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 ill.u.s.trious examples, M. Cra.s.sus 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 d.a.m.no, 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 pa.s.sant_, 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 ill.u.s.trious 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 exact.i.tude 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 cla.s.s 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 Fra.s.sen 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 pa.s.s 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 Fra.s.sen 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 pa.s.sage 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 n.a.z.ianzen, 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 pa.s.s 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 pa.s.ses 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, _Succ.u.m 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 duc.u.n.t 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.]