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 cæteros 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 quæ faciunt qua' sobrii,
hesitant, revocant se interdum, usque quæ 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?
Fæcundi 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,
Hæc 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 à 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 Sçavans.]
[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 Manichæans 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
Manichæans) 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 quæ ducunt epulis, quia mentibus error.
Irrepit rudibus, nec tantæ conscia culpæ
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 quærentes._[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 hæres cæcuba dignior
Servata centum clavibus: & mero
Tinget pavimentum superbo
Pontificum potiore cænis."[1b]
"A worthy heir shall then with joy unbind
Cæcubian, 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) cænis pontificum, quam quo pontifices in cænis suis, quæ
semper sumtuosissimæ 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!"
"O monks, ye reverend drones, your guts
Of wine are but so many buts;
You are, God knows (who can abide ye?)
Of plagues the rankest, _bona fide_!"
[Footnote 1: Juvenal.] [[_Satire_ II. 24.]]
[[Footnote 1a: Horace, _Odes_ I.xxxvii.1-4.]]
[[Footnote 1b: Horace, _Odes_ II.xiv.25-28.]]
CHAP. XI.
OF POPES, SAINTS, AND BISHOPS, THAT USED TO GET DRUNK.
After having spoken of the drunkenness of churchmen in general, it will
not, perhaps, be a thing altogether needless, to put the whole in the
clearest light, to confirm what has been said, by the example of Popes,
Saints, and Bishops, who have practised that laudable custom of getting
drunk.
A little song, mentioned by H. Stephens, in his apology for Herodotus,
affords matter of speculation in relation to the sobriety of sovereign
pontiffs.
"Le Pape qui est a Rome,
Boit du vin comme un autre homme
Et de l'Hypocras aussi."
The Pope at Rome, his holiness,
Of wine drinks many a hearty glass,
And pleasant Hypocras also,
As any other man I trow.
If one reads over the popes lives, we shall be fully convinced that
these holy fathers were no enemies to wine. Alexander the Fifth was a
great drinker, and that too of strong wines, says his own historian,
Theoderic de Neim. If one may give any credit to the letters of the king
of Spain's ambassador to his master, Sixtus Quintus was a terrible
drunkard[1].
And Pope Boniface instituted indulgencies for those who should drink a
cup after grace (called since St. Boniface's cup). A plain argument that
his sanctity did not hate wine.
This puts me in my mind of what I have formerly read, though the
author's name is now slipped out of my memory, that when cardinal
Pignatelli, afterwards Innocent the Twelfth, was advanced to the papacy,
his name signifying little pots or mugs, three of which he bore for his
arms; and whose mother was of the house of Caraffa, which signifies a
jug, a Frenchman made these lines:--
"Nous devons tous boire en repos
Sous le regne de ce saint pere
Son nom ses armes sont des pots
Une Caraffe etoit sa mere.
Celebrons donc avec eclat
Cet auguste Pontificat."
Under this holy father's reign
Hang sorrow, let us ne'er complain;
I think all of us should turn sots,
And fuddle with one another,
His name, and so his arms, are pots,
And a gallon pot was his mother;
Then let us brightly celebrate
This most august Pontificate.
In the main, this is nothing but a little punning or playing with words,
but it is one of those agreeable trifles that may now and then be worth
our thinking on.
One may add to the number of such popes as loved fuddling, all those who
sat at Avignon; for if we believe Petrarch[2], the long residence that
the court of Rome made at Avignon, was only to taste the good French
wines; and that it was merely on that account they stayed so long in
Provence, and removed with so much reluctance.