16. Wine with Water

Wine with Water

There is abundance of evidence that the ancients mixed their wines with water; not because they were so strong, with alcohol, as to require dilution, but because, being rich syrups, they needed water to prepare them for drinking. The quantity of water was regulated by the richness of the wine and the time of year.

“Those ancient authors who treat upon domestic manners abound with allusions to this usage. Hot water, tepid water, or cold water was used for the dilution of wine according to the season.” “Hesiod prescribed, during the summer months, three parts of water to one of wine.” “Nicochares considers two parts of wine to five of water as the proper proportion.” “According to Homer, Pramnian and Meronian wines required twenty parts of water to one of wine. Hippocrates considered twenty parts of water to one of the Thracian wine to be the proper beverage.” “Theophrastus says the wine at Thasos is wonderfully delicious.” Athenasus states that the Taeniotic has such a degree of richness or fatness that when mixed with water it seemed gradually to be diluted, much in the same way as Attic honey well mixed—Bible Commentary, p. 17.

Captain Treat says, “The unfermented wine is esteemed the most in the south of Italy, and wine is drunk mixed with water”—Lees’ Works. Also in Spain and Syria.

“In Italy the habit (mixing wine with water) was so universal that there was an establishment at Rome for the public use. It was called Thermopomum, and, from the accounts left of it, was upon a large scale. The remains of several have been discovered among the ruins of Pompeii. Cold, warm, and tepid water was procurable at these establishments, as well as wine, and the inhabitants resorted there for the purpose of drinking, and also sent their servants for hot water”—Nott, London Ed. p. 83.

“The annexed engraving of the Thermopolium is copied from the scarce work of Andreas Baccius (De Nat. Vinorum Hist., Rome, 1597, lib. iv. p. 178). The plan was obtained by himself, assisted by two antiquaries, from the ruins of the Diocletian Baths (Rome). Nothing can more clearly exhibit the contrast between the ancient wines and those of modern Europe than the widely different mode of treating them. The hot water was often necessary, says Sir Edward Barry, to dissolve their more inspissated and old wines”—Kitto, ii. p. 956. The Thermopolium

“Nor was it peculiar to pagans to mingle water with wine for beverage and at feasts; nor to profane writers to record the fact. It is written of Wisdom, she mingled her wine—Proverbs 9:2—and so written by an inspired penman”—Nott, London Ed. p. 84. This mixed wine must be different from that named in Psalms 75:8 “full of mixture,” which we have seen is the symbol of the divine vengeance, the cup prepared for his enemies. But in Proverbs 9:2, it is a blessing to which friends are invited. If in this passage the mixture is of aromatic spices, in addition to the water necessary to dilute the syrup, it was not to fire the blood with alcohol, but to gratify the taste with delicate flavors. The Passover was celebrated with wine mixed with water. According to Lightfoot, each person—man, woman, and child—drank four cups. Christ and his disciples having celebrated the Passover, he took of the bread and the wine that remained, and instituted the Lord’s Supper. The wine was, as we believe, the rich syrup diluted with water. This kind of wine met all the requirements of the law concerning leaven—the true rendering of Matsah, according to Dr. D.F. Lees, being unfermented things. The conclusion to which these varied sources of proof bring us may thus be stated:

1. That unfermented beverages existed, and were a common drink among the ancients.

2. That to preserve their very sweet juices, in their hot climate, they resorted to boiling and other methods which destroyed the power and activity of the gluten, or effectually separated it from the juice of the grape.

3. That these were called wines, were used, and were highly esteemed.

Prof. M. Stuart says, “Facts show that the ancients not only preserved their wine unfermented, but regarded it as of a higher flavor and finer quality than fermented wine”—Letter to Dr. Nott. That they also had drinks that would intoxicate cannot be denied. All that we have aimed to show is that intoxicating wines were not the only wines in use. With the teachings of chemical science, and with the knowledge of the tastes and usages of the ancients, we are the better prepared to examine and understand the Bible, which was written when those tastes and usages were in actual operation. Common honesty demands that we interpret the Scriptures with the eye, the taste, and the usages of the ancients, and not with the eye, the taste, and the usages of the moderns. We should interpret each text so as to be in harmony not only with the drift and scope of the whole teachings of the Bible, but also with the well-ascertained and established laws of nature. It certainly is as important to harmonize the interpretations of the Bible with the teachings of chemistry and the laws of our physical, intellectual, and moral nature, violated by alcoholic drinks, as it is to harmonize the interpretations of the same word of God with the ascertained facts of geology and astronomy. To these latter topics, Biblical scholars have given most praiseworthy attention. Let the same anxious interest animate our endeavors to harmonize the Bible teachings with clearly ascertained facts and with the truth which the temperance reformation has made indisputable. The will of God registered in the laws of nature, and the will of God registered in the inspired revelation, cannot possibly contradict each other. They must harmonize. Whatever difficulties may now stand in the way of this harmony, we know that, as science becomes more intelligently informed of the laws of nature, and as the interpretation of the Bible becomes more thorough and emancipated, the testimony of God’s works and word will perfectly harmonize.

“The books of nature and revelation were written by the same unerring hand. The former is more full and explicit in relation to the physical, the latter in relation to the moral, laws of our nature; still, however, where both touch on the same subject, they will ever be found, when rightly interpreted, to be in harmony.” “Nature and revelation are as little at variance on the wine questionas on other questions, and when rightly consulted it will be found to be so. It is not in the text, but in the interpretation, that men have felt straitened in their consciences; and though this feeling should continue, unless the providence of God changes, it will not alter the facts of the case”—Nott, London Ed. p. 75.