A few weeks back, I was out to lunch with a couple of coworkers from another office and some of their family members. A few of us clinked glasses with a “cheers to a job well done,” but when I turned to my other coworker and her relative and prompted her with my glass tilted in her direction, she shook her head and said, “We don’t toast.”
I’m now deathly curious what groups don’t toast and why. I’ve tried some random Googling, but it mostly pops up pages of toasting etiquette and toaster reviews, which are obviously not terribly helpful. I know of Christian and Muslim denominations that don’t drink, but I haven’t head of anyone who wouldn’t toast with a non-alcoholic beverage.
So, does anyone know of any (presumably religious) groups that don’t toast, and why they refrain?
Hungarians refused to clink classes until October 6, 1999, as a remembrance of the Martyrs of Arad. Basically, it had something to do with the Austrians clinking glasses in celebration of the Hungarian defeat, and the Hungarians vowed not to clink glasses for 150 years.
There are still plenty of people in the area who won’t clink glasses. The usual custom is to say cheers, tip your glass in the direction of the person you are toasting while looking them directly in the eye, then tapping the bottom of the glass on the table before taking a drink. I lived in Hungary from 1998-2003, so was there when the 150 year time limit expired. It was definitely frowned upon to clink glasses when I got there, but by the time I left, it was commonplace. But I’m sure many still hold to the old tradition.
Hrm, well, the coworker in question is an African-American from Chicago, so I’m thinking she’s not going with the Hungarian custom.
Labrador Deceiver, she didn’t say why, and I didn’t think it polite to ask since she didn’t offer an explanation.
Jodi, you could be on to something with the Jehovah’s Witness thing. Here’s another not-hugely-authoritative source that references JWs not participating in toasts. (Also, apparently the guy asking the question likes to “study the Bile.”)
Certainly in Scandinavia where the toast is “Skål” and refers to the drinking of the blood of the vanquished from their skulls (skål), sometimes and in later periods blood being replaced by mead or other alcoholic beverages.
As this was a celebration of murder, Jehova’s Witnesses will have no part in it, even though the tradition has long since been discontinued.
Couldn’t say if they have objections to other forms of toasting.
Do you have a cite for that? Sounds more than a bit apocryphal to me. Wiktionary gives the etymology of skål as being from Old Norse skál (“‘bowl’”), which makes more sense.
The Online Etymology Dictionary says: 1600, from Dan. skaal “a toast,” lit. “bowl, cup,” from O.N., originally a cup made from a shell, from P.Gmc. *skelo, from PIE *(s)kel- “to cut” (see shell). The word first appears in Scottish Eng., and may have been connected to the visit of James VI of Scotland to Denmark in 1589. Skull is probably ultimately related, but not the same.
The skull folk etymology is probably common among the JWs. As far as I can tell, a lot of the “don’t do it! It’s pagan!” is not so much historical puritanism as something that reinforces contemporary identity: the act of avoiding common celebrations reminds JWs that they are special, different, and not distracted by the fleshy pleasures of this world.
As I was taught, the clinking of glasses was intended to wake the spirit of the wine, much like knocking on wood to wake the spirit of the tree. The intention is to ask the support of the pagan Gods, or smaller powers for whatever purpose is mentioned in the toast.
I can see how many a fundamentalist denomination would have a problem with it - especially Christian Fundamentalists, who tend to be concerned about stamping out thoughtless pagan references in their day to day lives.
The Mormon Tabernacle Choir refused to say the words “here’s a toast to the host” as part of the air Air Force’s songand substituted the words “here’s a prayer to those”. They also substituted “hell of a roar” with “terrible roar”.
Seconded. Took a look at an online copy of an old edition of the Swedish Etymological Dictionary (yay Project Runeberg!) and it gives the etymology of skål (“bowl”) as the Germanic skælo, whereas skalle (“skull”) comes from the Old Norse root skallan-. In fact, the Germanic roots of skål seem to have had the exact same meaning as it does today, with no demonstrated connection to skulls at all.
So, not only do we have two separate words in Swedish with no connection (and I’ll see your living in Sweden and raise you actually speaking the language), the roots of both words also have no apparent connection either. Frankly, the JWs would be better off just saying “We don’t want to” when asked why they don’t toast.
