THE HISTORY OF BITTERS Part Two: The Medicinal Wines of Greece and Rome
Written by N. Streawbridge| 29 April 2026
How measured botanicals, controlled maceration and written formulas began to give bitters a recognisable pharmaceutical form
The decisive change was not that the Greeks and Romans suddenly invented modern bitters. It was that botanical wines became written formulas: plants were measured, tied into linen, steeped for defined periods, strained, transferred and preserved.
From fermented medicine to a written formulary
Part One of this series followed the earliest known lineage of bitters through ancient Egypt, where aromatic herbs, spices, fruits and resins were carried in fermented beer or wine. In the Greek and Roman world, that tradition became more systematic. Wine and fresh grape must were no longer simply ingredients within a compound remedy; they became carefully selected medicinal media in their own right.
This was still not the modern digestive bitter. There was no small bottle of concentrated tincture and no standard aperitif or after-dinner dose. The surviving preparations were medicinal wines made for many different purposes. Yet their structure is increasingly familiar: a defined botanical, a measured quantity of wine or must, a period of contact, and a final act of straining, transferring or sealing.
The Hippocratic tradition: food and drink as medicine
The Hippocratic writers treated food, drink, climate, constitution and daily regimen as active influences on health. In On Ancient Medicine, wine is not described as uniformly good or bad. Its effect depends on its strength, quantity and on the person drinking it. That way of thinking matters to the history of bitters: the vehicle itself had properties, and the physician was expected to understand how it altered the preparation and the patient.
A surviving Hippocratic preparation for ulcer treatment combined frankincense, gall and saffron with unripe-grape juice and an austere, dark and fragrant wine. It was not a beverage bitter, and its wound-use context should not be confused with a digestive tonic. Nevertheless, it shows how deliberately the character of the grape product was chosen. Sour unripe juice, astringent gall, aromatic resin, saffron and wine were made to work as one pharmaceutical composition.
Dioscorides: medicinal wines become technical recipes
The clearest step towards a recognisable bitters formulary appears in the first century CE in De Materia Medica by Pedanius Dioscorides, a Greek physician working within the Roman world. Book V is devoted largely to vines, grapes, wines and related preparations. Its recipes are strikingly practical. Botanicals are pounded, sifted or bruised; some are wrapped in linen and weighted so that they remain submerged; jars are sealed; and maceration may continue for days or months before the wine is strained into a clean vessel.
Wormwood is particularly important. Its powerful bitterness was not disguised or treated as an accidental taste. It was deliberately combined with wine or must, sometimes alone and sometimes balanced by fragrant roots, bark, flowers and fruit. This is one of the points at which bitterness starts to become part of the architecture of the preparation.
Three formulas that show the transition
Wormwood wine — the simple maceration
Historical formula. Wormwood, 1 lb; grape must, 9 gal.
Method. Beat the wormwood, bind it in thin linen and place it in the must for two months; then remove or strain it and store the wine.
Why it matters. The plant is measured, contained in an early infusion bag, given a defined contact time and removed before storage.
Aromatic wormwood wine
Historical formula. Wormwood, 3–4 oz; Syrian nard, cinnamon, cassia, flowers of juncus odoratus and Phoenician dates, 2 oz each; grape must, 9 gal.
Method. Pound the ingredients, place them in the must, seal for two or three months, then strain into other jars.
Why it matters. This is not bitterness alone. Bitter wormwood is layered with aromatic bark, fragrant root, flowers and dates—the same broad architecture that will reappear much later in complex bitters and aromatised wines.
Hyssop wine
Historical formula. Bruised Cilician hyssop leaves, 1 lb; grape must, 9 gal; small stones sufficient to sink the bundle.
Method. Wrap the hyssop and stones in thin linen, submerge the bundle, then strain and transfer the wine after forty days.
Why it matters. The recipe shows deliberate control of extraction: particle preparation, submersion, contact time and separation of the finished liquid.
Dioscorides records many more wines: horehound, betony, dittany, thyme, savory, elecampane, nard, myrrh, iris and several aromatic combinations. Some are distinctly bitter; others are pungent, resinous or intensely fragrant. Together they show that medicinal wine had become a broad formulation system rather than a single remedy.
Rome: the pharmacy enters the agricultural household
The Roman contribution is especially revealing because medicinal wines also appear in agricultural writing. Columella’s De Re Rustica is a practical work concerned with the management of an estate, yet Book XII moves easily between wine production, preservation and remedies. The boundary between cellar and pharmacy was porous.
Columella records wines made with horehound, squill, wormwood, hyssop, southernwood, thyme, fennel, pennyroyal, rosemary and myrtle. Some were fermented with the plant; others used a concentrated herbal portion that was later added to a larger volume of must. The recipes preserve not only ingredients but process decisions—when to harvest, whether to dry the plant, how long to leave it in contact and when to remove it.
Columella’s wormwood wine
Historical formula. Pontic wormwood, 1 Roman lb; grape must, 4 sextarii; one urna of Aminean must.
Method. Boil the wormwood with four sextarii of must until one quarter remains. Cool the remainder and add it to one urna of Aminean must.
Why it matters. Here the bitter fraction is first concentrated and then dispersed into the larger wine volume—a more technically controlled approach than simple maceration.
Historical Note. From the Amineae to Modern Campania.
The Latin name
Amineae did not describe one uniform grape variety in the modern sense. Pliny distinguished five Aminean vines and placed them at the head of the Italian grapes because their wines combined body with durability. He associated members of this vine family particularly with the vineyards around Mount Vesuvius and the hills of Surrentum, placing them firmly within Campania’s celebrated Roman wine landscape.
The strongest present-day Campanian association is
Greco, especially the white grape used for Greco di Tufo in Irpinia. Campanian viticultural tradition and the regional agricultural authority identify Greco with the ancient
Aminea Gemina, one of the highly regarded Aminean forms described by Roman agricultural writers. Fresh Greco must is therefore the most historically defensible present-day analogue for Columella’s ingredient.
The connection remains a historical identification rather than a proven genetic descent: no ancient vine securely labelled “Aminean” is available for direct DNA comparison. Fiano, Falanghina, Coda di Volpe and Aglianico are also important old Campanian cultivars, but they are better understood as companions within the same surviving regional wine culture—not as confirmed descendants of the Aminean vines.
Columella’s horehound wine
Historical formula. Dried tender horehound stalks, 8 Roman lb; sweet must, 200 sextarii.
Method. Tie the dried stalks into bundles, add them to the sweet must so that they ferment with it, then remove the horehound and seal the clarified wine.
Why it matters. The plant participates in fermentation itself, preserving the older relationship between botanical medicine and the production of the fermented drink.
Historical Note. How different was this from wine today? Columella’s wormwood wine was not a finished table wine subsequently flavoured with herbs. A concentrated preparation of wormwood and grape must was cooled and added to a much larger quantity of fresh Aminean must, allowing the bitter botanical to become part of the wine as it fermented. The result would have been an unfortified but markedly bitter, herbaceous medicinal wine. It was closer to a fermented botanical preparation than to modern Greco di Tufo, yet also unlike modern vermouth, which is usually compounded from finished wine, several botanicals, sweetening agents and additional alcohol. Its flavour, strength and stability would have depended on spontaneous fermentation, the vintage and the individual cellar.
What had changed?
By the end of this period, several features of the later bitters tradition were already present. Bitter plants were being selected intentionally. Aromatics were used to broaden and balance the sensory profile. Extraction was controlled through bruising, pounding, linen bundles, heat and time. Recipes distinguished between fresh wine, grape must, raisin wine and unripe-grape concentrate. Finished preparations were strained, transferred and stored.
What had not yet appeared was equally important. These were not concentrated spirit tinctures, and they were not yet the proprietary digestifs, amari or cocktail bitters of later centuries. They belonged to a medical and household tradition in which wine functioned simultaneously as ingredient, solvent, preservative and medicine.
The next stage
After Greece and Rome, the tradition did not disappear. Formulas travelled through Byzantine, Arabic and medieval European medicine. Bitter aloe preparations such as Hiera Picra—the “Holy Bitter”—would become influential, while monasteries and apothecaries developed increasingly complex medicinal wines, electuaries, distilled waters and elixirs. That is where Part Three will begin.
Historical note. The quantities and methods above are preserved as historical evidence, not modern instructions. Ancient plant identities, strengths, measures and processes may be uncertain, and several of the botanicals are unsuitable or unsafe for unsupervised use.
References
1. Hippocrates. On Ancient Medicine, trans. Francis Adams. https://classics.mit.edu/Hippocrates/ancimed.html
2. Dioscorides. De Materia Medica, Book V, trans. Tess Anne Osbaldeston (2000), especially the medicinal-wine passages. https://archive.org/details/dioscorides-de-materia-medica-2000-english
3. Columella. On Agriculture, vol. III, Books X–XII, trans. E. S. Forster and Edward H. Heffner. https://archive.org/details/columella0003unse
Editorial basis: Wildberry Book of Bitters research corpus, checked against the cited primary texts. Source units are intentionally preserved; no modern dose conversions have been introduced.
Recent Posts












