1846.] Banquet in the Days of the Empire. 239 spacious saloon. Elegant sofas, inlaid with tortoise-shell, decked below with white hangings embroidered with gold, and furnished with cushions and pillows, surrounded a table of cedar-wood, constituting together the triclinium.1 The guests all reclining in their allotted places, their sandals were removed by the slaves, and water was offered them in silver bowls for their ablutions. Soon appeared the gustatorium,2 or the first course. It would be difficult to find anything in modern times, to vie with the table-service and ingenious arrangements, here described by Becker. For instance; "in the centre of the plateau, ornamented with tortoise-shell, stood an ass of bronze, on either side of which hung silver panniers, filled with white and black olives; on the back of the beast sat a Silenus, from whose skin the most delicious garum, (a sauce) flowed upon the sumen beneath. Near this, on two silver gridirons lay delicately dressed sausages, beneath which Syrian plums, mixed with the seeds of the pomegranate, presented the appearance of glowing coals. Anon came on the This consisted of a brilliant succession of fish, flesh and fowl. Ring-doves and field-fares, capons and ducks, and mullets and turbots, all tempted the eye and the palate, and produced in the guests a most agreeable state of indecision. And now, too, began to flow freely the old Falernian; and all began to be merry. The boar was the caput coenae, or chief dish of the Roman dinner. Of all varieties, the Tuscan carried the palm. On this occasion, it was served in a manner worthy its eminence. It was surrounded by eight sucking-pigs, made of sweet paste, and surprisingly like real ones. On the tusks of the boar, hung little baskets, woven of palm-twigs, and containing Syrian and Theban dates. This dish well discussed, and others no less singular, but too numerous to mention, and the table carefully cleared, an ample dessert closed the coena proper. 1 The Roman Triclinium properly consisted of three lecti, each having three places, so that the whole would accommodate nine persons. They were arranged, so as to form three sides of a rectangle, leaving the space on the fourth side for the approach of the servants. After the introduction of the round table, one semi-circular sofa was used, which from its shape, was called the Sigma. 2 The Coena consisted of three parts. First, the gustus or gustatorium. This was a kind of antepast, and consisted of vegetables, shell-fish, and sauces. Second, the fercula. This was the coena proper, or the several courses. In early times, three was a large number, but with the increase of luxury, more were added. Hence Juvenal, Sat. 1. 94. Quis fercula septem secreto coenavit avus? Third, mensae secundae, or dessert. See the Excursus of Becker on Meals. entertainment. It was a curious custom to present the guests with elegant little trifles, as a kind of souvenir of the occasion. This was effected by our host Lentulus in a quite peculiar manner. A sudden noise over-head attracted the eyes of all. At once the ceiling opened, and slowly came down from some invisible hand, a large silver hoop, which scattered, as it revolved, its rich gifts of perfume-vials of silver and alabaster, and silver garlands of beautifully chiselled leaves and circlets. The dessert was not inferior to the other part of the feast. In the midst of a tempting array of pastry, "stood a well-modelled Vertumnus, who held in his apron a great variety of fruits. Around lay sweet quinces, full of almonds, and having the appearance of sea-urchins, with melons cut into various shapes." A slave handed round tooth-picks made of the lentiscus, or mastick tree, and Lentulus invited the guests to partake of the fruits with which the pod was loaded. It will be seen that this Roman banquet was no intellectual Symposium, like that described by Plato and Xenophon. Becker has purposely shunned the difficult task of introducing to his scene in familiar conversation the Roman scholars of the Augustan age, as this would have interfered with his main design. There were not wanting, however, among the guests some allusions to the character and policy of Augustus, which betrayed the irritated Gallus into some intemperate expressions of disloyalty and treason, which hurried on the consummation of his unhappy fate. On the morrow, the Emperor was informed of what had fallen from his lips; the whole matter was referred to the senate; and the result was a decree of banishment and confiscation. But the proud spirit of Gallus_brooked not so disgraceful an end; and ere the lictor had arrived to announce the sentence, he had struck deep into his breast the same sword that once had achieved many a victory, and he lay on his couch covered with his own blood. We must here close our remarks upon this valuable work. For its learned author, who has successfully penetrated this hitherto unexplored field of Roman Antiquities, and brought back such rich fruits of his toils, we cherish the most grateful sentiments of admiration and respect. This book marks an era on this subject, and is a complete view, in a most attractive form, of the private life of the Romans. The original work has suffered no essential loss in the process of translation into English, in the edition, from which we have frequently quoted, in the course of this Article. From a careful 1846.] Natural Theology. 241 comparison, in many places, we have found that Mr. Metcalfe, the English translator, has executed his task with accuracy and faithfulness. The external arrangement of the different parts of the work he has very skilfully changed. In the original, the Scenes are "separated by a profound gulf of Notes and Excursus, which is quite sufficient to drown the interest of the tale." This difficulty has been remedied by arranging the Scenes in succession, by setting the Notes in their several places at the foot of the pages in the narrative, and throwing together the Excursus in the form of an appendix. We may be allowed to say, however, that the book would have gained yet more in the English dress, if the author had taken some liberties with the style of the original, and broken up the many long and involved German sentences. With all their varied merits, the Germans have sadly neglected the cultivation of rhetorical excellence. On the other hand, it seems to us, that the translator has resorted too freely to the process of "lopping," and has left out happy references, and entirely omitted the discussion of matters of considerable importance. We must find fault too, with the numberless abbreviated allusions, which are copied unexplained, into the English work. With the exception of the learned Germans, it is not to be supposed that all scholars are familiar with every author that ever wrote in Greek or Latin, and that an arbitrary abbreviation made of two or three letters, and sometimes of a single letter is enough to suggest at once the name of the writer and of the work, to which reference is made. ARTICLE II. NATURAL THEOLOGY. Furnished by a Society of Clergymen. It has long been our conviction, that Natural Theology deserves far more attention than it has received from modern divines. In a preceding number of this Review, we expressed our regret that so noble a department of study should have fallen in 1 See an Article on the State of Theological Science and Education in our VOL. IIL No. 10. 22 to such unmerited neglect. It seems to be regarded by many as, at best, a convenient preparative for sacred science, rather than as an enlarged part of the science itself. By others it is regarded as a preliminary study which may be dispensed with, often without loss, sometimes with positive gain. Several of our modern systems of divinity treat this department in a cursory and illogical manner, and some of them overlook it entirely. Dwight has said but little which Charnock had not said before him. Hill, Dick, Knapp, Storr and Flatt, have done very much less in this branch of their science, than had been accomplished by their predecessors. German theology, as a whole, is deficient in this department. Even the systems of German ethics are treatises on biblical theology, rather than on the dictates of our moral sense. We have, indeed, a few recent works on Natural Religion which claim a respectful notice. The Bridgewater Treatises, particularly those of Whewell, Bell, Kidd, Kirby, and Chalmers, are of great value, chiefly however as affording a collection of materials for the formation of a theological system, rather than as of themselves exhibiting such a system in its true proportions. The more extended treatise of Chalmers on Natural Theology is rich in suggestive remark, and affords honorable proof of the comprehensiveness of its author's intellect, the accuracy of his observations, and the extent of his scientific inquiries. The literary world have been too much astonished at the exuberance of Dr. Chalmers' fancy, for a proper appreciation Country, in the Bib. Sac. and Theol. Review, Vol. I. pp. 743, 744. We stated in that Article, that in examining candidates for license to preach the Gospel, we have found but few individuals who could readily prove the unity of God, or who were sure that a plurality of deities can be disproved by arguments from nature alone; but few who could promptly reply to the philosophical objections by which such arguments may be met; or who could establish and vindicate the benevolence of the Deity on principles of reason; or who had formed settled opinions, and could give the reasons for their opinions on the foundation of virtue, on the nature of the moral sense, and on other fundamental topics in this branch of theology; but few, therefore, who were prepared to contend with atheists and infidels, on principles of reasoning, which must be admitted by even the enemies of the inspired volume. ? It is deficient not so much in the number, as in the quality of its treatises on Natural Theology. Some of the German Encylopaediasts give us the names of more than a hundred different modern treatises on the existence of God, and also more than a hundred on the immortality of the soul.-See the Encyclopaedias of Hagenbach and Pelt. Compare Brettschneider's Entwickelung § 58 and § 132. Hase's Hutterus Redivivus, § 52—§ 68, and § 129. Hahn's Lehrbuch des christlichen Glaubens § 29-50, and § 141—§ 144. 1846.] Works on Natural Theology. 243 of his philosophical acumen. We think, however, that he has not given so full an analysis as he should have given, of those fundamental principles which must be reasoned upon in Natural Theology, as well as in every other science; and from a failure to recognize these laws of belief, he has formed too low an opinion of the subject on which he so eloquently discourses. He is satisfied with saying, that "the theology of nature sheds powerful light on the being of a God," that "even from its unaided demonstrations we can reach a considerable degree of probability, both for his moral and natural attributes." He declares, however, that "Natural Theology is quite overrated by those who would represent it as the foundation of the edifice" of the Christian religion; that "it is not the foundation, but rather the taper by which we must grope our way to the edifice;" that it is not so much a teacher of religious truth, as an "inquirer or rather a prompter to inquiry" respecting it. We think that many of Dr. Chalmers' views of the religion of nature are less scientific and correct than those of Lord Brougham, and that his Lordship's Discourse of Natural Theology has opened a pathway of investigation which our divines will, sooner or later, be persuaded to follow. The compressed energy of many parts of that Discourse demand our highest praise. We could also speak in commendatory terms of some other extended treatises, and a few minor essays in this department; but the great majority of modern contributions to Natural Theology do not appear to be the results of a thoroughly logical and independent investigation. Some of them are improvements upon the Natural Theology of Paley, as this work was an advance upon the productions of Ray and Derham. We still need an original, a systematic analysis of the arguments and principles which lie scattered throughout the practical treatises which have been mentioned. We should rejoice to see a republication of Berkeley's Minute Philosopher, of Dr. Samuel Clarke's celebrated Demonstration of the Being and Attributes of God, and of the Controversial Papers which were exchanged between Clarke and Leibnitz. We believe that the mind of our theological public would be occupied more profitably by these discussions, than by such frequent, controversies as we now have, on the comparative advantages of the surplice and the black gown, of kneeling with the face directed away from, or towards the congregation. All the departments, whether more or less extensive, of theological study, should be cultivated with system, and with a zeal proportioned to their value. In the science of Medicine |