CHAPTER XX.

MEANS

EMPLOYED IN VARIOUS AGES AND COUNTRIES, TO RE

MOVE INTEMPERANCE.

“ Almost every legislator of the world, from whatever original he derived his authority, has exerted it in the prohibition of such foods, as tended to injure the health, and, destroy the vigour of the people for whom he designed his institutions.?--Johnson's Debates.

The evils of intemperance have been variously estimated at different periods of the world. In times of primitive simplicity, great caution was observed in regard to the use of intoxicating liquors. The virtuous feelings of society, however, gradually gave way before an increasing appetite for luxurious gratification. The regulations of the state, even in our own enlightened country, bear the stamp of proportionate deterioration, and more or less harmonize with the depraved morals of the age. Such has been the general experience of mankind, in regard to those national laws which have reference to intemperance. They bear an exact relation to the general estimation in which intoxica. ting liquors are held, and accordingly will be found in their general character, to correspond with the virtue and morality, or vice and intemperance of the age and country which produces them.

The manners and customs of the Jews, have already been detailed at considerable length; it is unnecessary therefore, to allude to the habits of that remarkable nation, further than by stating, that the temperate practices of other nations of antiquity, appear in a great measure to have been derived from the regulations of the Jewish economy

The records of Persian history, present striking illustrations of the advantages derived from temperance; as well as the pernicious consequences of indulgence in luxurious and intemperate habits. In its days of simplicity, the Persian nation set an example of temperance and sobriety to surrounding nations, worthy of universal imita

434

MEANS EMPLOYED IN VARIOUS AGES

tion. Their children were trained up professedly, with the design to benefit the state, and to promote the general welfare of the community; and as an essential means of securing this object, they were early taught to practise abstinence and self-denial.

The history of Cyrus abounds with illustrations of this fact. From the earliest period he was trained in the temperate habits of the people among whom he was born, and when arrived at more mature age, he refused to depart from the frugal practices of his early years. The same self-denial was enjoined upon his soldiers. By this means he accomplished the mighty achievements for which his name has been so conspicuously handed down to posterity:* Cyrus lived to an advanced age, possessed of all the vigour and advantages of youth, and in the enjoyment of the im mense possessions which he had acquired by his successful and victorious career.

The Persians in their primitive state, refrained from the use of wine, except at festive entertainments. Even on those occasions, the excessive use of it was interdicted by the law. “It was provided for by law,” remarks Xenophon, “that no pitchers, or large wine vessels, should be brought in at entertainments; as being sensible that if they kept from drinking too much, their constitutions both of body and mind would suffer less.”+

The records of Egyptian history, afford us but scanty information in regard to the drinking habits of the people of that country: Prior to a particular period in their history, the use of intoxicating wine was looked upon as un lawful, and consequently prohibited. The simple juice of the grape, however, or unfermented wine, was in use at an early period. Until the accession of Psammeticus, the kings of Egypt who held the sacred office of Priests, abstained altogether from the use of intoxicating wine. This monarch flourished about six hundred and forty years before the birth of Christ. He probably acquired a fondness for wine during his abode with the Syrians, to whom he fled for protection, when his dominions were invaded by Sabacus, king of Ethiopia. Plutarch however on the authority of Hecatæus, informs us that the quantity of wine used by this king and his successors, was definitely prescribed. Diodorus Siculus also affirms the same fact. The Egyptians, he remarks, prescribed even to their kings, a stinted measure of wine at their meals; so much indeed as would refresh, but not inebriate.*

The Romans, during the first ages of their national existence, were exceedingly simple and temperate in their manners. The vice of drunkenness was unknown to this people during the existence of the republic. Wine did not come into general use, nor indeed was the vine cultivated until about six hundred years after the foundation of the Commonwealth. This statement is made on the authority of Pliny, who also informs us that the primitive libations of the Romans, consisted of milk and other offer. ings of like simplicity. Numa, the immediate successor of Romulus, made a law, which, on account of the great scarcity of wine, directed that no man should sprinkle the funeral pile with it; and Lucius Papyrius, previous to his engagement with the Samnites, made no other vow than that he would in case of victory offer to Jupiter a small cup or goblet of wine.

The regulations of the Romans at this period, in relation to the use of intoxicating liquors, were exceedingly severe, and rigorously enforced." Among the Romans," remarks Ælian," it was a strict law, that no woman (bond or free) should drink wine ; nor any male until he had attained to the age of thirty-five years.”+ Athenæus makes a similar statement, except that in the latter instance, the period fixed was thirty years, instead of thirty-five, as stated by Ælian.f The regulation in relation to women in particular, was strictly enforced. It had its origin as early as the age of Romulus. Balduinus, however, states, that the

66

a

436

MEANS EMPLOYED IN VARIOUS AGES

their sex.

Latian women who existed at a period prior to the building of Rome, were exceedingly abstemious. Fatua Fauna, the sister and wife of Faunus, was scourged to death with myrtle rods, by her own husband for drinking off a large pot of wine.* The law of Romulus enacted—“Si vinum (mulier) biberit, domi ut adulteram puniunto.t That is, that the husband in conjunction with his relations, might punish the wife at home, with the same severity as if she were discovered to be an adultress. Dionysius Halicarnassus, thus states the reason of this enactment:—“Romulus deemed it proper to punish both these as the greatest crimes that women can be guilty of, with consideration of

He looked upon lewdness as the first step to all sorts of insolence and disorder, and drunkenness as the grand incentive to lewdness.” Valerius Maximus fully corroborates the preceding quotation. Wine, he asserts, was forbidden to women, lest by its use, they should fall into some extravagance. Vini usus olim Romanis fæminis ignotis fuit, ne scilicet in aliquod dedecus prolaberentur. I Near relations where permitted to salute females when they came into their houses, in order to smell whether they had tasted any temetum, the name by which at that period they distinguished wine. On conviction, the guilty woman received the punishment of adultery, in other words, death. Ignatius Mecenius, killed his wife on the discovery that she had been drinking wine, without even the formality of consulting with his relations. He was pardoned for this act by Romulus, in whose reign it occurred. Plinys and Valerius Maximus,lf both attest this circumstance. They not only relate the particulars of the case, but give the reason why the husband was acquitted of murder. Fabius Pictor, in his annals, states that a Roman lady was starved to death by her own relations, for having picked the lock of a chest, in which the keys of the wine cellar were deposited. T

The Roman Censors were magistrates,** appointed to inspeet the morals of the citizens, and were entrusted with power to expel out of the senate, or take away a horse from any man who gave

himself up to sensual pleasures, such as debauchery and intemperance. Alexander ab Alexandro, thus refers to this power.

“ The ancient

* Balduinus in hanc Legem Romuli. | Ibid, ad Leges Romuli. Val. Max. lib. 2, c. i.

Ś Plin. Hist. Nat. lib. 14, c, xiž. Val. Maximus lib. 6, c. iii.

Pliny b. 14, c. xiii, ** Alex ab Alex b. 3, c. xi.

Romans so much hated drunkards, that their Censors turned them out of the senate, and branded them with legal infamy, as unworthy to bear public honours and offices. They thought it scandalous that men of drunken morals, and (thereby) broken constitutions, and such as were noted for lewdness, should be admitted to any trust in the Government, or to consult upon affairs which related to the Commonwealth."*

Under the first emperors, intemperance was a vice to which women as well as men were equally addicted. Pliny complains in bitter terms of the drunken practices of females in his time.

The Greeks, like the Romans, during the earlier and more prosperous part of their career, were temperate and sober in their habits. In course of time, however, the temperance of the primitive Greeks, sunk under the insinuating advances of luxury and intemperance.

The most prominent of the institutions established among the ancient Greeks, for the promotion of moral principles, and temperate habits, were denominated diduokaleia ouppoonins schools of temperance and sobriety. A great number of individuals assembled, and partook of a frugal and temperate repast, provided for that purpose by general contribution. On these occasions, the persons present profited by the example and discourse of the elders of the place. The wines used at these banquets, were not only greatly inferior in potency to the wines of the present day, but were invariably mixed with water. One of their laws in reference to these public entertainments, enacted that “none but mixed wines should be drunk at banquets.”+ The Areopagite was commanded to take cognizance of all drunkards, I These inspectors of public morals were held in great respect among the people. They were empowered to examine into the lives of all the members of the community, and to punish those who were irregular in their manners, as well as to reward the virtuous and circumspect.

The senate and court of the Areopagus, according to Aristides, was των εν τοις Ελλησι δικαστεριων τιμιωτατον και αγιωτατον the most sacred and venerable tribunal in all Greece. Such Archons were admitted into this select body as had behaved correctly in the discharge of their trust, and were irreproachable in their private conduct. To have been sitting in a tavern or public-house, was a sufficient reason to deny an Archon admission into it. This dignity