interiors and stunning jewellery. I would imagine Miss Tilney in Jane Austen’s “Northanger Abbey”, who inherited “a very beautiful set of pearls” from her mother, wore them for special occasions. Just as Mrs Elton did when she arrived at the ball in Emma “as elegant as lace and pearls could make her“, and boasted … “I see very few pearls in the room except mine”. What she would have seen was an extravagant display of necklaces; brooches and stomachers all set with coloured stones and diamonds like those reproduced for Keira Knightly to wear in The Duchess, the story of Georgiana, Duchess of Devonshire.

Georgian cabochon garnet and rose diamond ear pendants, foil backed gold settings courtesy of Ann Schofield Antiques, Sydney

Garnets are lovely gemstones and come in many colours however at this time the blood red variety was exceedingly popular. For those who were superstitious they were meant to have healing powers and for the romantics they were often exchanged as gifts between friends to demonstrate their affection for each other.

In the eighteenth century foil backings were still being used to enhance coloured gemstones that were shaped and polished as opposed to being faceted.(cabochon). The rose cut of diamond was popular before the advent of the brilliant cut. It had a flat base with two horizontal rows of facets rising to a point.  These lovely earrings have superb cabochon garnets surrounded by rose diamonds, which came into more regular use during the nineteenth century.

The most dramatic love jewels of this period were set in the form of arrows, an obvious reference to Cupid’s dart….a great many have survived made of paste, although hair ornaments were set with emeralds and diamonds and flat cut garnets. The amount and variety of precious materials available to make jewellery in the late eighteenth century by the time of the French Revolution was now expanding rapidly due to expeditions across the ocean to the New World.

The ideology and reality of the French Revolution and the Reign of Terror would affect the western world for hundreds of years to come. The reign of Terror exacted an enormous price on the leading intellectuals, the aristocracy and the economy of France, as well as those seen to have supported them and for a time jewellery production would go into decline.

Fabulous French enamelled gold set with cornelian, pearls and emeralds brooch C1800

The symbols of love are the theme for this delightful piece of Love Jewellery, a brooch in the V & A Museum at London made from gold set with cornelian, pearls and emeralds. It contains Cupid’s bow and arrows (two loose and three in the quiver) which are arranged with a pair of kissing doves; two hearts on fire and a hymeneal torch (named after Hymen, the Greek goddess of marriage. They all form a diagonal composition of great elegance and effectiveness.

Carnelian (also spelled Cornelian) is a reddish-brown mineral commonly used as a semi-precious gemstone. Its use in the decorative arts is known from the Bronze Age and it was widely used in Roman times for setting into seal rings to imprint the insignia of the wearer on wax seals used for important documents and letters.The reason being wax did not stick to it.

Like most jewellery produced in France soon after the Revolution of 1789, the brooch is made of thin gold and contains few precious stones.  The design is pleasing, with at its heart the colour red, the colour of passion symbolising both revolutionary blood and romantic love.

….continued

Carolyn McDowall©The Culture Concept Circle 2009 – 2011

This is part two of a four part series. Read the rest of this series.

Read the 4 Installment Series in Chronological Order

Love Jewellery – Rome to Renaissance

Love Jewellery – Restoration to Revolution

Love Jewellery – Regency to Revival

Love Jewellery – Romantics to Retro

Related posts:

1. Love Jewellery from Cupid to Cartier
2. Love Jewellery – Regency to Revival
3. Love Jewellery – Rome to Renaissance