Why did Ancients add water to wine?

Any thoughts on this? I've heard.....

1. To not get drunk so easily.
2. To make it drinkable/taste better
3. To make the wine last longer
4. all of the above
5. none of the above

I'd pick all of the above, Tom, with the focus on 1 and 1.

The ancients---those that could afford to drink wine, since it was a rich or nobleman's drink--- tended to be more concerned about being abstemious, being in control, and maintaining their sense of decorum and balance. Dignity, or keeping up appearances, was key to them (as a class). Consider the Greeks and the Romans, primarily. Consider the moral stories of the Judaic texts too. Noah had a big problem once, as I recall. And those guys from Gomorrah, well...

So it was okay, as long as you just got a nice buzz on, got a little mellow, but didn't take it too far.

The idea of drinking to excess was a considered a social no-no as it led to lack of control. Excess broke down the structure of a civilized man, and made him appear classless.

The only time when it was considered "okay" to over-indulge was in religious ceremonies, where you were letting in the "divine madness" of the gods.

Add to that that most wine was thick, sludgy, treacly and almost always sweet drink, which needed to be cut to reduce the intensity of the flavor. All the other things we read about being added, I suspect, were simply mankind's penchant for tinkering with flavors of things.

Oh, and another thing: I imagine the Ancients used wine in water not just to dilute the wine----but to help clean the nasty little microbes up in the water. Helped 'em live longer.

Hoke,

Thanks for the thoughtful reply! #1 and #2 sound the most likely to me.

There's a typo in your first sentence. Did you mean #1 and #2?

Yes, 1 and 2.

Hoke, Hi...

Depending much, I suppose, on how ancient those ancients have to be. Wine was routinely supplied to Roman legionnaires of all ranks wherever they found themselves in the world. Going back even quite a bit further, it is known today that even during the Bronze Age, Egyptian Pharaohs enjoyed wines that were shipped from Canaan. The growing of grapes and the production of wine was a major agricultural endeavor during the periods of the First and Second Temples in Jerusalem, and the kings of Judah and Israel were said to have owned large vineyards as well as vast stores of wine. It is also known today that stands lined the roads to both Cairo and Alexandria in pharaonic Egypt and at those both food and wines were available to travellers. Indeed, many of the wines were made from watermelons but at least several historians feel that grape wine was also available.

As much as these grape wines were prized, it must be understood that they were very different from wines as we know them today. They were often so intense and coarse that they needed a fair amount of “adjustment” before they were considered drinkable. To improve the bouquet, the Romans were known to add spices and scents to their wines. To make the wine sweeter, they added a syrup made by heating grape juice in lead containers for a long period over a low flame. To improve flavors and hide faults it was customary to add honey, pepper, chalk, gypsum, lime, resin, herbs and even sea water.
In the time of the First and Second Temples, wine was widely consumed by the local populace, but the very best wines were set aside for libations in the Temple in Jerusalem. Later the best wines were reserved for the wealthy and for us in various temples in both Greece and Rome.

Among the best examples of how wine was enjoyed not only by noblemen at sea and at home but with even the lowest of crew members and servants can be found in a re-reading of the Iliad and the Odyssey which serve nicely to show how wine, spit-roasted cattle and goats, and fornication were among the favored pastimes of noble and commoner alike.

Best
Rogov

For the same reason students in French universities do. Institutional food begets institutional wine, and the water makes it drinkable. Suspect the wine the ancients drank was of the same ilk. Except, of course, at the Wedding Feast at Cana.

Carl, Hi...

I cannot vouch for the quality of the wine served at the wedding at which Jesus was a guest but in modern day Cana (an independent village in the Upper Galilee, technically part of Nazereth) you will find street-side vendors selling "The Holy Wine of Cana". The wine comes in small bottles, depending on what was available on the day of bottling containing 175, 225 or 375 cl). Regardless of what size or shape the bottle, the wine sells for anywhre from US$ 3 - 5.

Whomever it is who is putting these bottles on the street buys rejected bulk wine from one of the country's larger wineries and puts his own label on (some of those with a drawing of Jesus, some with the Virgin Mary). Considering the number of flies and other insects found in the bottles, it even seems doubtful that the bottles were sterilized (or even washed) prior to filling. If I had to describe the few of these that I have tasted over the years my major descriptive term would be "undrinkable swill".

What the heck though.....everyone's entitled to make a buck.

Best
Rogov

Later the best wines were reserved for the wealthy and for us in various temples in both Greece and Rome.

Ah, so you were there in person.

I have also heard that they would heat the wine to advance the maturity and soften the wine (much like 3-5 years in the bottle might). Maybe they knew they didn't have as many years as we think we do? Does anyone know anything about this practice?

I'd pick all of the above, Tom, with the focus on 1 and 1.

The ancients---those that could afford to drink wine, since it was a rich or nobleman's drink--- tended to be more concerned about being abstemious, being in control, and maintaining their sense of decorum and balance. Dignity, or keeping up appearances, was key to them (as a class). Consider the Greeks and the Romans, primarily. Consider the moral stories of the Judaic texts too. Noah had a big problem once, as I recall. And those guys from Gomorrah, well...

So it was okay, as long as you just got a nice buzz on, got a little mellow, but didn't take it too far.

Add to that that most wine was thick, sludgy, treacly and almost always sweet drink, which needed to be cut to reduce the intensity of the flavor. All the other things we read about being added, I suspect, were simply mankind's penchant for tinkering with flavors of things.

Oh, and another thing: I imagine the Ancients used wine in water not just to dilute the wine----but to help clean the nasty little microbes up in the water. Helped 'em live longer.

Hoke, by way of addendum, some notes I took a few years back based on a wonderful exhibit at the Jewish Institute in NYC on ancient wines:

Wine almost always was mixed with water for drinking; undiluted wine ("merum") was considered the habit of provincials and barbarians. The Romans usually mixed one part wine to two parts water (sometimes hot or even salted with sea water to cut some of the sweetness). The Greeks tended to dilute their wine with three or four parts water, which they always mixed by adding the wine. The intention of the "symposium" was to enjoy the aesthetic pleasure of the wine, to be intoxicated just enough to have conversation stimulated. At its Roman counterpart, the "convivium", there was a tendency to get drunk.

The exhibition traced a number of games that were played at the convivium, including a stick/string/ball game and including an actual set of parts from the game.

Sidebar: I haven't read them all, but there is a mystery series by an author named David Wishart set in early imperial Rome, where the protagonist (married to Ovid's daughter) is a detective. But he's also a winegeek, and each book has a fair amount of wine content. I have no clue re "appellations" of ancient Rome, but the character has strong opinions, including how much water is needed for various wines. Fun reading, though no clue if any relation to real life.

From observation, it seems that it is not unusual for Italian and Portuguese manual workers to mix their wine with spritzy water to drink with lunch. Probably refreshing and keeps one from falling down drunk into a ditch, etc.

And let us not forget the current day michelada from Mexico, a tasty blend of beer with various ingredients. And, I suppose, the old standby sangria.

Bob: good addendum. And I always wondered about the marvelous Greek tradition of kottybos in some of those symposia.

The ancients---those that could afford to drink wine, since it was a rich or nobleman's drink--- tended to be more concerned about being abstemious, being in control, and maintaining their sense of decorum and balance. Dignity, or keeping up appearances, was key to them (as a class). Consider the Greeks and the Romans, primarily.

I am currently enjoying reading "Wine - a cultural history" by John Varriano, and a very different picture is painted there...

Drunkeness in Greek symposia figures in literature. Examples given were from Plato and Eubulus. Though Plato admittedly did also warn against excessive drink, especially by young men (when I was reading that I was thinking of parallels in British society where we frown on binge drinking by youth) - older men should be allowed more according to Plato

Cicero told of a typical Roman dinner party with people coming and going unsteady on their feeet from drink, some still drunk from the day before, and of floors filthy with spilled wine.

There is a historical record of fellows of a Roman medical college being allocated 1,780 litres of wine a year.

The idea of Carpe Diem was also important - live for the day - which seemed to mean "eat, drink and be merry for tomorrow you die".

To come back the original question, it also mentioned that the wine was very strong, even when diluted. And I think the Greeks used se water didn't they? So mayhbe the salty taste was important to them.

Indeed, many of today's graduate students at university might wish their symposia had something akin to those of the Romans.

Indeed, many of today's graduate students at university might wish their symposia had something akin to those of the Romans.

And drinking in the medical profession has changed little

Indeed, many of today's graduate students at university might wish their symposia had something akin to those of the Romans.

And drinking in the medical profession has changed little

Recently had interaction with several doctors in different fields: pulmonary, thoracic and heart surgeons, anesthesiologist, radiologist, and GP.

Each and every one of them was a wine lover, and collector, and was thoroughly knowledgeable about cult wines (primarily CA, but also French and Italian and Australian), and a couple were currently or had been traveling to different wine regions, nationally and internationally.

[James Roscoe]

remember that drinking fermented whatever was part of every Ancient culture as it was generally safer than drinking straight from the local water supply. While people might have become immune to local water bacteria, they continued to mix water in their alcohol and serve it to all ages, genders and social classes. This meant even young children were drinking wine or beer, albeit very water stuff. This practice was carried on right until very late modern times.

From the ancient Greek playwright Aristophanes (448-380 BC) there is a quotation, which reads: - “ Here drink this also, mingled three and two. Demus Zeus! But it’s sweet and bears the three parts well!”

Heating the grape juice (into a syrupy-sugary texture) was just one way the ancients had to make it "last" longer (preserve it better).

Salute

I think it was more often the other way around--they added wine to water. The alcohol and acids killed off the bacteria to make the water safer to drink.

I don't deny that alcohol in low levels of dilution has been used as a safe alternative to "pure" water for many centuries. But I think that is totally different from the ancient Greek and Roman cultures of wine drinking (which in some cases may have been slightly diluted), where the principle goal was to have a "good time".

Hi Steve,
I’m more inclined to agree with Hoke and Daniel.

Hoke wrote;
The idea of drinking to excess was a considered a social no-no as it led to lack of control. Excess broke down the structure of a civilized man, and made him appear classless.

The only time when it was considered "okay" to over-indulge was in religious ceremonies, where you were letting in the "divine madness" of the gods.

Add to that that most wine was thick, sludgy, treacly and almost always sweet drink, which needed to be cut to reduce the intensity of the flavor. All the other things we read about being added, I suspect, were simply mankind's penchant for tinkering with flavors of things.

Daniel wrote;
As much as these grape wines were prized, it must be understood that they were very different from wines, as we know them today. They were often so intense and coarse that they needed a fair amount of “adjustment” before they were considered drinkable…

BTW you might find the following link interesting
https://mospace.umsystem.edu/xmlui/bits ... sequence=3

Salute

Thank you for the link, Victorwine. It looks interesting. I have only skim read, but my conclusions on the sobriety of Roman society - assuming that is the issue on which you agree/disagree - are pretty much as before: a) there was a lot of drunkeness and b) it was frowned upon in some quarters. But if anyone finds the issue interesting I can only recommend they take a look at the document and draw their own conclusions.

There is also some discussion on the ratios used for dilution, but I have not yet noticed much about the reason for dilution.

I think you would have to investigate why any particular individual would do it and then report the various reasons you found. I have seen the practice today, at my house, when relatives have visited who were not oenophiles. These people have had to put up with Lynn and me making a much bigger deal about wine than they would normally, because they wouldn’t ordinarily think about it. But to be sociable and fit in to our individual family culture as best as they could, a couple of them have actually added water or soda to the wine that was offered to them. They wanted to participate in our ritual with the least changing effect on them. I have also heard that Chinese people have diluted the Lafites they buy for thousands of dollars each to make the liquid slide down easier, for similar reasons to my relatives adding water, or soda, to wine.

Regarding Jesus changing water into wine at Cana, it is interesting (to me) to view the story through David Hume’s treatise on miracles. The gist is that when an apparent miracle happens, which is the greater miracle?: that what someone thought was a miracle actually was? Or whether a trick or something was performed and mistake was made about it really being a miracle. Hume opined that the lesser of the two "miracles" was the better explanation.

Once when I was a kid a bunch of us were playing Russian roulette with one of my grandfather’s nickel plated revolvers. We passed it around and “click, click, click,” - great fun for kids who can’t think of anything better to do at moment in juvenile time. So one time when the gun was passed to me, I slipped a cartridge into one of the chambers and said, “Holy Shit!” When my friends were alerted thus, and looked my way, I ejected the cartridge “plunk” onto the floor, and everybody gasped at the tragedy that we had narrowly escaped. That story, and the lesson it contained, has probably been told to future generations by the folks involved.

In Jesus’s case, a clue about the event comes from his rebuke of his mother, who asked him what could be done about the wine shortage. (This is all from memory of reading about it, I wasn’t there and it has been a long time since I read the story; so if some detail in incorrect, I apologize.) Something like, “Why do you ask me, woman?” I think it was a possible reaction to his guilt in the matter, that he might have been hiding some good wine, as I have done at such events, keeping it under my feet to drink surreptitiously while others were content with the plonk provided.

How difficult would it have been to drag out the good wine from its hiding place and announce to the revelers and drunks, “Look, I changed this water to wine, drink up?” If Jesus knew he could do such a thing, why would he criticize his mother for asking him to do something about the situation? Which is the greater miracle, as Hume would ask, that a trick like this was pulled, or that Jesus actually changed water into wine?