Imágenes de página
PDF
ePub

1816.]

M. Quatremère De Roissy on London and Paris.

with them, but of the same height as the body of the building. These pavilions have two rows of three windows above those in arcades. Such is the general arrangement. From the top of the first entablature of each of these pavilions springs an arched line with an architrave in brick; that in the centre with stone architrave is alone open, and leads into the interior courts, round which run the great masses of the edifice: over this arch is a trophy in stone. The inscription in bronze letters is upon the frieze of the entablature.

An hospital which exceeds in magnitude that of Chelsea, or any other yet erected in Europe for the same purpose, is the New Bethlem of brick and stone. It has a range of fifty-five windows in front. This line is divided into five parts: that in the middle is subdivided into three, the centre one of which, being rather higher than the rest, has two rows of windows and a door, with a portico of six columns, surmounted by a pediment level with the general height of the building, which has a flat roof. At the top is a receding attic of three windows with pilasters, and the whole is crowned with a small cupola. The two other parts of this main body, forming a line with it, have three ranges of windows upon a sub-basement of stone, having arches with mouldings. This principal body has eleven windows in front; a balustrade runs all along it at the height of the entablature on each side of the pediment. On either side of this principal body, but somewhat receding, je a range of three stories, the uppermost of which is the smallest, of fifteen windows, upon a continued sub-basement of stone, with semicircular arches. These two long divisions are wholly of brick; the windows quite simple, with iron bars. Here are the abodes of misfortune, and bare the edifice assumes a kind of character. At the extremity of each of these lines stands a building or pavilion of the same height, but somewhat in advance, in a line with the main body, containing seven windows, with stone architraves. At the top it is faced with stone, and rusticated to correspond with the centre building. These three parts (the centre and the extremities) have no more ornaments than are necessary to contrast with the rest of the edifice, and give to the whole a truly majestic appearance. Behind this vast building are others in a good style, but of these I shall say nothing. In front of the main body of the edifice is placed a strong

123

iron railing, the gates of which in particular are of superior workmanship, and in excellent taste. As this structure is quite new, and deserves the notice of strangers, I have thought it right to describe it at some length. I shall be very brief respecting Guy's Hospital, a monument of the humanity and muuificence of a private tradesman of London. It is ancient, very extensive, and generally of elegant construction. That part of it which principally concerns our subject is the building that overlooks the court. It is composed of a front of two wings. The centre of this façade is of stone, with columns and pilasters of the Ionic order, pediment, statues in niches, and basso-relievos; the whole in the best taste and style. This piece of architecture dates from about the beginning of the eighteenth century, a brilliant epoch for the arts. The two sides of the façade, and the two returning wings, are modern; their construction of brick and stone is very elegant. In the middle of the court stands a bronze statue of the founder, modest and simple as himself. The pedestal is adorned with bassorelievos of good workmanship.-Now that I am so near St. Thomas's Hospital, I shall mention an admirable statue in bronze, erected in one of the courts of that hospital to its founder, King Edward VI. It is a great pity that a performance of so much merit should not be kept in better condition. An edifice much more extensive, and which might even be called immense, is the Foundling Hospital. The principal front, composed of several divisions, overlooks a vast court; it is brick and stone. The centre, wrought into arcades forming a portico, is surmounted with a pediment, and particularly worthy of notice. The great lateral front which looks into the square, is not without beauty.

If it were necessary for my present purpose to say more, I might adduce many other edifices founded in London for affliction, poverty, and misfortune, which, erected under the guidance of talents and taste, are rendered by their exterior so many ornaments to the capital.

Against the two institutions of Chelsea, Paris has to place two of the same class, the Royal Hospital of Invalids (which might be more properly compared with Greenwich Hospital), and the Royal Military School. The former is imposing from the magnitude of its dimensions, but is not a handsome edifice. The interior court with its porticoes and

124

M. Quatremère De Roissy on London and Paris.

the dome alone deserve commendation. The principal building of the Military School is in a good taste, but not to be compared with the Military Asylum described above.

As Paris has but these two military hospitals, which cannot even be ranked above those of London, and no civil hos pitals worthy of mention on account of their achitecture, the British capital must be allowed the decided superiority in this particular.

OTHER PUBLIC EDIFICES.

In this class Paris has some buildings that it has reason to be proud of; it has its Mint (Hotel des Monnoyes), an edifice that strikes by the beauty of its form and the richness of its decoration. It has the School of Medicine, in the Greek style of architecture. After these, but at a very great distance, come the Bank of France, the Palace of Justice, and the Palace of the Chamber of Deputies. London can produce as many public buildings besides those of other kinds already enumerated. At the head of them I place the Treasury, which I have described above. The others are the Admiralty, a structure in the best style of architecture, chiefly remarkable for its outer and inner porticoes; the Bank, the exterior front of which, and the whole of the buildings surrounding the first court, display numerous beauties and taste; and since I am in this place, I cannot omit mentioning with commendation the two masses of building which border Bank-street: above a sub-basement, and upon a low wall, runs a range of small Doric columns with entablature; this disposition is in the best taste, and of the highest elegance; the construction of the upper part, of brick and stone, is equally good. The British Museum, of brick and stone, built by a French architect in the 17th century, has in the whole together a kind of dig. nity and grandeur, but not what constitutes a handsome edifice the application of the principal members of architecture. The principal entrance ought at least to have a portico adorned with columns or pilasters, and a pediment, and any other entablature than what we actually find there. This decoration would correspond with that of the court, which has a portico with columns, and lateral gates with pilasters. The College of Surgeons, the chief ornament of Lincoln's

* The whole line of buildings facing the Banquetting-House, Whitehall, is in the grand style of elegant architecture,

[March 1,

Inn Square, is a considerable edifice, with a range of seven windows. In front is a portico with six large columns of the Ionic order, with an entablature and cornice, and blocking-course, upon which are placed figures and other emblematical ornaments. A receding attic story has likewise seven windows. This edifice would appear rather beavy if it were not so lofty. The East India House ought, I think, to be ranked among the public buildings; but in whatever class this small structure be placed, it is impossible to speak of it without admiration of its plan, its proportions, and the elegant richness of its Ionic decoration, which indeed may be said to give it a peculiar character. I reckon it among the three most elegant buildings in London; the two others are the Treasury and Lord Spencer's house, which I shall come to presently.

The sketch which I have given of the public buildings of London would be incomplete, were I not to notice its three principal bridges, including the New Strand Bridge, and the great pillar called the Monument. Those three bridges, constructed in an excellent style, have grandeur and as much decoration as comports with that species of architecture.

Paris, with its numerous bridges, has nothing to oppose to these; but it pos sesses a peculiar, nay unique monument, which I must mention here, that I may be exact and impartial. This monument is the Gate of St. Denis, which, with the peristyle of the Louvre, eclipses all the other productions of architecture in Paris. Here every thing is grandthe height, and the proportions in the mass and in the opening of the arch— the richness of the decoration, the beauty and chastity of the ornaments, the inscription on the frieze, &c. A more majestic whole of the kind does not exist. The Monument is equally beautiful, equally perfect in itself; but it is a structure of less importance.

(To be concluded in our next.)

[blocks in formation]

1816.]

Ignis Fatuus-History and Effects of Wine.

people by the names of Will with a Wisp,
and Jack with a Lantern. We are further
told, that it seems to arise from an exhala-
tion,which, being kindled in the air, reflects
a sort of thin flame in the dark, without
any sensible heat, and that it is found
flying along rivers, hedges, &c., because
it there meets with a stream of air to di-
rect it. In other books, I have found the
above account of the ignis fatuus contra-
dicted. The light produced is there said
to proceed from the lantern fly, whose
body is very brilliant, and the un-
der side of its wings glazed; these when
extended, serve as a reflector. A gen-
tleman asserted that he followed one
for several hours, which would fly against
the wind, mount over hedges, houses,
&c.-This was not the effect of the wind.
The question is, whether this light is
produced by a vapour or a fly, and whe-
ther it is calculated to do any mischief?
Correct notions on this subject would
greatly tend to remove the fears of igno-
rant country people.
T. C.

[ocr errors]

London, Jan. 23, 1816.

THE GUARDIAN OF HEALTH.

No. VI.

HISTORY AND EFFECTS OF WINE.

THE regions of the East are undoubtedly the native country of the vine. Greece has from the most ancient times had wines of its own, which are still very famous. But it is easy to prove that it was brought thither from some other place. Might it not have been introduced by the Egyptians? The Greeks not only carried on a great traffic with them, but also received from them their arts and sciences. The vine, however, could not have come from that quarter. Egypt itself was not a wine country. Herodotus relates that the Egyptians drank a beverage made with barley, to supply the want of wine; and Maillet assures us, that though this country possessed vines of the most generous and productive species, still one vast plain could not have grown them in such abundance as to afford wine sufficient for the large population. The vine affects hilly countries; and Egypt, which has been inhabited from so remote a period, has no vineyards; on the contrary, all accounts agree in stating that the grape is scarcely known there, and that nothing but trellises for vines is to be found, and these only at some of the convents. If Egypt, however, was destitute of this production, the neighbouring countries of Asia and Palestine in particular were capable of furnishing it in the greater

125

profusion. The Land of Canaan was
situated in the midst of regions abound-
ing in wine, and was itself full of vine-
yards. Rabshekah, king of Assyria, calle
it (II Kings, xviii. 32.) a land of wine
and vineyards, and of the oil of the olives;
and Reland mentions as a circumstance
universally known, that the wine of As-
calon, and that of Gaza and Sarepta,
were in high repute among the most dis-
tant nations. Among the presents which
Jacob sent to his son Joseph in Egypt,
was a kind of honey, which the learned
Professor Michaelis of Göttingen has
demonstrated not to have been the com-
mon honey made by bees, which Egypt
itself produced in great abundance, and
which is still produced there, but a mass
of bruised grapes, which was called ho-
ney by the Arabs on account of its
sweetness. This mass was probably a
sort of grape cheese, similar to that
made of figs. Hence, in I. Samuel, xxv.
18, and xxx. 12, the mass of figs is men-
tioned immediately before or after the
mass of raisins; so many clusters of rai-
sins and so many cakes of figs. The
single town of Hebron sends annually.
according to Shaw, three hundred camels
laden with this grape-mass to Egypt;
and hence we may infer how much of
this commodity the flourishing land of
Canaan, which was covered with vine-
yards, must formerly have exported.
Every reader knows that a bunch of
grapes, brought from the promised
land, was carried by two men to he
shown to the Israelites.
We must
not thence conclude that it was either
so large or so heavy as to require the
strength of two persons. It is more pro-
bable that they suspended it from a pole,
which was borne by them both, that the
grapes might not be bruised by the way.
At the same time this bunch must have
been of uncommon size and beauty, be-
cause it was exhibited to the people as a
proof of the extraordinary fertility of
the Land of Promise. Travellers have
mentioned bunches of ten or twelve
pounds weight produced in that coun-
try; at least the monks assured the Che-
valier D'Arvieux that such is the case.
The grapes of Damascus, which come to
us in their dried state as raisins, confirm
the assertions respecting the superior
growth of those parts; and no person
acquainted with history will entertain
any doubt on the subject.

If we, therefore, take it for granted that Assyria was the native country of the vine, we shall have no difficulty in conceiving how it spread after the De

126

Guardian of Health-History and Effects of Wine. [March 1,

Juge over Asia Minor, and subsequently to Greece. Bochart proves that Cadmus introduced the worship of Bacchus into the latter, and quotes passages of the ancient writers, who report that the Tyrians asserted that they had given the vine to the Greeks. The same celebrated scholar maintains along with many more, that the Saturn of the Pagans was no other than the patriarch Noah. Now Plutarch ascribes the discovery of the vine to Saturn. Every reader knows why we attribute the same discovery to Noah, and the mischance that befel him from drinking to excess of the juice of the grape. M. Agricola advances acute arguments to prove that the famous Dionysus, or Bacchus of the ancients, was our Moses; and as Bacchus is said to have been the discoverer of wine, every circumstance seems to agree most exactly in pointing to the Promised Land as the native country of the vine, whence the Greeks must have received it, because they themselves in their fabulous inythology, place the discoverers of the generous beverage yielded by its fruit in this happy region.

In Greece the vine found a soil and a climate perfectly adapted to its growth. Bythinia, as we are told by De la Mare, has always had extensive vineyards near Scutari and other places, whence excellent wines are sent to Constantinople. The same may be said of Lydia, Pamphylia, and many other parts of Asia. The fine, pale, yellow wine of the island of Lesbos gives celebrity, even to the present day, to this its native country, under the name of Metelino. The islands of Chios, Samos, Cos, Rhodes, and Cyprus, have likewise their vineyards in the same profusion, and of as high repute as formerly; and Rome extolled the wines of Greece, and particularly of Chios, with as much enthusiasm as we ourselves, when the generous host gave his honoured guests just a taste, by way of treat, at the conclusion of the most splendid entertainments. Rollin says that this custom continued to prevail at Rome till the time of the childhood of Lucullus.

From Greece the vine travelled to Italy, where the Romans had it soon after the building of their city, though at first it was but rare. It was not till about 600 years after the foundation of Rome that the culture of the vine extended to all parts of Italy. Cato, who was then living, was the first that laid down rules for its cultivation. Horace has particularly extolled the wines of

Massa and Falerna. In less than a century, however, these so celebrated wines lost their character, either through neglect or the avarice of those by whom they were raised.

Macrobius informs us that the Gauls did not learn the art of cultivating the vine till Rome had arrived at the period of high prosperity. A Helvetian, as we are told by Pliny, gave them some wine brought by him from Rome to taste. Its fine flavour induced them to march to Rome and besiege the city: but they were defeated by Camillus, who forced them to retire to their native forests. What they had in vain sought in Italy was offered them 270 years afterwards in their own country, when Fabius Maximus proceeded with a Roman army to Gaul to return their visit. He kept extending his conquests in Provence, Languedoc, and Dauphiné; and thus the Gauls learned from the Romans the art of cultivating the vine. Others are of opinion that the Greeks, when they founded the eity of Marseilles, about 500 years before Christ, introduced the vine into Gaul. If, however, this might have been the case in regard to Gallia Narbonensis, still the Celtic part of Gaul was ignorant of this art on the arrival of the Romans. Beer was the usual beverage at Paris till the time of Julian. In a Greek epigram he ridicules the Gauls because their Bacchus did not smell of nectar, but like a goat, and was only a god of oats and barley. This governor of Gaul was himself obliged to be content with beer; and it was fortunate for the country that he disliked it, as this circumstance promoted the introduction of the vine.

In the time of Probus, who again allowed the culture of the vine, which had been circumscribed not a little since Domitian had from political motives forbidden it, and his successors had continued this prohibition for nearly two bun dred years, we find it introduced into Gaul, Spain, and Hungary, nay, even in the neighbourhood of Tokay; and this same Probus is said also to have caused vines to be planted on the banks of the Rhine and of the Moselle. These are the northernmost points of Europe for the growth of wine; those in a higher latitude produce but a degenerate kind. If we traverse the wine countries, we shall find the wines of superior flavour, but of less spirit and strength, the nearer we approach to the coldest regions; in the warnest, on the contrary, the wine has not so fine a flavour, but more spirit.

1816.]

Guardian of Health-History and Effects of Wine.

Owing to the heat, the latter is rough, thick, and disposed to acidity; in the former the fruit seldom attains due maturity. It is observed that the best wines are met with between the 40th and 50th degrees of north latitude.

Having thus given the reader a brief outline of the history of the vine, it may be justly expected that I should say something concerning the fate of wine itself. From its very origin it found lovers and admirers, who freely indulged in all the excesses into which it was caleulated to lead them. Every luxury stands in a similar predicament; but in the fate of wine there has been something peculiar. No sooner was this exbilarating drink discovered, than there appeared people who made in some measure a profession of hating it. These persecutions render its history remarkable. Let us inquire from what source they flowed.

The Abbé Pluche, M. de la Mare, nay even some of the fathers of the church, are of opinion that the vine was known anterior to the Deluge, but that Noah, after the Flood, took care to plant it anew, and expressed the juice from its fruit. Jablonsky conceives that the mortifying remembrance of Noah's inebriety excited in the Egyptians that hatred to wine of which we find the clearest traces. Professor Michaelis, however, has been more fortunate in his inquiries into the cause of this ancient antipathy, which he attributes to the native poverty of Egypt in vines. This poverty the Egyptians turned into a les son of wisdom, stigmatizing the drinking of wine as impious, and dedicating it to Typhon. Jablonsky himself has proved that the philosophic antipathy to wine in which certain heretics, the Gnostics, Severians, Encratites, and others, agree with the extremities of the East, the Bramins and the followers of Muhammed, had its origin in Egypt many centuries before their names were heard of, and according to the testimony of Diodorus Siculus, was prevalent in Arabia long before the time of Muhammed himself. This historian relates that the Nabathaans had a law which for bade them either to drink wine or to live in houses, which exactly corresponds with what the prophet Jeremiah says concerning the Rechabites, who were of Arabian origin.

The solicitude of the Egyptians to promote the interests of their country and nation by means of philosophy and religion, probably induced thein, when they

127

perceived that Egypt did not produce wine nearly sufficient for its population, to abstain from that beverage altogether rather than to purchase it of foreigners. To reconcile the people to this severe law, it was pretended that wine was dedicated to Typhon, that it was even the blood and gall of that deity, and conse quently to be avoided by every friend to virtue and wisdom. As on the other hand their country produced a superabundance of barley, they invented a beer, or as Herodotus terms it, a barley-wine, which they drank instead of grape-wine. If the inhabitants of the northern regions, with whom the vine will not thrive had adhered to this useful policy, they would not send such incredible sums of money abroad for wines, and would consequently be much richer. It is inconceivable what wealth Britain poured for a long series of years even into the lap of her mortal enemy for wines, and what she still continues to pay for the brandies of France. By prohibitions and punishments nothing is to be effected: but under the pretext of morality and philosophy, the rulers of Egypt accomplished all their purposes.

Of the antipathy to wine founded on policy, delusion and superstition, we find traces in the books of Moses, and even so early as the history of the patriarch Joseph. Those who abstained from wine had nevertheless no objection to cat grapes. This circumstance is adduced by St. Augustine as a singular absurdity in the Manichæans. "What can be more inconsistent," says he, “than to consider wine as the gall of the prince of darkness, and yet to eat grapes?"Does not this agree with what we read of Pharaoh, who did not drink genuine wine, but who had only the grapes pressed into his cup? The chief butler of the Egyptian monarch in relating his dream says:-"I took the grapes and pressed them into his cup, and gave the cup into Pharaoh's hand." Of course this kind of wine was given to such only as bad an antipathy to wine properly so called, but thought it no harin to eat the grapes or drink their juice. This very distinction between the juice of the grape and fermented wine solves the difficulty, how Muhammed who prohibited wine, could nevertheless regard the plant which yields it as the gift of God. Wine itself he considers as an invention of Satan, who is said to have first instructed men in the art of preparing innocent grapes the paguanov apgooúvne, which name was given to wine by the Essenians, who

« AnteriorContinuar »