Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadJohn Kitto Evening Bible Devotions: March 10
Today is: Thursday, April 25th, 2024 (Show Today's Devotion)
Select a Day for a Devotion in the Month of March: (Show All Months)
Pro_9:2-3
For a day or two we shall look to those passages which have reference to food and feasting, of which there is perhaps more mention in Proverbs than in any other single book of Scripture.
At the commencement of the ninth chapter, there is a remarkable passage in which Wisdom is described as preparing a feast for the ignorant—“She hath killed her beasts; she hath mingled her wine; she hath also furnished her table. She hath sent forth her maidens,” etc. Some question has arisen respecting this mingling of wine, which is more than once mentioned in Scripture. Harmer thinks that it “means the opening of the jars of old, and consequently strong wine, which opening makes the wine somewhat turbid by mixing the lees with it; they, it seems, having no way of drawing it off fine from those earthen vessels in which it is kept, which we may learn from D’Arvieux’s complaint relating to the wine near Mount Carmel; and so this mingled wine stands in opposition to new wine, which is to the eye of a uniform color.” In other words, Harmer takes mingled wine to be wine of the strongest kind. Bishop Lowth concurs in that point; but holds that it was wine “made stronger and more inebriating by the addition of higher and more powerful ingredients, such as honey, spices, etc.” So the anonymous author of a note on Psa_75:8, in Merrick’s Annotations, refers to this and other passages in Proverbs, as well as to Isa_5:22, as showing that “they seemed to have mixed ingredients in their wine just before they drank it, to make it more agreeable, or perhaps more heady.” He adds further on—“Probably they mixed several sorts of wine.”
That these things might not sometimes be done, and that they may not sometimes be indicated by the “mingled wine” of Scripture, we shall neither deny nor affirm. But in Isa_1:22, “wine mixed with water” is expressly mentioned; and this is what we believe to be intended in the present case, as well as in most, if not all, others in which the term occurs. This impression is confirmed to our mind by the distinct knowledge we possess that the ancients were greatly in the habit of mixing water with their wine, and that pure wine was seldom taken, except in the feasts of drunkenness, when it might even be mixed with stronger ingredients, as suggested. But under all ordinary circumstances, the wine was mixed with water, so as to form a table drink, refreshing, and but slightly exciting, unless taken in very large quantities. The quantity of water was usually proportioned to the strength of the wine. Sometimes three parts water were added to one of wine, and at other times five parts water to one of wine. Pliny Note: Hist. Nat. xiv. 4. the elder speaks, after Homer, of certain wines which were only used mixed with five parts of water. The Scoliast in Aristophanes Note: Scoliast in Equit. p. 356. says, that the best way of mixing was to put three parts water to two of wine. In general, it was regarded as a mark of intemperance to drink pure wine, and characteristic of the Scythians and other “barbarians,” but unbecoming civilized men. An exception was made in behalf of the gods, the libations to whom were poured out in pure wine. In Aristophanes, Note: In Plut. v. 1. Mercury is introduced as complaining that people put half water to his wine, whereas they offered pure wine to the other gods. These facts are important; for ancient usage must necessarily have much weight in determining the sense in which such allusions are to be taken. It is not to be supposed that the Hebrews, who were essentially a temperate people, had less restrained habits in this respect than the Greeks and Romans, who were by no means celebrated for temperance. We shall hardly venture to class the Jews with the “Scythians and other barbarians,” who drank pure wine.
The clause which describes Wisdom as sending forth her maidens to invite people to her feast, is well worthy of our passing notice. At the first view, it may seem to imply that female domestics were more numerous proportionally to males than is now the case in the East, and that they were employed in services scarcely consistent with modern eastern notions. Both conclusions would be erroneous. Wisdom being represented as a female, it was necessary to represent her attendants as maidens, not as men; and their employment in calling the guests may receive some illustration from a custom which was noticed by Hasselquist in Egypt, and which appears to have been ancient in that country. That it has scarcely been noticed by other travellers, may arise from the fact that, although they may have seen the women on their way, they had no means of learning on what errand they were bound. Hasselquist says, that he saw a great number of women, who went about inviting people to a banquet “in a singular, and no doubt very ancient manner. There were about ten or twelve of them, covered with black veils, as is now customary in Egypt. They were preceded by four eunuchs; and after them were Moors with their usual walking staves. As they walked along, they all joined in making a noise, which we were told signified their joy, but which we could not find resembled a joyful or pleasing sound.” The sound was so singular, that the traveller found himself at a loss to give an idea of it to those who had never heard it. “It was shrill, but had a peculiar quivering, which they learnt by long practice.” This female cry was doubtless the ziraleet Note: See First Series—Tenth Week—Friday. which is heard on various occasions of rejoicing in Egypt and other Eastern countries, and is produced by a sharp utterance of the voice, accompanied by a quick, tremulous motion of the tongue. The whole of this incident is curiously illustrative, especially as it clearly shows that, through these her maidens, whom she sends forth, “Wisdom crieth upon the high places of the city.”