Chapter 3

The sprightly influence you shed, Bright constellation! makes Parnassus gay. Apollo droops and hangs his head, His frozen fingers know not how to play; And we his sons the sad distemper find, Which chills the fancy, and benumbs the mind, When cruel you withdraw your magic ray. You finely paint on ev'ry rhyme Features most noble and sublime, Resplendent all the images, In rich immortal draperies. You give me colours that can never die, But baffle time, and live through all eternity.

It is to wine we owe the productions of Eschylus and Anacreon, whose muses were very chilly, till Bacchus warmed them. Aurelius, the sophist, composed his best declamations in his cups. Herodes, called Saginatus Orator, the fattened Orator, never talked better, than after drinking pretty plentifully. And according to Horace, this was the case with Ennius.

"Ennius ipse pater nunquam nisi potus ad arma Prosiluit dicenda ------------ [10]."

Ennius himself ne'er sung of arms, Martial exploits and wars alarms, Till the good father's face did shine, Enrich'd with ruby beams of wine.

Alcaeus, the famous poet, never sat down to compose tragedy till he was tipsy. The disciples of the great Paracelsus took the opportunity, when he was fuddled, to make him dictate. The venerable Messire Francis Rabelais composed over the bottle the acts and jests of Gargantua, and his son Pantagruel, a work which gained him such great reputation. "Pontius de Thiard, bishop of Chalons sur Saone, had greater obligations to Bacchus than Apollo for his good verses; who, not reckoning what wine he drank all day long, never slept without drinking a pretty large bottle[11]." So true is it, that

"A la fontaine ou s'enyvre Boileau Le grand Corneille et le sacre troupeau De ces auteurs que l'on ne trouve guere Un bon rimeur doit boire a pleine eguyere, S'il veut donner un bon tour au rondeau[12]."

At that rich fountain where the great Boileau, Corneille, Racine, to whom so much we owe, Th' immortal Dryden, and the sacred band Of those bright authors, whom we cannot find, Whose names, (so does oblivion's power command,) Alas! we no where know, Supp'd largely to inebriate their mind. Here a good versifier, fond of rhime, Should swill, to make his jingling couplets chime.

From hence, good natur'd B----d, arose your flame, Hence your inimitable numbers came, When you so prais'd his house and Buckingham.

And certainly Cicero was much in the wrong, when he said, that "what people do when they are drunk, is not done with the same approbation as if they were sober; they hesitate, and often recall themselves, and frame a weaker judgment of what they see[13]." But had he consulted experience, he would have found that drunkenness, far from making people fearful, inspires them with boldness and temerity.

[Footnote 1: Vinum acuit ingenium.]

[Footnote 2: Vinum ingenii fomes.]

[Footnote 3: Hist. des. vii. sag. p. 123.]

[Footnote 4: Non idem sapere possunt qui aquam et qui vinum bibunt.]

[Footnote 5: Resp. aux Quest. d'un Prov. t. i. ch. 12.]

[Footnote 6: Sive Platoni credimus, frustra poetices fores compos sui pepulit. Non potest grande aliquid et supra caeteros loqui nisi mota mens.]

[Footnote 7: 1 Ep. xix. 3.]

[[Footnote 7a: Ovid, _Ex Ponto_ IV.ii.25-26.]]

[Footnote 8: La Motte, Ode Pind. 1.]

[Footnote 9: Ode 2. Pindar.]

[Footnote 10: Ep. xix. 7.]

[Footnote 11: Menagiana, t. i. p. 384.]

[Footnote 12: ---- p. 189.]

[Footnote 13: Ne vinolenti quidem quae faciunt qua' sobrii, hesitant, revocant se interdum, usque quae videntur, imbecillius assentiuntur. Acad. Quest. lib. 4.]

CHAP. VI.

THAT WINE MAKES ONE ELOQUENT.

What wretch so dull, but eloquent must grow, When the full goblets with persuasive wine, Inebriate with bright eloquence divine?

Faecundi calices quem non fecere disertum?[a]

Let us make a few commentaries on this verse of Horace.

We read, that "the sages of Portugal having undertaken to convert those of Melinda, gained as much upon them by wine as by reason, which, in the end, facilitated the conquest of the whole country[1]."

To draw a consequence from this, we say, That one must reasonably believe, that wine gave those sages an eloquence necessary to convert the people of Melinda, and them a necessary penetration to discover the truth through the thick veils of their ignorance.

Books of travels farther inform us, that "the priests of the kingdom of Tibet, whom they call Lamas, drink a good quantity of wine on their days of fasting and devotion, that they may have, to use their own words, the tongue prompt and ready to say their orisons[2]."

According to this doctrine, Palingenius was much in the wrong to say, that wine makes churchmen uncapable to perform the duties of their function.

Nec bene tractabit vinosus sacra sacerdos[3].

No priest, who tipples wine that's good, Will do his duty as he should.

Surely our author never conversed much with the religious. The friers would have told him, they never perform their office without taking a choir cup. Experto crede Roberto, as the saying is. There is no false Latin in this, says a good monk to me once upon a time, drawing from under his cassock a double flask. You are much in the right on't, brother Peter, said I, I believe as the church believes, and so--my service to you, and here's to the pious memory of St. Boniface. And indeed the vehicle proved capaciously orthodox.

In relation to what hath been said I shall add a remark of the famous M. Bayle. "It cannot be denied," says he, "that the christians of Europe are subject to two great vices, drunkenness and lewdness. The first of these reigns in cold countries, the other in hot. Bacchus and Venus share these two climates between them. We find that the reformation having divided this portion of christianity, that part which was subject to Venus continues as it was, but the greatest part of what was subject to Bacchus has renounced popery[4]."

But you will say, what coherence has this remark with the matter in question? Have a little patience, and you shall presently see the application. I say then, that a thorough true blue hearty Protestant would conclude from this quotation, that wine bestowed so much eloquence and penetration to these northern people, as to put them into that happy state, to discover the truth, and conquer all prejudices against it whatsoever. But of this enough.

Pon, pon; pata pon: tara rara, pon pon[5].

[[Footnote a: Horace, _Epistulae_ I.v.19. (_Same passage as note 2:9b._)]]

[Footnote 1: Rem. sur Rabel. t. i. lib. 1. cap. 5.]

[Footnote 2: Divers. cur.]

[Footnote 3: Lib. iii. p. m. 43.]

[Footnote 4: Bayle Dict. t. ii. p. 1163.]

[Footnote 5: Racine.]

CHAP. VII.

THAT WINE ACQUIRES FRIENDS, AND RECONCILES ENEMIES.

Friendship is a good so precious and valuable, and at the same time so very rare, that one cannot take too much care in order to procure it. The most efficacious means to do this is feasting. It is by eating and drinking together that conversation becomes more easy and familiar; and, to use the words of Monsieur de la Mothe le vayer, "We hold, that table communion unites people's very souls, and causes the strictest friendships." Unde Philotetius Crater[1]. And, in reality, can any thing be more agreeable and engaging, than to take a friendly bottle in pleasant and delightful company?

And therefore Cleomedes had great reason to say, "Take away the pleasures of the table, where we open ourselves so agreeably to each other, and you rob us of the sweetest cordial of human life[2]." This was also the sentiment of Cicero, in his Book of old Age; of Aristotle, in his Ethics; and Plutarch, in his Questions. Let who will, then, look on trencher friends to be false, and say with those of whom Ovid makes mention,

Dum fueris felix multos numerabis amicos, Tempora si fuerint nubila, solus eris.[2a]

In happy times, while riches round you flow, A thousand friends their obligations own, But when loud adverse winds begin to blow, And darksome clouds appear, you're left alone.

Daily experience teaches us, that one of the best means to push one's fortune, is often to regale with those who are in credit; for, to one that may have ruined himself by so doing, ten have made their fortunes. We may therefore say of entertainments, that,

Haec res et jungit, et junctos servat amicos.[2b]

These unite friends, and strictly keep them so.

But what is more, wine does the office of a mediator between enemies. Of which truth I shall instance two illustrious examples, M. Crassus reconciled himself to Cicero at a feast; Asdrubal and Scipio did the same on the like occasion. And one may see, in a description which a very learned person[3] has given of Switzerland, that when the inhabitants of that country quarrel with one another, and come to blows, they are immediately reconciled, by returning to their cups, and no harm ensues, but sitting up all night, and amicably getting drunk together. The Latin has more force in it, which I shall therefore here transcribe. _Quin et si quando vehementius in se insurgunt, depositis in medium armis, pugnis rem manibusque decernunt, sed eodem momento conveniunt, iisdemque epulis, iisdemque poculis a quibus surrexere conciliantibus; et nullo alio ex contentionibus damno, nisi quod innovata pocula in noctem ducantur._

Tacitus had said the same thing long before of the Germans.

But to come nearer. The bishop of Bitonto, one of the fathers of the Council of Trent, and a famous preacher, frequently in his sermons, exhorting the Germans to unity, and to return to the church, made use of this topic of friendly drinking, conjuring them thereto as undoubtedly, by the strongest, and most efficacious argument he could make use of, by remembering how merry and sociable heretofore they had been in their cups.

[Footnote 1: Dial. 2. d'Or, Tuber. p. m. 118.]

[Footnote 2: Hist. 7 Sap.]

[[Footnote 2a: Ovid, _Tristia_ I.ix.5-6. _First line is more often read as_ Donec eris sospes (_or_ felix) ...]]

[[Footnote 2b: Horace, _Satire_ I.iii.54.]]

[Footnote 3: Dan. Eremit. Descript. p. 416.]

CHAP. VIII.

THAT THE CUSTOM OF GETTING DRUNK IS MOST ANCIENT.

After having displayed the good qualities of wine and drunkenness, I come now to shew, that it is generally received by all the world. To do this effectually I shall enter into some particular detail, and after having remarked, _en passant_, how the custom of fuddling is very ancient, I shall then shew, that the primitive christians used to get drunk: I shall speak something of the tippling of churchmen in general, afterwards I shall take a cursory review of popes, saints, and bishops, then I shall come to kings and emperors, and give a small catalogue of these illustrious topers; I shall not forget the philosophers, and much less the poets, who loved drinking. Freemasons, and other learned men, who after having wearied themselves with important studies have taken this diversion, shall also appear upon the stage. After this I shall enumerate the several nations that have been, and those which yet are subject to get fuddled; whether they make use of wine for that purpose, or such liquors as produce the same effect with wine. And from this enumeration I shall draw some consequences in favour of drunkenness.

But before I enter into this detail, I hope I shall be permitted a general remark, which is, that my readers must not expect I should set down a complete list of all the several sorts of topers I just now mentioned; such an exactitude would take up too much time. Much sooner may one reckon up what numbers die away every spring by the doctor; and how many dispose of their maidenheads before marriage.

In every different class you will find no other jolly drinkers, but such as I have met with in my great reading, and as shall occur to my remembrance. Neither shall I be very scrupulous in placing them according to the strict rules of chronology, but put them down as they present themselves to my imagination.

If the antiquity of a custom makes it always good and laudable, certainly drunkenness can never deserve sufficient recommendation. Every one knows, that Noah got drunk after he had planted the vine. There are some who pretend to excuse him, that he was not acquainted with the strength of wine. But to this it may very well be answered, that it is not very probable so wise a man as Noah should plant a vine without knowing its nature and property. Besides, it is one thing to know, whether he got drunk at all: and another, whether he had an intention to do so.

But if we give any credit to several learned persons, Noah was not the first man that got fuddled. Father Frassen maintains, "That people fed on flesh before the flood, and drank wine. There is no likelihood, according to him, that men contented themselves with drinking water for fifteen or sixteen hundred years together. It is much more credible, that they prepared a drink more nourishing and palatable. These first men of the world were endued with no less share of wit than their posterity, and, consequently, wanted no industry to invent every thing that might contribute to make them pass their lives agreeably. Jesus Christ says, that in the days of Noah, before the Flood, men married, and gave their children in marriage. These people, Father Frassen observes, regaled each other, and made solemn entertainments. Now who can imagine, that they drank at those festivals nothing but water, and fed only on fruits and herbs! Noah, therefore, was not the inventor of that use which we make of the grape; the most that he did, was only to plant new vines[1]."

This good father was not singular in his opinion; another very learned person also believed, that from the passage of Scripture above cited, one might draw a very probable argument, that men before the flood drank wine, and that too even to be drunk[2].

As for Procopius of Gaza[3], one of the most ancient interpreters of Scripture, he thinks it no less true, that the vine was known in the world before Noah's time, but he does not allow that the use of wine was known before that patriarch, whom he believes to be the inventor of it.

[Footnote 1: Disq. Biblic. Journ. des Scavans.]

[Footnote 2: Jo. Chr. Becman. Annal. Hist.]

[Footnote 3: Torner de Ebriet. lib. i. c. 3.]

CHAP. IX.

THAT THE PRIMITIVE CHRISTIANS GOT DRUNK.

There is no one that has ever so little dipped into ecclesiastical history, but knows very well, that in the primitive church it was a custom to appoint solemn feasts on the festivals of martyrs. This appears by the harangue of Constantine, and from the works of St. Gregory Nazianzen, and St. Chrysostom. People generally got drunk at these feasts; and this excess was looked upon as a thing that might be permitted. This evidently appears by the pathetic complaints of St. Augustin and St. Cyprian: the former of these holy fathers expresses himself after this manner:---- "Drunken debauches pass as permitted amongst us, so that people turn them into solemn feasts, to honour the memory of the martyrs; and that not only on those days which are particularly consecrated to them, (which would be a deplorable abuse to those, who look at these things with other eyes than those of the flesh,) but on every day of the year[1]."

St. Cyprian, in a treatise attributed to him, says much the same thing. "Drunkenness, says he, is so common with us in Africa, that it scarce passes for a crime. And do we not see Christians forcing one another to get drunk, to celebrate the memory of the martyrs[2]!"

But it was not only at these repasts that the Christians got drunk, they did the same on several other occasions; and it was on this account that St. Augustin wrote to his dear Alipius in these terms: "However the corruption of manners, and the unhappiness of the times, have induced us to wish, I do not say that people should not get drunk in particular houses, but that they should not get drunk any where else[3]."

Cardinal du Perron tells us, "That the Manichaeans said, that the Catholicks were people much given to wine, but that they never drank any[4]."

Against this charge St. Augustin no otherwise defends them, than by recrimination. He answers, "That it was true, but that they (the Manichaeans) drank the juice of apples, which was more delicious than all the wines and liquors in the world. And so does Tertullian, which liquor pressed from apples, he says, was most strong and vinous." His words are, _Succum ex pomis vinosissimum_[5].

Here one may observe also, that the use of cider was very primitive and antient, but as strong and delicious as it was, the Catholicks stuck close to the juice of the grape, as what was entirely orthodox and no wise conversant with the heretics of those days.

But to return to these feasts just now mentioned, it is certain, that it was not only customary for the Christians of Africa to get drunk. They had this custom in common with the Christians of Italy, where these kinds of repasts were forbidden by the Council of Laodicea, which was held in the fourth century. Paulinus, however, (and I do not wonder at it, being a poet,) has endeavoured to excuse the Christians, on pretence that they only got drunk out of a good intention, which, say the casuists, judges all human actions[6]. His words are,

---- "Ignoscenda tamen puto talia parvis Gaudia quae ducunt epulis, quia mentibus error. Irrepit rudibus, nec tantae conscia culpae Simplicitas pietate cadit, male credula sanctos Perfusis halante mero gaudere sepulchris.[6a]

But yet that mirth in little feasts enjoy'd, I think should ready absolution find; Slight peccadillo of an erring mind, Artless and rude, of all disguises void, Their simple hearts too easy to believe (Conscious of nothing ill) that saints in tombs Enshrin'd should any happiness perceive From quaffing cups, and wines ascending fumes, Must be excus'd, since what they did they meant, With piety ill plac'd, yet good intent.

[Footnote 1: Ep. 22.]

[Footnote 2: Pamel. p. 416.]

[Footnote 3: Ep. 29.]

[Footnote 4: Perron, p. 64.]

[Footnote 5: Ibid.]

[Footnote 6: Quicquid agunt homines intentio judicat omne.]

[[Footnote 6a: St. Paulinus of Nola (Paulinus Nolensis), _possibly_ Carmen IX. in St. Felicem.]]

CHAP. X.

OF CHURCHMEN.

If one formed a judgment of the manner of Churchmen's lives by their discourses, certainly one would take them for models of sobriety. But there is a great deal of difference between preaching and practising. This distinction is very solid, and daily experience confirms it. And if those gentlemen would do themselves justice, how many amongst them might say in particular,

Alas! how can I ever dare pretend, From man this ancient error to remove, Which they, ev'n to distraction, fondly love: If I, who blame it, with such pain defend Myself from this contagious malady, This epidemic poison of the mind. Weak reason, feeble thing, of which mankind So boasts, this we can only build on thee, Unjust continuing still, and false and vain, In our discourses loudly we complain Against the passions, weakness, vice, and yet Those things we still cry down, we still commit.

One cannot, therefore, without indignation, hear Churchmen declaim against drunkenness, while they themselves are such ruddy examples of it.

_Quis tulerit Gracchos de seditione quaerentes._[1]

With patience who can hear west-country cudden Rail against roasted beef and good plum pudden?

If the law of prescription take place, one cannot dispute with them that of fuddling with any colour of reason, for in St. Jerom's time, the priests were very much given to wine. This we learn from an epistle of that father, in which he very severely reprehends them. They have been no changelings since. We read in the adages of Erasmus, that it was a proverb amongst the Germans, that the lives of the monks consisted in nothing but eating, drinking, and----Monachorum nunc nihil aliud est quam facere, esse, bibere. Besides, a vast number of councils, who made most severe canons against priests that should get drunk, evidently shew, that they used frequently to do so. Such were the Councils of Carthage, Agathon, the first of Tours, that of Worms, Treves, &c. To make this more clear, we shall copy a little of what H. Stephens says on this subject, in his apology for Herodotus:-- "But to return, says he, to these proverbs, theologal wine, and the abbots, or prelates table. I say, that without these, one could never rightly understand this beautiful passage of Horace, viz.

"Nunc est bibendum, nunc pede libero Pulsanda tellus: Nunc saliaribus Ornare pulvinar Deorum Tempus erit dapibus sodales."[1a]

"Come, boys, lets put the flowing goblet round, Drink hard, and with brisk measures beat the ground. The tables of the gods now bright shall shine With cheer luxurious, fit for mouths of priests, When holy epicures become your guests, And venerably quaff large cups of wine."

Nor this other,

"Absumet haeres caecuba dignior Servata centum clavibus: & mero Tinget pavimentum superbo Pontificum potiore caenis."[1b]

"A worthy heir shall then with joy unbind Caecubian, by a hundred locks confin'd, And tinge with better wines the ground, Than e'er at feasts pontifical are found."

"You see how necessary these proverbs are, to let us into the true understanding of these two passages of this poet. Here follows, word for word, what a certain gloss says of the last of them, _Mero dicit potiore (meliore) caenis pontificum, quam quo pontifices in caenis suis, quae semper sumtuosissimae fuerunt, unde nunc theologicum dicunt vinum, usi sunt_. That is, with better wine than that which the chief priests used at their suppers, which were always most sumptuous and expensive, and which sort of wine we call now theological.

"By this you plainly see how much attached to divines and prelates those gentlemen are who make profession of being expositors of the poets. But in relation to this same theologal, or theological, I know very well that it is a great question if it should be called _vinum theologale_, or _vinum theologalis per appositionem_; for the wicked laity, some of them will have it, that when these good men get tipsy they agree no otherwise than dogs and cats. But I shall leave this dispute to be decided by the readers. And as to these two proverbs, they put me in mind of another, and that is, an abbot's face, which proverb being very ancient, makes me believe that formerly the abbots had their faces illuminated. --But without going any farther for witnesses, I shall content myself with presenting my readers with the following piece of antiquity, viz.

"Sanctus Dominicus sit nobis semper amicus, Cui canimus rostro jugiter preconia nostro De cordis venis siccatis ante lagenis. Ergo tuas laudes si tu nos pangere gaudes Tempore paschali, fac ne potu puteali Conveniat uti, quod si fit undique muti Semper erunt fratres qui non curant nisi ventres."

"O good Saint Dominic, be ay propitious, Whose praise we daily chirp in notes delicious From all the veins of all our hearts, Having toss'd up some double quarts. Therefore, if't be thy true desire, We chaunt thy lauds at Easter quire. Let not thy saintship think it meet We drink from well tho' ne'er so sweet, Liquor unworthy priest or parson, If so, your friers will hang an arse on, Who nothing mind, I need not tell ye, Most holy patron, but their belly. So used, they'll ev'ry soul be dumb, No _dixit dominus_, but -------- mum."

Not unlike this is what follows:--

"O monachi, vestri stomachi sunt amphora Bacchi, Vos estis, Deus est testis, teterrima pestis!"