CHAP. III.
THAT IT IS GOOD FOR ONE’S HEALTH TO GET DRUNK SOMETIMES.

Although mirth and joy be absolutely necessary to health, yet it must be allowed that there are a great many pleasures very injurious and prejudicial to it; and we should act with precaution in using those we make choice of1. But this precaution is not necessary in those we seek in the sweet juice of the grape. So far is drunkenness from prejudicing our health, that, on the contrary, it highly preserves it. This is the sentiment of the most able physicians. These worthy gentlemen are arbiters of life and death. They have over us, jus vitæ et necis. We must therefore believe them. Ergo, let us heartily carouse. Every one knows that Hippocrates, the prince of physicians, prescribes getting drunk once a month, as a thing very necessary to the conservation of health; for, according to him, in the words of a certain French lady 2,

“Avicenna and Rasis, most excellent physicians of Arabia, say3, that it is a thing very salutary and wholesome to get drunk sometimes.”

Monsieur Hofman confirms what has been just now said in relation to Avicenna, and adds thereto the testimony of another physician. “Avicenna,” says he4, “absolutely approves getting drunk once or twice every month, and alleges for it physical reasons.”—Dioscorides says, “That drunkenness is not always hurtful, but that very often it is necessary for the conservation of health.”—Homer says, “That Nestor, who lived so long, tossed off huge bocals of wine5.”

Monsieur Hofman believes also, that wine is an excellent preservative against distempers, and of an admirable use in their cure. In like manner, several divines believe, that there is no manner of harm in getting drunk, when it is done for health’s sake and not for pleasure. In this class one may reckon Pere Taverne, a Jesuit6. These are his words: “Drunkenness,” says he, “is a mortal sin, if one falls into it for pleasure only; but if one gets drunk for any honest end, as for example, by direction of one’s physician in order to recover health, there is no manner of harm in it at all.”

But, however, not to digress too much from our subject, to preserve their health the Africans drink a great deal of wine; and this they do to help the digestion of the vast quantity of fruits they eat.

Montaigne7 tells us, that he heard Silvius, an excellent physician of Paris, say, “That to keep up the powers of the stomach, that they faint not, it would be very proper to rouze them up once a month by this wholesome excess. And if we believe Regnier, a young physician does not see so far as an old drunkard8.

We also say with the French poet9,

And, by the bye, if the number of physicians, who used to get drunk, proves any thing, I could insert a good round catalogue, amongst whom I do not find any English doctors, for they are the most abstemious persons in the world; however, being unwilling to trouble my gentle reader with so long a bead-roll, I shall instance only two very illustrious topers of the faculty. The first is no less a man than the great Paracelsus, who used to get drunk very often; and the other is the famous master Dr. Francis Rabelais, who took a singular pleasure to moisten his clay; or to make use of one of his own expressions, Humer le piot.

I could, after these, mention Patin11, who tells us, That when he gave his public entertainment for his decanat, or deanship, at which thirty-six of his colleagues assisted, he never saw in all his life so much toping. From all which, however, one may very reasonably infer, that so many able persons would never have drunk so much, had they not thought it was no ways prejudicial to their health.

To conclude, let any one allege this verse as a maxim, that

Pocula non lædunt paucula, multa nocent.

And I shall do myself the honour to answer him with another verse, that sometimes

Una salus sanis multam potare salutem12.

And that this is true, witness the great Hippocrates, who says,

CHAP. IV.
THAT OLD PEOPLE OUGHT TO GET DRUNK SOMETIMES.

Wine taken with some excess is excellent for old people.

And is not the reason plain? because it moistens their dry temperament, and nourishes their radical moisture. Hence came the proverb, which says, “That wine is the milk of old men2.” Tirellus, in his history, declares the same thing, when he says, “That wine is the nutriment of natural heat3.” Conformably to this truth that old man acted, of whom Seneca makes mention, who being pressed to drink wine cooled in snow, said, “That his age made him cold enough, and that he did not desire to be more cold than he was4.” Than which, certainly no answer could be more just and true.

Besides, the infirmities of an advanced age require some consolation and diversion. Let us see what Montaigne says, who was not much given to tippling; for he plainly says, that his gout and complexion were greater enemies to drunkenness than his discourse. His words are these, “The inconveniencies attending old age, which stand in need of some support and refreshment, might with reason produce in me a desire of this faculty, since it is as it were the last pleasure that the course of years steals from us. The natural heat, say the boon companions, begins first at the feet; this is the case of infancy; thence it ascends to the middle region, where it continues a long while, and there produces in my mind the only true pleasures of the corporal life; at last exhaling itself like a vapour, it moves upwards, till it comes to the throat, and there it makes its last little stay5.”

Athenæus, after Theophrastus, says, That wine drives away those irksome inquietudes to which old people are unhappily subject6. And to conclude, the divine Plato assures us, that, “Wine is a medicine as well for the body as the mind, the dryness of old people have great occasion for this kind of moistening, and their severe genius of the brisk gaiety inspired by wine, without which they would not be able to perform their part in the concert, and consequently would be no longer useful members in the commonwealth, which is no other ways supported and preserved than by harmony.”

CHAP. V.
THAT WINE CREATES WIT.

As wine increases the quantity of animal spirits, by the fumes which it sends to the brain, it is easy to comprehend that it cannot but be of great advantage to dull and heavy wits; so that one may particularly apply to them the common proverb, “Wine sets an edge to wit1.” And the emblem of Adr. Junius, in which he represents Bacchus as a youth with wings on, and with this inscription, “Wine kindles wit2,” agrees admirably well with these people. But the application of both proverb and emblem is no less just in relation to all the world; for it is most certain, that the god Bacchus, by warming the thoughts, renders them more acute, and inspires a greater plenty of witty sallies. For “Bacchus had not the name of Lysian, or Opener, if I may use the term, bestowed upon him for nothing but purely because he opens the mind, by putting it into an agreeable humour, and renders it more subtile and judicious3.” For this reason it is grown into a proverb, That water-drinkers are not near so knowing as those who drink wine4.

Plutarch assures us, That wine collects and increases the powers of the mind. He observes also, That it produces excellent effects on the minds of persons, who, though naturally timid, want no penetration. Plato maintains, as I have observed in the foregoing chapter, That wine warms as well the mind as the body. Monsieur Hofman says a great deal more, viz. That experience proves, that those climates which produce good wine, produce also people that “have infinitely more wit than those of the north, who drink nothing but beer. Gryllus believes, That the Greeks were called fathers of wisdom, on account of the excellency of their wine; and, that they lost their ancient lustre by reason of the Turks rooting out their vines. The Heathens placed Pallas and Bacchus in the same temple, to shew, that wine increased their wisdom, and that the Gods were represented wiser than men, only because they drank nectar and ambrosia.”

In respect of poets the world was always so sensible of the necessity they lay under, of having their imagination roused by wine, that nobody ever had any good opinion of the productions of a poet that drank water, that Non est Dythyrambus si aquam bibat; and wine was called the poets great horse. “There never were any excellent poets,” says Mr. Bayle, “that could versify, till after drinking pretty plentifully5.”

And if we believe Plato, “He could never open the gates of poesy till he was a little beyond himself. The soul can speak nothing grand, or above the common, if it be not somewhat agitated6.”

Horace7, who knew by experience this truth, goes yet farther.

Ovid bewailed himself very bitterly for want of wine in his exile.

La Motte8, my beloved Frenchman, has something not unlike it.

One may very well apply to Bacchus, what the same gentleman says of the graces in this ode9.

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.

Alcæus, 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 bottle11.” So true is it, that

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 see13.” But had he consulted experience, he would have found that drunkenness, far from making people fearful, inspires them with boldness and temerity.

CHAP. VI.
THAT WINE MAKES ONE ELOQUENT.

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 country1.”

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 orisons2.”

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 sacerdos3.

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 popery4.”

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 pon5.

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 Crater1. 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 life2.” 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,

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 person3 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.

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 vines1.”

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 drunk2.

As for Procopius of Gaza3, 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.