The fork is an article of every-day use amongst us, and on that account little thought of; still the short space we intend to occupy with this subject may, perhaps, convey a little information to many of our readers unknown to them before, or, at least, unthought of.

There is not the least room to suppose the ancients were at all acquainted with this little table utensil, now so necessary to our own comfort and convenience, to say nothing of our ideas of cleanliness. Pliny, who enumerated most things natural, physical, philosophical, and economical, makes no mention of them; nor does it occur in any other writer of antiquity; neither does Pollux speak of it in the very full catalogue which he has given of things necessary for a table.

Neither the Greeks or Romans had any name in the least applicable to its use, either direct or by inference, where it can be asserted that such an instrument was intended. The ancients had, it is true, in Greece, their creagra. In Rome, their furca, fuscina, furcilla, &c.: the Grecian instrument somewhat resembled a rake of an ordinary construction, and calculated for the purpose of taking meat out of a boiling pot, constructed in the shape of a hook, or rather the bent fingers of the hand.

With reference to the Roman names, the first two were undoubtedly applied to instruments which approached nearer to our furnace and hay forks.—The trident of Neptune is also called fuscina. The furcilla was large enough to be employed as a weapon of defence. The present Latin name for a fork, fusinula, is not to be found in any of the old Latin writers.

It is the opinion, we understand, of a learned Italian writer, that the ancient Romans used the instruments they called ligulÆ, instead of forks. Now those instruments had some distant resemblance to our teaspoons. Hence we must conclude that they and our ancestors used no forks, because, had they had anything answering the purpose, even in effect, it must undoubtedly have had a name.

In the East, we understand it was, and still is, customary to dress their victuals until they become so tender as to be easily pulled in pieces. We are told by modern travellers, that if an animal be dressed before it has lost its natural warmth, it becomes tender and very savoury. This is the Oriental custom, and has been so from the most remote antiquity.

Fortunately, all articles of food were cut up in small pieces before they were served up at table; the necessity for which practice will appear, when we remember they usually took their meals in a recumbent posture upon beds. Originally, persons of rank kept an officer for the purpose of cutting the meat, who used a knife, the only one placed at table, which, in opulent families, had an ivory handle, and was ornamented with silver.

The bread was never cut at table; it needed it not, being usually baked thin, somewhat resembling the Passover cake of the Jews; this is not understood, however, to have been universal.

The Chinese use no forks; however, to supply them, they have small sticks of ivory, often of very fine workmanship, inlaid with silver and gold, which each guest employs to pick up the bits of meat, it being previously cut small. The invention of forks was not known till about two centuries ago in Europe, where people eat the same as they do now in Turkey.

In the New Testament we read of putting hands into the dish. Homer, as well as Ovid, mention the same custom.

In the quotation from the sacred writings, we observe that the guests had, it is presumed, no instrument to help themselves out of the common dish which contained the repast; for, upon the question being put of who was to betray the Saviour, the answer was given in the following quotation, “It is one of the twelve that dippeth with me in the dish.”

In the passage cited from Homer, the phrase, according to the Latin translation, implies the same sense. And had the Romans been apprised of the utility of this instrument, or in fact of any substitute, there could have been no occasion for the master of the amorous art to have given his instructions to his pupils in nearly similar terms which we now use to children.

Although Count Caylus and Grignon both assert that ancient forks have been found, we still want further testimony. The former says, one with two prongs was found among some rubbish in the Appian Way, which he alleges to be of beautiful workmanship, terminating in the handle with a carved stag’s foot. Notwithstanding the high reputation of that author, this assertion is not credited. The latter says, he found some in the ruins of a Roman town in Champagne; but he does not describe them, otherwise than to observe that one was of copper or brass, and the others of iron: and speaking of the latter, says, they appear to be table-forks, but are very coarsely made.

The truth seems to be that table-forks were first used in Italy, as appears from the book of Galeotus Martius, an Italian in the service of Matthias Corvinus, King of Hungary, who reigned from 1458 to 1490. Martius relates that at that period forks were not used at table in Hungary as in Italy; but that at meals each person laid hold of the meat with his fingers, and on that account they were much stained with saffron, usually put into sauces and soups. He praises the king for eating without a fork, conversing at the same time, and never dirtying his clothes.

In France, at the end of the sixteenth century, forks were quite unknown even at the court of the monarch. Neither at that period were they known in Sweden.

From the history of the travels of our countryman, Coryate, entitled “Crudities,” first published in 1611, and afterwards in 1776, the author says he first saw them in Italy, and he was also the first person who used them in England. As his account of them is curious, we may be excused giving an extract, slightly altering the orthography.

“Here I will mention a thing that might have been spoken of before in discourse of the first Italian town. I observed a custom in all those Italian cities and towns through which I passed, that is not used in any other country I saw in my travels; neither do I think that any other nation in Christendom doth use it, but only Italy. The Italian, and also most strangers that are commorant in Italy, do always at their meals, use a little fork when they cut their meat. For while with their knife, which they hold in one hand, they cut the meat out of the dish, they fasten the fork, which they hold in their other hand, upon the same dish; so that whatsoever he be that, sitting in the company of any others at meals, should unadvisedly touch the dish of meat with his fingers, from which all at the table do cut, he will give occasion of offence unto the company, as having transgressed the laws of good manners, insomuch that for his error he shall be at least brow-beaten if not reprehended in words. This form of feeding I understand is generally used in all places of Italy; their fork being for the most part made of iron or steel, and some of silver, but those are used only by gentlemen. The reason of this their curiosity is, because the Italian cannot by any means endure to have his dish touched with fingers—seeing all men’s fingers are not alike clean. Hereupon I myself thought good to imitate the Italian fashion by this forked cutting of meat, not only while I was in Italy, but also in Germany, and oftentime in England, since I came home, being once equipped for that frequent using of my fork by a certain learned gentleman, a familiar friend of mine, one Mr. Lawrence Whitaker, who in his merry humour doubted not to call one at table farsifer, only for using a fork at feeding, but for no other cause.”

In many parts of Spain, we understand that, at present, drinking-glasses, spoons, and forks are rarities. It is also said, that even in taverns in many countries, particularly in France, knives are not placed on the table, because it is expected that each person should have one of his own. This custom the modern French appear to have derived from their ancestors the ancient Gauls. But, as no person will eat any longer without forks, the landlords are obliged to furnish these, together with plates and spoons.

Among the Highlanders in Scotland, Dr. Johnson asserts, that knives have been introduced at table since the Revolution only. Before that period the men were accustomed to cut their meat with a knife they carry as a companion to their dirk. The men cut the meat into small morsels for the women, who used their fingers to put it into their mouths.

The use of forks at table was first considered as a superfluous luxury, and as such forbidden in convents, as appears from the records of the congregation of St. Maur.