ALCHEMY: ANCIENT AND MODERN
Being a brief account of the alchemistic doctrines, and their relations, to
mysticism on the one hand, and to recent discoveries in physical science on the
other hand; together with some particulars regarding the lives and teachings of
the most noted alchemists.
H. STANLEY REDGROVE., B.Sc. (Lond.), F.C.S.
Author of "On the Calculation of Thermo-Chemical Constants,"
"Matter, Spirit and the Cosmos," ETC.
LONDON
WILLIAM RIDER & SON, LTD.
8 PATERNOSTER ROW, E.C. 4
1922
First published . . . 1911
Second Edition . . . 1922
Page v
PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION
IT is exceedingly gratifying to me that a second edition of this book should
be called for. But still more welcome is the change in the attitude of the
educated world towards the old-time alchemists and their theories which has
taken place during the past few years.
The theory of the origin of Alchemy put forward in Chapter I has led to
considerable discussion; but whilst this theory has met with general acceptance,
some of its earlier critics took it as implying far more than is actually the
case. As a result of further research my conviction of its truth has become more
fully confirmed, and in my recent work entitled Bygone Beliefs (Rider, 1920),
under the title of "The Quest of the Philosopher's Stone," I have found it
possible to adduce further evidence in this connection. At the same time, whilst
I became increasingly convinced that the main alchemistic hypotheses were drawn
from the domain of mystical theology and applied to physics and chemistry by way
of analogy, it also became evident to me that the crude physiology of bygone
ages and remnants of the old phallic faith formed a further and subsidiary
source of alchemistic theory. I have barely, if at all, touched on this
Page vi
matter in the present work; the reader who is interested will find it dealt with
in some detail in "The Phallic Element in Alchemical Doctrine" in my Bygone
Beliefs.
In view of recent research in the domain of Radioactivity and the consequent
advance in knowledge that has resulted since this book was first published, I
have carefully considered the advisability of rewriting the whole of the last
chapter, but came to the conclusion that the time for this was not yet ripe, and
that, apart from a few minor emendations, the chapter had better remain very
much as it originally stood. My reason for this course was that, whilst
considerably more is known to-day, than was the case in 1911, concerning the
very complex transmutations undergone spontaneously by the radioactive elements
-- knowledge helping further to elucidate the problem of the constitution of the
so-called "elements" of the chemist -- the problem really cognate to my subject,
namely that of effecting a transmutation of one element into another at will,
remains in almost the same state of indeterminateness as in 1911. In 1913, Sir
William Ramsay1 thought he had obtained evidence for the transmutation of
hydrogen into helium by the action of the electric discharge, and Professors
Collie and Patterson 2 thought they had obtained evidence of the
Page vii
transmutation of hydrogen into neon by similar means. But these observations (as
well as Sir William Ramsay's earlier transmutational experiments) failed to be
satisfactorily confirmed; 3 and since the death of the latter, little, if
anything, appears to have been done to settle the questions raised by his
experiments. Reference must, however, be made to a very interesting
investigation by Sir Ernest Rutherford on the "Collision of -Particles with
Light Atoms,"4 from which it appears certain that when bombarded with the
swiftly-moving -particles given off by radium-C, the atoms of nitrogen may be
disintegrated, one of the products being hydrogen. The other product is possibly
helium,5 though this has not been proved. In view of Rutherford's results a
further repetition of Ramsay's experiments would certainly appear to be
advisable.
As concerns the spontaneous transmutations undergone by the radioactive
elements, the facts appear to indicate (or, at least, can be brought into some
sort of order by supposing) the atom to consist of a central nucleus and an
outer shell, as suggested by Sir Ernest Rutherford. The nucleus may be compared
to the sun of a solar system. It is excessively small, but in it the mass of the
atom is almost entirely concentrated. It is positively charged, the charge being
neutralised by that of the free electrons which revolve like planets about it,
and which by their orbits account for the
Page viii
volume of the atom. The atomic weight of the element depends upon the central
sun; but the chemical properties of the element are determined by the number of
electrons in the shell; this number is the same as that representing the
position of the element in the periodic system. Radioactive change originates in
the atomic nucleus. The expulsion of an -particle therefrom decreases the atomic
weight by 4 units, necessitates (since the -particle carries two positive
charges) the removal of two electrons from the shell in order to maintain
electrical neutrality, and hence changes the chemical nature of the body,
transmuting the element into one occupying a position two places to the left in
the periodic system (for example, the change of radium into niton). But
radioactivity sometimes results in the expulsion of a -particle from the
nucleus. This results in the addition of an electron to the shell, and hence
changes the chemical character of the element, transmuting it into one occupying
a position one place to the right in the periodic system, but without altering
its atomic weight. Consequently, the expulsion of one -and two -particles from
the nucleus, whilst decreasing the atomic weight of the element by 4, leaves the
number of electrons in the shell, and thus the chemical properties of the
element, unaltered. These remarkable conclusions are amply borne out by the
facts, and the discovery of elements (called "isobares") having the same atomic
weight but different chemical properties, and of those (called "isotopes")
having identical chemical characters but different atomic weights, must be
regarded as one of the most significant and important discoveries of recent
years. Some further reference
Page ix
to this theory will be found in 77 and 81: the reader who wishes to follow the
matter further should consult the fourth edition of Professor Frederick Soddy's
The Interpretation of Radium (1920), and the two chapters on the subject in his
Science and Life (1920), one of which is a popular exposition and the other a
more technical one.
These advances in knowledge all point to the possibility of effecting
transmutations at will, but so far attempts to achieve this, as I have already
indicated, cannot be regarded as altogether satisfactory. Several methods of
making gold, or rather elements chemically identical with gold, once the method
of controlling radioactive change is discovered (as assuredly it will be) are
suggested by Sir Ernest Rutherford's theory of the nuclear atom. Thus, the
expulsion of two -particles from bismuth or one from thallium would yield the
required result. Or lead could be converted into mercury by the expulsion of one
-particle, and this into thallium by the expulsion of one -particle, yielding
gold by the further expulsion of an -particle. But, as Professor Soddy remarks
in his Science and Life just referred to, "if man ever achieves this further
control over Nature, it is quite certain that the last thing he would want to do
would be to turn lead or mercury into gold -- for the sake of gold. The energy
that would be liberated, if the control of these sub-atomic processes were as
possible as is the control of ordinary chemical changes, such as combustion,
would far exceed in importance and value the gold. Rather it would pay to
transmute gold into silver or some base metal."
Page x
In 101 of the book I suggest that the question of the effect on the world of
finance of the discovery of an inexpensive method of transmuting base metal into
gold on a large scale is one that should appeal to a novelist specially gifted
with imagination. Since the words were first written a work has appeared in
which something approximating to what was suggested has been attempted and very
admirably achieved. My reference is to Mr. H. G. Wells's novel, The World Set
Free, published in 1914.
In conclusion I should like to thank the very many reviewers who found so
many good things to say concerning the first edition of this book. For kind
assistance in reading the proofs of this edition my best thanks are due also and
are hereby tendered to my wife, and my good friend Gerald Druce, Esq., M.Sc.
H. S. R.
191, CAMDEN ROAD, LONDON, N.W. 1.
October, 1921.
1. See his "The Presence of Helium in the Gas from the Interior of an X-Ray
Bulb," Journal of the Chemical Society, vol. ciii. (1913), pp. 264 et seq.
2. See their "The Presence of Neon in Hydrogen after the Passage of the Electric
Discharge through the latter at Low Pressures," ibid., pp. 419 et seq.; and "The
Production of Neon and Helium by the Electric Discharge," Proceedings of the
Royal Society, A, vol. xci. (1915), pp. 30 et seq.
3. See especially the report of negative experiments by Mr. A. C. G. Egerton,
published in Proceedings of the Royal Society, A, vol. xci. (1915), pp. 180 et
seq.
4. See the Philosophical Magazine for June, 1919, 6th Series, vol. xxxvii. pp.
537-587.
5. Or perhaps an isotope of helium (see below).
Page xi
PREFACE
THE number of books in the English language dealing with the interesting
subject of Alchemy is not sufficiently great to render an apology necessary for
adding thereto. Indeed, at the present time there is an actual need for a
further contribution on this subject. The time is gone when it was regarded as
perfectly legitimate to point to Alchemy as an instance of the aberrations of
the human mind. Recent experimental research has brought about profound
modifications in the scientific notions regarding the chemical elements, and,
indeed, in the scientific concept of the physical universe itself; and a certain
resemblance can be traced between these later views and the theories of bygone
Alchemy. The spontaneous change of one "element" into another has been
witnessed, and the recent work of Sir William Ramsay suggests the possibility of
realising the old alchemistic dream -- the transmutation of the "base" metals
into gold.
The basic idea permeating all the alchemistic theories appears to have been
this: All the metals (and, indeed, all forms of matter) are one in origin, and
are produced by an evolutionary process. The Soul of them all is one and the
same; it is only the
Page xii
Soul that is permanent; the body or outward form, i.e., the mode of
manifestation of the Soul, is transitory, and one form may be transmuted into
another. The similarity, indeed it might be said, the identity, between this
view and the modern etheric theory of matter is at once apparent.
The old alchemists reached the above conclusion by a theoretical method, and
attempted to demonstrate the validity of their theory by means of experiment; in
which, it appears, they failed. Modern science, adopting the reverse process,
for a time lost hold of the idea of the unity of the physical universe, to gain
it once again by the experimental method. It was in the elaboration of this
grand fundamental idea that Alchemy failed. If I were asked to contrast Alchemy
with the chemical and physical science of the nineteenth century I would say
that, whereas the latter abounded in a wealth of much accurate detail and much
relative truth, it lacked philosophical depth and insight; whilst Alchemy,
deficient in such accurate detail, was characterised by a greater degree of
philosophical depth and insight; for the alchemists did grasp the fundamental
truth of the Cosmos, although they distorted it and made it appear grotesque.
The alchemists cast their theories in a mould entirely fantastic, even
ridiculous -- they drew unwarrantable analogies -- and hence their views cannot
be accepted in these days of modern science. But if we cannot approve of their
theories in toto, we can nevertheless appreciate the fundamental ideas at the
root of them. And it is primarily with the object of pointing out this
similarity between these ancient ideas regarding the physical
Page xiii
universe and the latest products of scientific thought, that this book has been
written.
It is a regrettable fact that the majority of works dealing with the subject
of Alchemy take a one-sided point of view. The chemists generally take a purely
physical view of the subject, and instead of trying to understand its mystical
language, often (I do not say always) prefer to label it nonsense and the
alchemist a fool. On the other hand, the mystics, in many cases, take a purely
transcendental view of the subject, forgetting the fact that the alchemists
were, for the most part, concerned with operations of a physical nature. For a
proper understanding of Alchemy, as I hope to make plain in the first chapter of
this work, a synthesis of both points of view is essential; and, since these two
aspects are so intimately and essentially connected with one another, this is
necessary even when, as in the following work, one is concerned primarily with
the physical, rather than the purely mystical, aspect of the subject.
Now, the author of this book may lay claim to being a humble student of both
Chemistry and what may be generalised under the terms Mysticism and
Transcendentalism; and he hopes that this perhaps rather unusual combination of
studies has enabled him to take a broad-minded view of the theories of the
alchemists, and to adopt a sympathetic attitude towards them.
With regard to the illustrations, the author must express his thanks to the
authorities of the British Museum for permission to photograph engraved
portraits and illustrations from old works in the
Page xiv
British Museum Collections, and to G. H. Gabb, Esq., F.C.S., for permission to
photograph engraved portraits in his possession.
The author's heartiest thanks are also due to Frank E. Weston, Esq., B.Sc.,
F.C.S., and W. G. Llewellyn, Esq., for their kind help in reading the proofs,
&c.
H. S. R.
THE POLYTECHNIC, LONDON, W.
October, 1910.
Page xv
CONTENTS
CHAPTER 1. THE MEANING OF ALCHEMY. . . . . . . . . . . 1
1. The Aim of Alchemy. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
2. The Transcendental Theory of Alchemy. . . . . . 2
3. Failure of the Transcendental Theory. . . . . . 3
4. The Qualifications of the Adept . . . . . . . . 4
5. Alchemistic Language. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
6. Alchemists of a Mystical Type . . . . . . . . . 7
7. The Meaning of Alchemy. . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
8. Opinions of other Writers . . . . . . . . . . . 8
9. The Basic Idea of Alchemy . . . . . . . . . . . 10
10. The Law of Analogy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
11. The Dual Nature of Alchemy . . . . . . . . . . 13
12. "Body, Soul and Spirit". . . . . . . . . . . . 14
13. Alchemy, Mysticism and Modern Science. . . . . 15
CHAPTER II. THE THEORY OF PHYSICAL ALCHEMY . . . . . . 17
14. Supposed Proofs of Transmutation . . . . . . . 17
15. The Alchemistic Elements . . . . . . . . . . . 18
16. Aristotle's Views regarding the Elements . . . 19
17. The Sulphur Mercury Theory . . . . . . . . . . 20
18. The Sulphur-Mercury Salt Theory. . . . . . . . 22
19. Alchemistic Elements and Principles. . . . . . 23
20. The Growth of the Metals . . . . . . . . . . . 25
21. Alchemy and Astrology. . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
22. Alchemistic View of the Nature of Gold . . . . 27
23. The Philosopher's Stone. . . . . . . . . . . . 29
24. The Nature of the Philosopher's Stone. . . . . 30
25. The Theory of Development. . . . . . . . . . . 32
26. The Powers of the Philosopher's Stone. . . . . 34
27. The Elixir of Life . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
28. The Practical Methods of the Alchemists. . . . 36
Page xvi
CHAPTER III. THE ALCHEMISTS (A. BEFORE PARACELSUS) . 39
29. Hermes Trismegistos. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
30. The Smaragdine Table . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
31. Zosimus of Panopolis . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
32. Geber. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
33. Other Arabian Alchemists . . . . . . . . . . . 44
34. Albertus Magnus. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
35. Thomas Aquinas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
36. Roger Bacon. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
37. Arnold de Villanova. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
38. Raymond Lully. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
39. Peter Bonus. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
40. Nicolas Flamel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
41. "Basil Valentine" and the Triumphal Chariot
of Antimony . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
42. Isaac of Holland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
43. Bernard Trevisan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
44. Sir George Ripley. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
45. Thomas Norton. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
CHAPTER IV. THE ALCHEMISTS (B. PARACELSUS
AND AFTER). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
46. Paracelsus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
47. Views of Paracelsus. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
48. Iatro-chemistry. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
49. The Rosicrucian Society. . . . . . . . . . . . 62
50. Thomas Charnock. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
51. Andreas Libavius . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66
52. Edward Kelley and John Dee . . . . . . . . . . 67
53. Henry Khunrath . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70
54. Alexander Sethon and Michael Sendivogius . . . 70
55. Michael Maier. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72
56. Jacob Boehme . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74
57. J. B. van Helmont and F. M. van Helmont. . . . 75
58. Johann Rudolf Glauber. . . . . . . . . . . . . 77
59. Thomas Vaughan ("Eugenius Philalethes"). . . . 77
60. "Eirenaeus Philalethes" and George Starkey . . 79
CHAPTER V. THE OUTCOME OF ALCHEMY. . . . . . . . . . 81
61. Did the Alchemists achieve the Magnum Opus? . . . . . . . 81
62. The Testimony of van Helmont . . . . . . . . . . 82
63. The Testimony of Helvetius . . . . . . . . . . . 83
64. Helvetius obtains the Philosopher's Stone. . . . 85
65. Helvetius performs a Transmutation . . . . . . . 87
Page xvii
66. Helvetius's Gold Assayed . . . . . . . . . . . . 88
67. Helvetius's Gold Further Tested. . . . . . . . . 88
68. The Genesis of Chemistry . . . . . . . . . . . . 89
69. The Degeneracy of Alchemy. . . . . . . . . . . . 90
70. "Count Cagliostro" . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91
CHAPTER VI. THE AGE OF MODERN CHEMISTRY. . . . . . . 94
71. The Birth of Modern Chemistry. . . . . . . . . . 94
72. The Phlogiston Theory. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94
73. Boyle and the Definition of an Element . . . . . 96
74. The Stoichiometric Laws. . . . . . . . . . . . . 96
75. Dalton's Atomic Theory . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99
76. The Determination of the Atomic Weights of the Elements . . . . . . . .102
77. Prout's Hypothesis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102
78. The "Periodic Law" . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105
79. The Corpuscular Theory of Matter . . . . . . . . 109
80. Proof that the Electrons are not Matter. . . . . 110
81. The Electronic Theory of Matter. . . . . . . . . 112
82. The Etheric Theory of Matter . . . . . . . . . . 113
83. Further Evidence of the Complexity of the Atoms. 114
84. Views of Wald and Ostwald. . . . . . . . . . . . 115
CHAPTER VII. MODERN ALCHEMY. . . . . . . . . . . . . 117
85. "Modern Alchemy" . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117
86. X-Rays and Becquerel Rays. . . . . . . . . . . . 117
87. The Discovery of Radium. . . . . . . . . . . . . 118
88. Chemical Properties of Radium. . . . . . . . . . 119
89. The Radioactivity of Radium. . . . . . . . . . . 120
90. The Disintegration of the Radium Atom. . . . . . 122
91. "Induced Radioactivity". . . . . . . . . . . . . 123
92. Properties of Uranium and Thorium. . . . . . . . 123
93. The Radium Emanation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124
94. The Production of Helium from Emanation. . . . . 125
95. Nature of this Change. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127
96. Is this Change a true Transmutation? . . . . . . 128
97. The Production of Neon from Emanation. . . . . . 130
98. Ramsay's Experiments on Copper . . . . . . . . . 132
99. Further Experiments on Radium and Copper . . . . 134
100. Ramsay's Experiments on Thorium and allied
Metals. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134
101. The Possibility of Making Gold. . . . . . . . . 136
102. The Significance of "Allotropy" . . . . . . . . 136
103. Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 142
Page xix
LIST OF PLATES
PLATE 1. Portrait of Paracelsus . . . . . . .Frontispiece
TO FACE PAGE
PLATE 2. Symbolical Illustration representing the Trinity of
Body, Soul and Spirit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
PLATE 3. Symbolical Illustrations representing --
(A) The Fertility of the Earth
(B) The Amalgamation of Mercury and Gold. . . . . . . 26
PLATE 4. Symbolical Illustrations representing --
(A) The Coction of Gold-Amalgam in a Closed Vessel
(B) The Transmutation of the Metals . . . . . . . . . 33
PLATE 5. Alchemistic Apparatus --
(A) (B) Two forms of apparatus for sublimation. . . . 37
PLATE 6. Alchemistic Apparatus --
(A) An Athanor
(B) A Pelican . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
PLATE 7. Portrait of Albertus Magnus. . . . . . 44
PLATE 8. Portraits of --
(A) Thomas Aquinas
(B) Nicolas Flamel. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
PLATE 9. Portraits of --
(A) Edward Kelley
(B) John Dee. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68
PLATE 10. Portrait of Michael Maier . . . . . . 72
PLATE 11. Portrait of Jacob Boehme. . . . . . . 74
PLATE 12. Portraits of J. B. and
F. M. van Helmont . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76
Page xx
TO FACE PAGE.
PLATE 13. Portrait of J. F. Helvetius . . . . . 84
PLATE 14. Portrait of "Cagliostro". . . . . . . 92
PLATE 15. Portrait of Robert Boyle. . . . . . . 94
PLATE 16. Portrait of John Dalton . . . . . . . 100
TABLE SHOWING THE PERIODIC CLASSIFICATION OF THE CHEMICAL
ELEMENTS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Pages 106, 107
Page 1
Chapter 1
ALCHEMY: ANCIENT AND MODERN
CHAPTER I
THE MEANING OF ALCHEMY
1. The Aim of Alchemy.
Alchemy is generally understood to have been that art whose end was the
transmutation of the so-called base metals into gold by means of an ill-defined
something called the Philosopher's Stone; but even from a purely physical
standpoint, this is a somewhat superficial view. Alchemy was both a philosophy
and an experimental science, and the transmutation of the metals was its end
only in that this would give the final proof of the alchemistic hypotheses; in
other words, Alchemy, considered from the physical standpoint, was the attempt
to demonstrate experimentally on the material plane the validity of a certain
philosophical view of the Cosmos. We see the genuine scientific spirit in the
saying of one of the alchemists: "Would to God . . . all men might become adepts
in our Art -- for then gold, the great idol of mankind, would lose its value,
and we should prize it only
Page 2
for its scientific teaching."1 Unfortunately, however, not many alchemists came
up to this ideal; and for the majority of them, Alchemy did mean merely the
possibility of making gold cheaply and gaining untold wealth.
2. The Transcendental Theory of Alchemy.
By some mystics, however, the opinion has been expressed that Alchemy was not
a physical art or science at all, that in no sense was its object the
manufacture of material gold, and that its processes were not carried of Alchemy
out on the physical plane. According to this transcendental theory, Alchemy was
concerned with man's soul, its object was the perfection, not of material
substances, but of man in a spiritual sense. Those who hold this view identify
Alchemy with, or at least regard it as a branch of, Mysticism, from which it is
supposed to differ merely by the employment of a special language; and they hold
that the writings of the alchemists must not be understood literally as dealing
with chemical operations, with furnaces, retorts, alembics, pelicans and the
like, with salt, sulphur, mercury, gold and other material substances, but must
be understood as grand allegories dealing with spiritual truths. According to
this view, the figure of the transmutation of the "base" metals into gold
symbolised the salvation of man -- the transmutation of his soul into spiritual
gold -- which was to be obtained by the elimination of evil and the development
of good by the grace of God; and the realisation of which salvation or spiritual
transmutation
Page 3
may be described as the New Birth, or that condition of being known as union
with the Divine. It would follow, of course, if this theory were true that the
genuine alchemists were pure mystics, and hence, that the development of
chemical science was not due to their labours, but to pseudo-alchemists who so
far misunderstood their writings as to have interpreted them in a literal sense.
3. Failure of the Transcendental Theory.
This theory, however, has been effectively disposed of by Mr. Arthur Edward
Waite, who points to the lives of the alchemists themselves in refutation of it.
For their lives indisputably prove that the alchemists were occupied with
chemical operations on the physical plane, and that for whatever motive they
toiled to discover a method for transmuting the commoner metals into actual,
material gold. As Paracelsus himself says of the true "spagyric physicians," who
were the alchemists of his period. "These do not give themselves up to ease and
idleness . . . But they devote themselves diligently to their labours; sweating
whole nights over fiery furnaces. These do not kill the time with empty talk,
but find their delight in their laboratory." 2 The writings of the alchemists
contain (mixed, however, with much that from the physical standpoint appears
merely fantastic) accurate accounts of many chemical processes and discoveries,
which cannot be explained away by any method of transcendental interpretation.
There is not the slightest doubt that chemistry owes its origin
Page 4
to the direct labours of the alchemists themselves, and not to any who misread
their writings.
4. The Qualifications of the Adept.
At the same time, it is quite evident that there is a considerable element of
Mysticism in the alchemistic doctrines; this has always been recognised; but, as
a general rule, those who have approached the subject from the scientific point
of view have considered this mystical element as of little or no importance.
However, there are certain curious facts which are not satisfactorily explained
by a purely physical theory of Alchemy, and, in our opinion, the recognition of
the importance of this mystical element and of the true relation which existed
between Alchemy and Mysticism is essential for the right understanding of the
subject. We may notice, in the first place, that the alchemists always speak of
their Art as a Divine Gift, the highest secrets of which are not to be learnt
from any books on the subject; and they invariably teach that the right mental
attitude with regard to God is the first step necessary for the achievement of
the magnum opus. As says one alchemist: "In the first place, let every devout
and God-fearing chemist and student of this Art consider that this arcanum
should be regarded, not only as a truly great, but as a most holy Art (seeing
that it typifies and shadows out the highest heavenly good). Therefore, if any
man desire to reach this great and unspeakable Mystery, he must remember that it
is obtained not by the might of man, but by the grace of God, and that not our
will or desire, but only the mercy of the Most High, can bestow it upon us.
For this reason you must first of all cleanse your
Page 5
heart, lift it up to Him alone, and ask of Him this gift in true, earnest, and
undoubting prayer. He alone can give and bestow it."3 And "Basil Valentine":
"First, there should be the invocation of God, flowing from the depth of a pure
and sincere heart, and a conscience which should be free from all ambition,
hypocrisy, and vice, as also from all cognate faults, such as arrogance,
boldness, pride, luxury, worldly vanity, oppression of the poor, and similar
iniquities, which should all be rooted up out of the heart -- that when a man
appears before the Throne of Grace, to regain the health of his body, he may
come with a conscience weeded of all tares, and be changed into a pure temple of
God cleansed of all that defiles."4
5. Alchemistic Language.
In the second place, we must notice the nature of alchemistic language. As we
have hinted above, and as is at once apparent on opening any alchemistic book,
the language of Alchemy is very highly mystical, and there is much that is
perfectly unintelligible in a physical sense. indeed, the alchemists habitually
apologise for their vagueness on the plea that such mighty secrets may not be
made more fully manifest. It is true, of course, that in the days of Alchemy's
degeneracy a good deal of pseudo-mystical nonsense was written by the many
impostors then abounding, but the mystical style of language is by no means
confined to the later alchemistic writings. It is also
Page 6
true that the alchemists, no doubt, desired to shield their secrets from vulgar
and profane eyes, and hence would necessarily adopt a symbolic language. But it
is past belief that the language of the alchemist was due to some arbitrary
plan; whatever it is to us, it was very real to him. Moreover, this argument
cuts both ways, for those, also, who take a transcendental view of Alchemy
regard its language as symbolical, although after a different manner. It is
also, to say the least, curious, as Mr. A. E. Waite points out, that this
mystical element should be found in the writings of the earlier alchemists,
whose manuscripts were not written for publication, and therefore ran no risk of
informing the vulgar of the precious secrets of Alchemy. On the other hand, the
transcendental method of translation does often succeed in making sense out of
what is otherwise unintelligible in the writings of the alchemists. The
above-mentioned writer remarks on this point: "Without in any way pretending to
assert that this hypothesis reduces the literary chaos of the philosophers into
a regular order, it may be affirmed that it materially elucidates their
writings, and that it is wonderful how contradictions, absurdities, and
difficulties seem to dissolve wherever it is applied."5
The alchemists' love of symbolism is also conspicuously displayed in the
curious designs with which certain of their books are embellished. We are not
here referring to the illustrations of actual apparatus employed in carrying out
the various operations of physical Alchemy, which are not infrequently found in
the works of those alchemists who at the same time
Page 7
were practical chemists (Glauber, for example), but to pictures whose meaning
plainly lies not upon the surface and whose import is clearly symbolical,
whether their symbolism has reference to physical or to spiritual processes.
Examples of such symbolic illustrations, many of which are highly fantastic,
will be found in plates 2, 3, and 4. We shall refer to them again in the course
of the present and following chapters.
6. Alchemists of a Mystical Type.
We must also notice that, although there cannot be the slightest doubt that
the great majority of alchemists were engaged in problems and experiments of a
physical nature, yet there were a few men included within the alchemistic ranks
who were entirely, or almost entirely, concerned with problems of a spiritual
nature; Thomas Vaughan, for example, and Jacob Boehme, who boldly employed the
language of Alchemy in the elaboration of his system of mystical philosophy. And
particularly must we notice, as Mr. A. E. Waite has also indicated, the
significant fact that the Western alchemists make unanimous appeal to Hermes
Trismegistos as the greatest authority on the art of Alchemy, whose alleged
writings are of an undoubtedly mystical character (see 29). It is clear, that in
spite of its apparently physical nature, Alchemy must have been in some way
closely connected with Mysticism.
7. The Meaning of Alchemy.
If we are ever to understand the meaning of Alchemy aright we must look at
the subject from the alchemistic point of view. In modern times there has come
about a divorce between Religion and Science in men's minds (though more
recently a unifying
Page 8
tendency has set in); but it was otherwise with the alchemists, their religion
and their science were closely united. We have said that "Alchemy was the
attempt to demonstrate experimentally on the material plane the validity of a
certain philosophical view of the Cosmos"; now, this "philosophical view of the
Cosmos" was Mysticism. Alchemy had its origin in the attempt to apply, in a
certain manner, the principles of Mysticism to the things of the physical plane,
and was, therefore, of a dual nature, on the one hand spiritual and religious,
on the other, physical and material. As the anonymous author of Lives of
Alchemystical Philosophers (1815) remarks, "The universal chemistry, by which
the science of alchemy opens the knowledge of all nature, being founded on first
principles forms analogy with whatever knowledge is founded on the same first
principles.... Saint John describes the redemption, or the new creation of the
fallen soul, on the same first principles, until the consummation of the work,
in which the Divine tincture transmutes the base metal of the soul into a
perfection, that will pass the fire of eternity;"6 that is to say, Alchemy and
the mystical regeneration of man (in this writer's opinion) are analogous
processes on different planes of being, because they are founded on the same
first principles.
8. Opinions of other Writers.
We shall here quote the opinions of two modern writers, as to the
significance of Alchemy; one a mystic, the other a man of science. Says Mr. A.
E. Waite, "If the authors of the `Suggestive Inquiry' and of `Remarks on Alchemy
and the
Page 9
Alchemists' [two books putting forward the transcendental theory] had considered
the lives of the symbolists, as well as the nature of the symbols, their views
would have been very much modified; they would have found that the true method
of Hermetic interpretation lies in a middle course; but the errors which
originated with merely typographical investigations were intensified by a
consideration of the great alchemical theorem, which, par excellence, is one of
universal development, which acknowledges that every substance contains
undeveloped resources and potentialities, and can be brought outward and forward
into perfection. They [the generality of alchemists] applied their theory only
to the development of metallic substances from a lower to a higher order, but we
see by their writings that the grand hierophants of Oriental and Western alchemy
alike were continually haunted by brief and imperfect glimpses of glorious
possibilities for man, if the evolution of his nature were accomplished along
the lines of their theory."7 Mr. M. M. Pattison Muir, M.A.,
Page 10
says: ". . . alchemy aimed at giving experimental proof of a certain theory of
the whole system of nature, including humanity. The practical culmination of the
alchemical quest presented a threefold aspect; the alchemists sought the stone
of wisdom, for by gaining that they gained the control of wealth; they sought
the universal panacea, for that would give them the power of enjoying wealth and
life; they sought the soul of the world, for thereby they could hold communion
with spiritual existences, and enjoy the fruition of spiritual life. The object
of their search was to satisfy their material needs, their intellectual
capacities, and their spiritual yearnings. The alchemists of the nobler sort
always made the first of these objects subsidiary to the other two...."8
9. The Basic Idea of Alchemy.
The famous axiom beloved by every alchemist -- "What is above is as that
which is below, and what is below is as that which is above" -- although of
quesable{sic} origin, tersely expresses the basic idea of Alchemy. The
alchemists postulated and believed in a very real sense in the essential unity
of the Cosmos. Hence, they held that there is a correspondence or analogy
existing between things spiritual and things physical, the same laws operating
in each realm. As writes Sendivogius ". . . the Sages have been taught of God
that this natural world is only an image and material copy of a heavenly and
spiritual pattern; that the very existence of this world is based upon the
reality of its celestial archetype; and that God has created it in imitation of
the spiritual and invisible universe, in order that men
Page 11
might be the better enabled to comprehend His heavenly teaching, and the wonders
of His absolute and ineffable power and wisdom. Thus the Sage sees heaven
reflected in Nature as in a mirror; and he pursues this Art, not for the sake of
gold or silver, but for the love of the knowledge which it reveals; he jealously
conceals it from the sinner and the scornful, lest the mysteries of heaven
should be laid bare to the vulgar gaze."9
The alchemists held that the metals are one in essence, and spring from the
same seed in the womb of nature, but are not all equally matured and perfect,
gold being the highest product of Nature's powers. In gold, the alchemist saw a
picture of the regenerate man, resplendent with spiritual beauty, overcoming all
temptations and proof against evil; whilst he regarded lead -- the basest of the
metals -- as typical of the sinful and unregenerate man, stamped with the
hideousness of sin and easily overcome by temptation and evil; for whilst gold
withstood the action of fire and all known corrosive liquids (save aqua regia
alone), lead was most easily acted upon. We are told that the Philosopher's
Stone, which would bring about the desired grand transmutation, is of a species
with gold itself and purer than the purest; understood in the mystical sense
this means that the regeneration of man can be effected only by Goodness itself
-- in terms of Christian theology, by the Power of the Spirit of Christ. The
Philosopher's Stone was regarded as symbolical of Christ Jesus, and in this
sense we can understand the otherwise incredible powers attributed to it.
Page 12
10. The Law of Analogy.
With the theories of physical Alchemy we shall deal at length in the
following chapter, but enough has been said to indicate the analogy existing,
according to the alchemistic view, between the problem of the perfection of the
metals, i.e., the transmutation of the "base" metals into gold, and the
perfection or transfiguration of spiritual man; and it might also be added,
between these problems and that of the perfection of man considered
physiologically. To the alchemistic philosopher these three problems were one:
the same problem on different planes of being; and the solution was likewise
one. He who held the key to one problem held the key to all three, provided he
understood the analogy between matter and spirit. The point is not, be it noted,
whether these problems are in reality one and the same; the main doctrine of
analogy, which is, indeed, an essential element in all true mystical philosophy,
will, we suppose, meet with general consent; but it will be contended (and
rightly, we think) that the analogies drawn by the alchemists are fantastic and
by no means always correct, though possibly there may be more truth in them than
appears at first sight. The point is not that these analogies are correct, but
that they were regarded as such by all true alchemists. Says the author of The
Sophic Hydrolith: ". . . the practice of this Art enables us to understand, not
merely the marvels of Nature, but the nature of God Himself, in all its
unspeakable glory. It shadows forth, in a wonderful manner . . . all the
articles of the Christian faith, and the reason why man must pass through much
tribulation and anguish, and fall
Page 13
a prey to death, before he can rise again to a new life." 10 A considerable
portion of this curious alchemistic work is taken up in expounding the analogy
believed to exist between the Philosopher's Stone and "the Stone which the
builders rejected," Christ Jesus; and the writer concludes: "Thus . . . I have
briefly and simply set forth to you the perfect analogy which exists between our
earthly and chemical and the true and heavenly Stone, Jesus Christ, whereby we
may attain unto certain beatitude and perfection, not only in earthly but also
in eternal life."11 And likewise says Peter Bonus: "I am firmly persuaded that
any unbeliever who got truly to know this Art, would straightway confess the
truth of our Blessed Religion, and believe in the Trinity and in our Lord Jesus
Christ."12
11. The Dual Nature of Alchemy.
For the most part, the alchemists were chiefly engaged with the carrying out
of the alchemistic theory on the physical plane, i.e., with the attempt to
transmute the "base" metals into the "noble" ones; some for the love of
knowledge, but alas! the vast majority for the love of mere wealth. But all who
were worthy of the title of "alchemist" realised at times, more or less dimly,
the possibility of the application of the same methods to man and the glorious
result of the transmutation of man's soul into spiritual gold. There were a few
who had a
Page 14
clearer vision of this ideal, those who devoted their activities entirely, or
almost so, to the attainment of this highest goal of alchemistic philosophy, and
concerned themselves little if at all with the analogous problem on the physical
plane. The theory that Alchemy originated in the attempt to demonstrate the
applicability of the principles of Mysticism to the things of the physical realm
brings into harmony the physical and transcendental theories of Alchemy and the
various conflicting facts advanced in favour of each. It explains the existence
of the above-mentioned, two very different types of alchemists. It explains the
appeal to the works attributed to Hermes, and the presence in the writings of
the alchemists of much that is clearly mystical. And finally, it is in agreement
with such statements as we have quoted above from The Sophic Hydrolith and
elsewhere, and the general religious tone of the alchemistic writings.
12. "Body, Soul and Spirit".
In accordance with our primary object as stated in the preface, we shall
confine our attention mainly to the physical aspect of Alchemy; but in order to
understand its theories, it appears to us to be essential to realise the fact
that Alchemy was an attempted application of the principles of Mysticism to the
things of the physical world. The supposed analogy between man and the metals
sheds light on what otherwise would be very difficult to understand. It helps to
make plain why the alchemists attributed moral qualities to the metals -- some
are called "imperfect," "base"; others are said to be "perfect," "noble." And
especially does it help to explain the alchemistic
PLATE 2.
SYMBOLICAL ILLUSTRATION
Representing the Trinity of Body, Soul and Spirit
Page 15
notions regarding the nature of the metals. The alchemists believed that the
metals were constructed after the manner of man, into whose constitution three
factors were regarded as entering: body, soul, and spirit. As regards man,
mystical philosophers generally use these terms as follows: "body" is the
outward manifestation and form; "soul" is the inward individual spirit13; and
"spirit" is the universal Soul in all men. And likewise, according to the
alchemists, in the metals, there is the "body" or outward form and properties,
"metalline soul" or spirit,14 and finally, the all-pervading essence of all
metals. As writes the author of the exceedingly curious tract entitled The Book
of Lambspring. "Be warned and understand truly that two fishes are swimming in
our sea," illustrating his remark by the symbolical picture reproduced in plate
2, and adding in elucidation thereof, "The Sea is the Body, the two Fishes are
Soul and Spirit." 15 The alchemists, however, were not always consistent in
their use of the term "spirit." Sometimes (indeed frequently) they employed it
to denote merely the more volatile portions of a chemical substance; at other
times it had a more interior significance.
13. Alchemy, Mysticism and Modern Science.
We notice the great difference between the
Page 16
alchemistic theory and the views regarding the constitution of matter which have
dominated Chemistry since the time of Dalton. But at the present time Dalton's
theory of the chemical elements is undergoing a profound modification. We do not
imply that Modern Science is going back to any such fantastic ideas as were held
by the alchemists, but we are struck with the remarkable similarity between this
alchemistic theory of a soul of all metals, a one primal element, and modern
views regarding the ether of space. In its attempt to demonstrate the
applicability of the fundamental principles of Mysticism to the things of the
physical realm Alchemy apparently failed and ended its days in fraud. It
appears, however, that this true aim of alchemistic art -- particularly the
demonstration of the validity of the theory that all the various forms of matter
are produced by an evolutionary process from some one primal element or
quintessence -- is being realised by recent researches in the domain of physical
and chemical science.
1. "EIRENÆUS PHILALETHES": An Open Entrance to the Closed Palace of the King
(see The Hermetic Museum, Restored and Enlarged, edited by A. E. Waite, 1893,
vol. ii. p. 178).
2. PARACELSUS: "Concerning the Nature of Things" (see The Hermetic and
Alchemical Writings of Paracelsus, edited by A. E Waite, 1894, vol. i. p. 167).
3. The Sophic Hydrolith; or, Water Stone of the Wise (see The Hermetic Museum,
vol. i. p. 74).
4. The Triumphal Chariot of Antimony (Mr. A. E. Waite's translation, p. 13). See
41.
5. ARTHUR EDWARD WAITE: The Occult Sciences (1891), p. 91.
6. F. B.: Lives of Alchemystical Philosophers (1815), Preface, p. 3.
7. ARTHUR EDWARD WAITE: Lives of Alchemystical Philosophers (1888), pp. 30, 31.
As says another writer of the mystical school of thought: "If we look upon the
subject [of Alchymy] from the point which affords the widest view, it may be
said that Alchymy has two aspects: the simply material, and the religious. The
dogma that Alchymy was only a form of chemistry is untenable by any one who has
read the works of its chief professors. The doctrine that Alchymy was religion
only, and that its chemical references were all blinds, is equally untenable in
the face of history, which shows that many of its most noted professors were men
who had made important discoveries in the domain of common chemistry, and were
in no way notable as teachers either of ethics or religion" ("Sapere Aude," The
Science of Alchymy, Spiritual and Material (1893), pp. 3 and 4).
8. M. M. PATTISON MUIR, M.A.: The Story of Alchemy and the Beginnings of
Chemistry (1902), pp. 105 and 106.
9. MICHAEL SENDIVOGIUS: The New Chemical light, Pt. II., Concerning Sulphur (The
Hermetic Museum, vol. ii. p. 138).
10. The Sophic Hydrolith; or, Water Stone of the Wise (see The Hermetic Museum,
vol. i. p. 88).
11. Ibid. p. 114.
12. PETER BONUS: The New Pearl of Great Price (Mr. A. E. Waite's translation, p.
275).
13. Which, in virtue of man's self-consciousness, is, by the grace of God,
immortal.
14. See the work Of Natural and Supernatural Things, attributed to "Basil
Valentine," for a description of the "spirits" of the metals in particular.
15. The Book of Lambspring, translated by Nicholas Barnaud Delphinas (see the
Hermetic Museum, vol. i. p. 277). This work contains many other fantastic
alchemistic symbolical pictures, amongst the most curious series in alchemistic
literature.
Page 17
Chapter 2
CHAPTER II
THE THEORY OF PHYSICAL ALCHEMY
14. Supposed Proofs of Transmutation.
It must be borne in mind when reviewing the theories of the alchemists, that
there were a number of phenomena known at the time, the superficial examination
of which would naturally engender a belief that the transmutation of the metals
was a common occurrence. For example, the deposition of copper on iron when
immersed in a solution of a copper salt (e.g., blue vitriol) was naturally
concluded to be a transmutation of iron into copper,1 although, had the
alchemists examined the residual liquid, they would have found that the two
metals had merely exchanged places; and the fact that white and yellow alloys of
copper with arsenic and other substances could be produced, pointed to the
possibility of transmuting copper into silver and gold. It was also known that
if water (and this is true of distilled water which does not contain solid
matter in solution) was boiled for some time in a glass flask, some solid,
earthy matter was produced; and if water could be transmuted into earth, surely
one metal could be
Page 18
converted into another.2 On account of these and like phenomena the alchemists
regarded the transmutation of the metals as an experimentally proved fact. Even
if they are to be blamed for their superficial observation of such phenomena,
yet, nevertheless, their labours marked a distinct advance upon the purely
speculative and theoretical methods of the philosophers preceding them. Whatever
their faults, the alchemists were the forerunners of modern experimental
science.
15. The Alchemistic Elements.
The alchemists regarded the metals as composite, and granting this, then the
possibility of transmutation is only a logical conclusion. In order to
understand the theory of the elements held by them we must rid ourselves of any
idea that it bears any close resemblance to Dalton's theory of the chemical
elements; this is clear from what has been said in the preceding chapter. Now,
it is a fact of simple observation that many otherwise different bodies manifest
some property in common, as, for instance, combustibility. Properties such as
these were regarded as being due to some principle or element common to all
bodies exhibiting such properties; thus, combustibility was thought to be due to
some elementary principle of combustion -- the "sulphur" of the alchemists and
the "phlogiston" of a later period. This is a view which à priori appears to be
not unlikely; but it is now known that, although there are relations existing
between the properties of bodies
Page 19
and their constituent chemical elements (and also, it should be noted, the
relative arrangement of the particles of these elements), it is the less obvious
properties which enable chemists to determine the constitution of bodies, and
the connection is very far from being of the simple nature imagined by the
alchemists.
16. Aristotle's Views regarding the Elements.
For the origin of the alchemistic theory of the elements it is necessary to
go back to the philosophers preceding the alchemists, and it is not improbable
that they derived it from some still older source. It was taught by Empedocles
of Agrigent (440 B.C. circa), who considered that there were four elements --
earth, water, air, and fire. Aristotle added a fifth, "the ether." These
elements were regarded, not as different kinds of matter, but rather as
different forms of the one original matter, whereby it manifested different
properties. It was thought that to these elements were due the four primary
properties of dryness, moistness, warmth, and coldness, each element being
supposed to give rise to two of these properties, dryness and warmth being
thought to be due to fire, moistness and warmth to air, moistness and coldness
to water, and dryness and coldness to earth. Thus, moist and cold bodies
(liquids in general) were said to possess these properties in consequence of the
aqueous element, and were termed "waters," &c. Also, since these elements were
not regarded as different kinds of matter, transmutation was thought to be
possible, one being convertible into another, as in the example given above (
14)
Page 20
17. The Sulphur-Mercury Theory.
Coming to the alchemists, we find the view that the metals are all composed
of two elementary principles -- sulphur and mercury -- in different proportions
and degrees of purity, well-nigh universally accepted in the earlier days of
Alchemy. By these terms "sulphur" and "mercury," however, must not be understood
the common bodies ordinarily designated by these names; like the elements of
Aristotle, the alchemistic principles were regarded as properties rather than as
substances, though it must be confessed that the alchemists were by no means
always clear on this point themselves. Indeed, it is not altogether easy to say
exactly what the alchemists did mean by these terms, and the question is
complicated by the fact that very frequently they make mention of different
sorts of "sulphur" and "mercury." Probably, however, we shall not be far wrong
in saying that "sulphur" was generally regarded as the principle of combustion
and also of colour, and was said to be present on account of the fact that most
metals are changed into earthy substances by the aid of fire; and to the
"mercury," the metallic principle par excellence, was attributed such properties
as fusibility, malleability and lustre, which were regarded as characteristic of
the metals in general. The pseudo-Geber (see 32) says that "Sulphur is a fatness
of the Earth, by temperate Decoction in the Mine of the Earth thickened, until
it be hardned{sic} and made dry."3 He considered an excess of sulphur to be a
cause of imperfection in the metals, and he writes
Page 21
that one of the causes of the corruption of the metals by fire "is the Inclusion
of a burning Sulphuriety in the profundity of their Substance, diminishing them
by Inflamation, and exterminating also into Fume, with extream Consumption,
whatsoever Argentvive in them is of good Fixation."4 He assumed, further, that
the metals contained an incombustible as well as a combustible sulphur, the
latter sulphur being apparently regarded as an impurity. 5 A later alchemist
says that sulphur is "most easily recognised by the vital spirit in animals, the
colour in metals, the odour in plants."6 Mercury, on the other hand, according
to the pseudo-Geber, is the cause of perfection in the metals, and endows gold
with its lustre. Another alchemist, quoting Arnold de Villanova, writes:
"Quicksilver is the elementary form of all things fusible; for all things
fusible, when melted, are changed into it, and it mingles with them because it
is of the same substance with them. Such bodies differ from quicksilver in their
composition only so far as itself is or is not free from the foreign matter of
impure sulphur."7 The obtaining of "philosophical mercury," the imaginary
virtues of which the alchemists never tired of relating, was generally held to
be essential for the attainment of the magnum opus. It was commonly thought that
it could be prepared from ordinary quicksilver by
Page 22
purificatory processes, whereby the impure sulphur supposed to be present in
this sort of mercury might be purged away.
The sulphur-mercury theory of the metals was held by such famous alchemists
as Roger Bacon, Arnold de Villanova and Raymond Lully. Until recently it was
thought to have originated to a great extent with the Arabian alchemist, Geber;
but the late Professor Berthelot showed that the works ascribed to Geber, in
which the theory is put forward, are forgeries of a date by which it was already
centuries old (see 32). Occasionally, arsenic was regarded as an elementary
principle (this view is to be found, for example, in the work Of the Sum of
Perfection, by the pseudo-Geber), but the idea was not general.
18. The Sulphur-Mercury-Salt Theory.
Later in the history of Alchemy, the mercury-sulphur theory was extended by
the addition of a third elementary principle, salt. As in the case of
philosophical sulphur and mercury, by this term was not meant common salt
(sodium chloride) or any of those substances commonly known as salts. "Salt" was
the name given to a supposed basic principle in the metals, a principle of
fixity and solidification, conferring the property of resistance to fire. In
this extended form, the theory is found in the works of Isaac of Holland and in
those attributed to "Basil Valentine," who (see the work Of Natural and
Supernatural Things) attempts to explain the differences in the properties of
the metals as the result of the differences in the proportion of sulphur, salt,
and mercury they contain. Thus, copper, which is highly coloured, is said to
contain much sulphur, whilst iron
Page 23
is supposed to contain an excess of salt, &c. The sulphur-mercury-salt theory
was vigorously championed by Paracelsus, and the doctrine gained very general
acceptance amongst the alchemists. Salt, however, seems generally to have been
considered a less important principle than either mercury or sulphur.
The same germ-idea underlying these doctrines is to be found much later in
Stahl's phlogistic theory (eighteenth century), which attempted to account for
the combustibility of bodies by the assumption that such bodies all contain
"phlogiston" -- the hypothetical principle of combustion (see 72) -- though the
concept of "phlogiston" approaches more nearly to the modern idea of an element
than do the alchemistic elements or principles. It was not until still later in
the history of Chemistry that it became quite evident that the more obvious
properties of chemical substances are not specially conferred on them in virtue
of certain elements entering into their constitution.
19. Alchemistic Elements and Principles.
The alchemists combined the above theories with Aristotle's theory of the
elements. The latter, namely, earth, air, fire and water, were regarded as more
interior, more primary, than the principles, whose source was said to be these
same elements. As writes Sendivogius in Part II. of The New Chemical Light: "The
three Principles of things are produced out of the four elements in the
following manner: Nature, whose power is in her obedience to the Will of God,
ordained from the very beginning, that the four elements should incessantly act
on one another
Page 24
so, in obedience to her behest, fire began to act on air, and produced Sulphur;
air acted on water, and produced Mercury; water, by its action on the earth,
produced Salt. Earth, alone, having nothing to act upon, did not produce
anything, but became the nurse, or womb, of these three Principles. We
designedly speak of three Principles; for though the Ancients mention only two,
it is clear that they omitted the third (Salt) not from ignorance, but from a
desire to lead the uninitiated astray."8
Beneath and within all these coverings of outward properties, taught the
alchemists, is hidden the secret essence of all material things. ". . . the
elements and compounds," writes one alchemist, "in addition to crass matter, are
composed of a subtle substance, or intrinsic radical humidity, diffused through
the elemental parts, simple and wholly incorruptible, long preserving the things
themselves in vigour, and called the Spirit of the World, proceeding from the
Soul of the World, the one certain life, filling and fathoming all things,
gathering together and connecting all things, so that from the three genera of
creatures, Intellectual, Celestial, and Corruptible, there is formed the One
Machine of the whole world."9 It is hardly necessary to point out how nearly
this approaches modern views regarding the Ether of Space.
Page 25
20. The Growth of the Metals.
The alchemists regarded the metals as growing in the womb of the earth, and a
knowledge of this growth as being of very great importance. Thomas Norton (who,
however, contrary to the generality of alchemists, denied that metals have seed
and that they grow in the sense of multiply) says: --
"Mettals of kinde grow lowe under ground,
For above erth rust in them is found;
Soe above erth appeareth corruption,
Of mettalls, and in long tyme destruction,
Whereof noe Cause is found in this Case,
Buth that above Erth thei be not in their place
Contrarie places to nature causeth strife
As Fishes out of water losen their Lyfe:
And Man, with Beasts, and Birds live in ayer,
But Stones and Mineralls under Erth repaier." 10
Norton here expresses the opinion, current among the alchemists, that each
and every thing has its own peculiar environment natural to it; a view
controverted by Robert Boyle ( 71). So firm was the belief in the growth of
metals, that mines were frequently closed for a while in order that the supply
of metal might be renewed. The fertility of Mother Earth forms the subject of
one of the illustrations in The Twelve Keys of "Basil Valentine" (see 41), We
reproduce it in plate 3, fig. A. Regarding this subject, the author writes: "The
quickening power of the earth produces all things that grow forth from it, and
he who says that the earth has no life makes
Page 26
a statement which is flatly contradicted by the most ordinary facts. For what is
dead cannot produce life and growth, seeing that it is devoid of the quickening
spirit. This spirit is the life and soul that dwell in the earth, and are
nourished by heavenly and sidereal influences. For all herbs, trees, and roots,
and all metals and minerals, receive their growth and nutriment from the spirit
of the earth, which is the spirit of life. This spirit is itself fed by the
stars, and is thereby rendered capable of imparting nutriment to all things that
grow, and of nursing them as a mother does her child while it is yet in the
womb. The minerals are hidden in the womb of the earth, and nourished by her
with the spirit which she receives from above.
"Thus the power of growth that I speak of is imparted not by the earth, but
by the life-giving spirit that is in it. If the earth were deserted by this
spirit, it would be dead, and no longer able to afford nourishment to anything.
For its sulphur or richness would lack the quickening spirit without which there
can be neither life nor growth."11
21. Alchemy and Astrology.
The idea that the growth of each metal was under the influence of one of the
heavenly bodies (a theory in harmony with the alchemistic view of the unity of
the Cosmos), was very generally held by the alchemists; and in consequence
thereof, the metals were often referred to by the names or astrological symbols
of their peculiar planets. These particulars are shown in the following table:
--
PLATE 3.A.
SYMBOLICAL ILLUSTRATION
Representing the Fertility of the Earth
PLATE 3.B.
SYMBOLICAL ILLUSTRATION
Representing the Amalgamation of Gold with Mercury
(See page 33.)
Page 27
Metals.Planets, &c.12Symbols.
GoldSun
SilverMoon
MercuryMercury
CopperVenus
IronMars
TinJupiter
LeadSaturn
Moreover, it was thought by some alchemists that a due observance of
astrological conditions was necessary for successfully carrying out important
alchemistic experiments.
22. Alchemistic View of the Nature of Gold.
The alchemists regarded gold as the most perfect metal, silver being
considered more perfect than the rest. The reason of this view is not difficult
to understand: gold is the most beautiful of all the metals, and it retains its
beauty without tarnishing; it resists the action of fire and most corrosive
liquids, and is unaffected by sulphur; it was regarded, as we have pointed out
above (see 9), as symbolical of the regenerate man. Silver, on the other hand,
is, indeed, a beautiful metal which wears well in a pure atmosphere and resists
the action of fire; but it is attacked by certain corrosives (e.g., aqua fortis
or nitric acid) and also by sulphur. Through all the metals, from the one seed,
Nature, according to the
Page 28
alchemists, works continuously up to gold; so that, in a sense, all other metals
are gold in the making; their existence marks the staying of Nature's powers; as
"Eirenæus Philalethes" says: "All metallic seed is the seed of gold; for gold is
the intention of Nature in regard to all metals. If the base metals are not
gold, it is only through some accidental hindrance; they are all potentially
gold." 13 Or, as another alchemist puts it: "Since . . . the substance of the
metals is one, and common to all, and since this substance is (either at once,
or after laying aside in course of time the foreign and evil sulphur of the
baser metals by a process of gradual digestion) changed by the virtue of its own
indwelling sulphur into GOLD, which is the goal of all the metals, and the true
intention of Nature -- we are obliged to admit, and freely confess that in the
mineral kingdom, as well as in the vegetable and animal kingdoms, Nature seeks
and demands a gradual attainment of perfection, and a gradual approximation to
the highest standard of purity and excellence." 14 Such was the alchemistic view
of the generation of the metals; a theory which is admittedly crude, but which,
nevertheless, contains the germ of a great principle of the utmost importance,
namely, the idea that all the varying forms of matter are evolved from some one
primordial stuff -- a principle of which chemical science lost sight for awhile,
for its validity was unrecognised by Dalton's Atomic Theory (at least, as
enunciated by him),
Page 29
but which is being demonstrated, as we hope to show hereinafter, by recent
scientific research. The alchemist was certainly a fantastic evolutionist, but
he was an evolutionist, and, moreover, he did not make the curious and
paradoxical mistake of regarding the fact of evolution as explaining away the
existence of God -- the alchemist recognised the hand of the Divine in nature --
and, although, in these days of modern science, we cannot accept his theory of
the growth of metals, we can, nevertheless, appreciate and accept the
fundamental germ-idea underlying it.
23. The Philosopher's Stone.
The alchemist strove to assist Nature in her gold-making, or, at least, to
carry out her methods. pseudo-Geber taught that the imperfect metals were to be
perfected or cured by the application of "medicines." Three forms of medicines
were distinguished; the first bring about merely a temporary change, and the
changes wrought by the second class, although permanent, are not complete. "A
Medicine of the third Order," he writes, "I call every Preparation, which, when
it comes to Bodies, with its projection, takes away all Corruption, and perfects
them with the Difference of all Compleatment. But this is one only." 15 This,
the true medicine that would produce a real and permanent transmutation is the
Philosopher's Stone, the Masterpiece of alchemistic art. Similar views were held
by all the alchemists, though some of them taught that it was necessary first of
all to reduce the metals to their first
Page 30
substance. Often, two forms of the Philosopher's Stone were distinguished, or
perhaps we should say, two degrees of perfection in the one Stone; that for
transmuting the "imperfect" metals into silver being said to be white, the stone
or "powder of projection" for gold being said to be of a red colour. In other
accounts (see Chapter V.) the medicine is described as of a pale brimstone hue.
Most of the alchemists who claimed knowledge of the Philosopher's Stone or
the materia prima necessary for its preparation, generally kept its nature most
secret, and spoke only in the most enigmatical and allegorical language, the
majority of their recipes containing words of unknown meaning. In some cases
gold or silver, as the case may be, was employed in preparing the "medicine";
and, after projection had been made, this was, of course, obtained again in the
metallic form, the alchemist imagining that a transmutation had been effected.
In the case of the few other recipes that are intelligible, the most that could
be obtained by following out their instructions is a white or yellow metallic
alloy superficially resembling silver or gold.
24. The Nature of the Philosopher's Stone.
The mystical as distinguished from the pseudo-practical descriptions of the
Stone and its preparation are by far the more interesting of the two.
Paracelsus, in his work on The Tincture of the Philosophers, tells us that all
that is necessary for us to do is to mix and coagulate the "rose-coloured blood
from the Lion" and "the gluten from the Eagle," by which he probably meant that
we must combine "philosophical sulphur" with "philosophical mercury."
Page 31
This opinion, that the Philosopher's Stone consists of "philosophical sulphur
and mercury" combined so as to constitute a perfect unity, was commonly held by
the alchemists, and they frequently likened this union to the conjunction of the
sexes in marriage. "Eirenæus Philalethes" tells us that for the preparation of
the Stone it is necessary to extract the seed of gold, though this cannot be
accomplished by subjecting gold to corrosive liquids, but only by a homogeneous
water (or liquid) -- the Mercury of the Sages. In the Book of the Revelation of
Hermes, interpreted by Theophrastus Paracelsus, concerning the Supreme Secret of
the World, the Medicine, which is here, as not infrequently, identified with the
alchemistic essence of all things or Soul of the World, is described in the
following suggestive language: "This is the Spirit of Truth, which the world
cannot comprehend without the interposition of the Holy Ghost, or without the
instruction of those who know it. The same is of a mysterious nature, wondrous
strength, boundless power.... By Avicenna this Spirit is named the Soul of the
World. For, as the Soul moves all the limbs of the Body, so also does this
Spirit move all bodies. And as the Soul is in all the limbs of the Body, so also
is this Spirit in all elementary created things. It is sought by many and found
by few. It is beheld from afar and found near; for it exists in every thing, in
every place, and at all times. It has the powers of all creatures; its action is
found in all elements, and the qualities of all things are therein, even in the
highest perfection . . . it heals all dead and living bodies without other
medicine, . . . converts all metallic
Page 32
bodies into gold, and there is nothing like unto it under Heaven." 16
25. The Theory of Development.
From the ascetic standpoint (and unfortunately, most mystics have been
somewhat overfond of ascetic ideas), the development of the soul is only fully
possible with the mortification of the body; and all true Mysticism teaches that
if we would reach the highest goal possible for man -- union with the Divine --
there must be a giving up of our own individual wills, an abasement of the soul
before the Spirit. And so the alchemists taught that for the achievement of the
magnum opus on the physical plane, we must strip the metals of their outward
properties in order to develop the essence within. As says Helvetius: " . . the
essences of metals are hidden in their outward bodies, as the kernel is hidden
in the nut. Every earthly body, whether animal, vegetable, or mineral, is the
habitation and terrestrial abode of that celestial spirit, or influence, which
is its principle of life or growth. The secret of Alchemy is the destruction of
the body, which enables the Artist to get at, and utilise for his own purposes,
the living soul."17 This killing of the outward nature of material things was to
be brought about by the processes of putrefaction and decay; hence the reason
why such processes figure so largely in alchemistic recipes for the preparation
of the "Divine Magistery."
PLATE 4.A.
SYMBOLICAL ILLUSTRATION
Representing the Coction of Gold Amalgam in a Closed Vessel
PLATE 4.B.
SYMBOLICAL ILLUSTRATION
Representing the Transmutation of the Metals
Page 33
It must be borne in mind, however, that the alchemists used the terms
"putrefaction" and "decay" rather indiscriminately, applying them to chemical
processes which are no longer regarded as such. Pictorial symbols of death and
decay representative of such processes are to be found in several alchemistic
books. There is a curious series of pictures in A Form and Method of Perfecting
Base Metals, by Janus Lacinus, the Calabrian (a short tract prefixed to The New
Pearl of Great Price by Peter Bonus -- see 39), of which we show three examples
in plates 3 and 4. In the first picture of the series (not shown here) we enter
the palace of the king (gold) and observe him sitting crowned upon his throne,
surrounded by his son (mercury) and five servants (silver, copper, tin, iron and
lead). In the next picture (plate 3, fig. B), the son, incited by the servants,
kills his father; and, in the third, he catches the blood of his murdered parent
in his robes; whereby we understand that an amalgam of gold and mercury is to be
prepared, the gold apparently disappearing or dying, whilst the mercury is
coloured thereby. The next picture shows us a grave being dug, i.e., a furnace
is to be made ready. In the fifth picture in the series, the son "thought to
throw his father into the grave, and to leave him there; but . . . both fell in
together"; and in the sixth, picture (plate 4, fig. A), we see the son being
prevented from escaping, both son and father being left in the grave to decay.
Here we have instructions in symbolical form to place the amalgam in a sealed
vessel in the furnace and to allow it to remain there until some change is
observed. So the allegory
Page 34
proceeds. Ultimately the father is restored to life, the symbol of resurrection
being (as might be expected) of frequent occurrence in alchemistic literature.
By this resurrection we understand that the gold will finally be obtained in a
pure form. Indeed, it is now the "great medicine" and, in the last picture of
the series (plate 4, fig. B), the king's son and his five servants are all made
kings in virtue of its powers.
26. The Powers of the Philosopher's Stone.
The alchemists believed that a most minute proportion of the Stone projected
upon considerable quantities of heated mercury, molten lead, or other "base"
metal, would transmute practically the whole into silver or gold. This claim of
the alchemists, that a most minute quantity of the Stone was sufficient to
transmute considerable quantities of "base" metal, has been the object of much
ridicule. Certainly, some of the claims of the alchemists (understood literally)
are out of all reason; but on the other hand, the disproportion between the
quantities of Stone and transmuted metal cannot be advanced as an à priori
objection to the alchemists' claims, inasmuch that a class of chemical reactions
(called "catalytic") is known, in which the presence of a small quantity of some
appropriate form of matter -- the catalyst -- brings about a chemical change in
an indefinite quantity of some other form or forms; thus, for example,
cane-sugar in aqueous solution is converted into two other sugars by the action
of small quantities of acid; and sulphur-dioxide and oxygen, which will not
combine under ordinary conditions, do so readily in the presence of a small
quantity
Page 35
of platinized asbestos, which is obtained unaltered after the reaction is
completed and may be used over and over again (this process is actually employed
in the manufacture of sulphuric acid or oil of vitriol). However, whether any
such catalytic transmutation of the chemical "elements" is possible is merely
conjecture.
27. The Elixir of Life.
The Elixir of Life, which was generally described as a solution of the Stone
in spirits of wine, or identified with the Stone itself, could be applied, so it
was thought, under certain conditions to the alchemist himself, with an entirely
analogous result, i.e., it would restore him to the flower of youth. The idea,
not infrequently attributed to the alchemists, that the Elixir would endow one
with a life of endless duration on the material plane is not in strict accord
with alchemistic analogy. From this point of view, the effect of the Elixir is
physiological perfection, which, although ensuring long life, is not equivalent
to endless life on the material plane. "The Philosophers' Stone," says
Paracelsus, "purges the whole body of man, and cleanses it from all impurities
by the introduction of new and more youthful forces which it joins to the nature
of man." 18 And in another work expressive of the opinions of the same
alchemist, we read: ". . . there is nothing which might deliver the mortal body
from death; but there is One Thing which may postpone decay, renew youth, and
prolong short human
Page 36
life . . . "19 In the theory that a solution of the Philosopher's Stone (which,
it must be remembered, was thought to be of a species with gold) constituted the
Elixir Vitæ, can be traced, perhaps, the idea that gold in a potable form was a
veritable cure-all: in the latter days of Alchemy any yellow-coloured liquid was
foisted upon a credulous public as a medicinal preparation of gold.
28. The Practical Methods of the Alchemists.
We will conclude this chapter with some few remarks regarding the practical
methods of the alchemists. In their experiments, the alchemists worked with very
large quantities of material compared with what is employed in chemical
researches at the present day. They had great belief in the efficacy of time to
effect a desired change in their substances, and they were wont to repeat the
same operation (such as distillation, for example) on the same material over and
over again; which demonstrated their unwearied patience, even if it effected
little towards the attainment of their end. They paid much attention to any
changes of colour they observed in their experiments, and many descriptions of
supposed methods to achieve the magnum opus contain detailed directions as to
the various changes of colour which must be obtained in the material operated
upon if a successful issue to the experiment is desired.20
PLATE 5.
ALCHEMISTIC APPARATUS A and B.
-- Two forms of the apparatus for Sublimation
Page 37
In plates 5 and 6 we give illustrations of some characteristic pieces of
apparatus employed by the alchemists. Plate 5, fig. A, and plate 6, fig. A, are
from a work known as Alchemiae Gebri (1545); plate 5, fig. B, is from Glauber's
work on Furnaces (1651); and plate 6, fig. B, is from a work by Dr. John French
entitled The Art of Distillation (1651).
Page 38
The first figure shows us a furnace and alembics. The alembic proper is a sort
of still-head which can be luted on to a flask or other vessel, and was much
used for distillations. In the present case, however, the alembics are employed
in conjunction with apparatus for subliming difficultly volatile substances.
Plate 5, fig. B, shows another apparatus for sublimation, consisting of a sort
of oven, and three detachable upper chambers, generally called aludels. In both
forms of apparatus the vapours are cooled in the upper part of the vessel, and
the substance is deposited in the solid form, being thereby purified from less
volatile impurities. Plate 6, fig. A, shows an athanor (or digesting furnace)
and a couple of digesting vessels. A vessel of this sort was employed for
heating bodies in a closed space, the top being sealed up when the substances to
be operated upon had been put inside, and the vessel heated in ashes in an
athanor, a uniform temperature being maintained. The pelican, illustrated in
plate 6, fig. B, was used for a similar purpose, the two arms being added in the
idea that the vapours would be circulated thereby.
PLATE 6.
ALCHEMISTIC APPARATUS: A. -- An Athanor. B. -- A Pelican
1. Cf. The Golden Tract concerning the Stone of the Philosophers (The Hermetic
Museum, vol. i. p. 25).
2. Lavoisier (eighteenth century) proved this apparent transmutation to be due
to the action of the water on the glass vessel containing it.
3. Of the Sum of Perfection (see The Works of Geber, translated by Richard
Russel, 1678, pp. 69 and 70).
4. Of the Sum of Perfection (see The Works of Geber, p. 156).
5. See The Works of Geber, p. 160. This view was also held by other alchemists.
6. The New Chemical Light, Part II., Concerning Sulphur (see The Hermetic
Museum, vol. ii. p. 151).
7. See The Golden Tract concerning the Stone of the Philosophers (The Hermetic
Museum, vol. i. p. 17).
8. The New Chemical Light, Part II., Concerning Sulphur (see The Hermetic
Museum, vol. ii. pp. 142-143).
9. ALEXANDER VON SUCHTEN: Man, the best and most perfect of God's creatures. A
more complete Exposition of this Medical Foundation for the less Experienced
Student. (See BENEDICTUS FIGULUS: A Golden and Blessed Casket of Nature's
Marvels, translated by A. E. Waite, 1893, pp. 71 and 72.)
10. THOMAS NORTON: Ordinall of Alchemy (see Theatrum Chemicum Britannicum,
edited by Elias Ashmole, 1652, p. 10).
11. "BASIL VALENTINE": The Twelve Keys (see The Hermetic Museum, vol i. pp.
333-334).
12. This supposed connection between the metals and planets also played an
important part in Talismanic Magic.
13. "EIRENÆUS PHILALETHES": The Metamorphosis of Metals (see The Hermetic
Museum, vol. ii. p. 239).
14. The Golden Tract Concerning the Stone of the Philosophers (see The Hermetic
Museum, vol. i. p. 19).
15. Of the Sum of Perfection (see The Works of Geber, translated by Richard
Russel, 1678, p. 192).
16. See BENEDICTUS FIGULUS: A Golden and Blessed Casket of Nature's Marvels
(translated by A. E. Waite, 1893, pp. 36, 37, and 41).
17. J. F. HELVETIUS: The Golden Calf, ch. iv. (see The Hermetic Museum, vol. ii.
p. 298).
18. THEOPHRASTUS PARACELSUS: The Fifth Book of the Archidoxies (see The Hermetic
and Alchemical Writings of Paracelsus, translated by A. E. Waite, 1894, vol. ii.
p. 39).
19. The Book of the Revelation of Hermes, interpreted by Theophrastus
Paracelsus, concerning the Supreme Secret of the World. (See BENEDICTUS FIGULUS:
A Golden Casket of Nature's Marvels, translated by A. E. Waite, 1893, pp. 33 and
34.)
20. As writes Espagnet in his Hermetic Arcanum, canons 64 and 65: "The Means or
demonstrative signs are Colours, successively and orderly affecting the matter
and its affections and demonstrative passions, whereof there are also three
special ones (as critical) to be noted; to these some add a Fourth. The first is
black, which is called the Crow's head, because of its extreme blackness, whose
crepusculum sheweth the beginning of the action of the fire of nature and
solution, and the blackest midnight sheweth the perfection of liquefaction, and
confusion of the elements. Then the grain putrefies and is corrupted, that it
may be the more apt for generation. The white colour succeedeth the black,
wherein is given the perfection of the first degree, and of the White Sulphur.
This is called the blessed stone; this Earth is white and foliated, wherein
Philosophers do sow their gold. The third is Orange colour, which is produced in
the passage of the white to the red, as the middle, and being mixed of both is
as the dawn with his saffron hair, a forerunner of the Sun. The fourth colour is
Ruddy and Sanguine, which is extracted from the white fire only. Now because
whiteness is easily altered by any other colour before day it quickly faileth of
its candour. But the deep redness of the Sun perfecteth the work of Sulphur,
which is called the Sperm of the male, the fire of the Stone, the King's Crown,
and the Son of Sol, wherein the first labour of the workman resteth.
"Besides these decretory signs which firmly inhere in the matter, and shew its
essential mutations, almost infinite colours appear, and shew themselves in
vapours, as the Rainbow in the clouds, which quickly pass away and are expelled
by those that succeed, more affecting the air than the earth: the operator must
have a gentle care of them, because they are not permanent, and proceed not from
the intrinsic disposition of the matter, but from the fire painting and
fashioning everything after its pleasure, or casually by heat in slight
moisture" (see Collectanea Hermetica, edited by W. Wynn Westcott, vol. i., 1893,
pp. 28 and 29). Very probably this is not without a mystical meaning as well as
a supposed application in the preparation of the physical Stone.
Page 39
Chapter 3
CHAPTER III
THE ALCHEMISTS1
(A. BEFORE PARACELSUS)
29. Hermes Tismegistos.
Having now considered the chief points in the theory of Physical Alchemy, we
must turn our attention to the lives and individual teachings of the alchemists
themselves. The first name which is found in the history of Alchemy is that of
Hermes Trismegistos. We have already mentioned the high esteem in which the
works ascribed to this personage
Page 40
were held by the alchemists ( 6). He has been regarded as the father of Alchemy;
his name has supplied a synonym for the Art -- the Hermetic Art -- and even
to-day we speak of hermetically sealing flasks and the like. But who Hermes
actually was, or even if there were such a personage, is a matter of conjecture.
The alchemists themselves supposed him to have been an Egyptian living about the
time of Moses. He is now generally regarded as purely mythical -- a
personification of Thoth, the Egyptian God of learning; but, of course, some
person or persons must have written the works attributed to him, and the first
of such writers (if, as seems not unlikely, there were more than one) may be
considered to have a right to the name. Of these works, the Divine Pymander,2 a
mystical-religious treatise, is the most important. The Golden Tractate, also
attributed to Hermes, which is an exceedingly obscure alchemistic work, is now
regarded as having been written at a comparatively late date.
30. The Smaragdine Table.
In a work attributed to Albertus Magnus, but which is probably spurious, we
are told that Alexander the Great found the tomb of Hermes in a cave near
Hebron. This tomb contained an emerald table -- "The Smaragdine Table" -- on
which were inscribed the following thirteen sentences in Phoenician characters:
--
1. I speak not fictitious things, but what is true and most certain.
Page 41
2. What is below is like that which is above, and what is above is like that
which is below, to accomplish the miracles of one thing.
3. And as all things were produced by the mediation of one Being, so all things
were produced from this one thing by adaptation.
4. Its father is the Sun, its mother the Moon; the wind carries it in its belly,
its nurse is the earth.
5. It is the cause of all perfection throughout the whole world.
6. Its power is perfect if it be changed into earth.
7. Separate the earth from the fire, the subtle from the gross, acting prudently
and with judgment.
8. Ascend with the greatest sagacity from the earth to heaven, and then again
descend to the earth, and unite together the powers of things superior and
things inferior. Thus you will obtain the glory of the whole world, and all
obscurity will fly far away from you.
9. This thing is the fortitude of all fortitude, because it overcomes all subtle
things, and penetrates every solid thing.
10. Thus were all things created.
11. Thence proceed wonderful adaptations which are produced in this way.
12. Therefore am I called Hermes Trismegistus, possessing the three parts of the
philosophy of the whole world.
13. That which I had to say concerning the operation of the Sun is completed.
These sentences clearly teach the doctrine of the alchemistic essence or "One
Thing," which is everywhere present, penetrating even solids (this we should
Page 42
note is true of the ether of space), and out of which all things of the physical
world are made by adaptation or modification. The terms Sun and Moon in the
above passage probably stand for Spirit and Matter respectively, not gold and
silver.
31. Zosimus of Panopolis.
One of the earliest of the alchemists of whom record remains was Zosimus of
Panopolis, who flourished in the fifth century, and was regarded by the later
alchemists as a master of the Art. He is said to have written many treatises
dealing with Alchemy, but only fragments remain. Of these fragments, Professor
Venable says: " . . . they give us a good idea of the learning of the man and of
his times. They contain descriptions of apparatus, of furnaces, studies of
minerals, of alloys, of glass making, of mineral waters, and much that is
mystical, besides a good deal referring to the transmutation of metals." 3
Zosimus is said to have been the author of the saying, "like begets like," but
whether all the fragments ascribed to him were really his work is doubtful.
Among other early alchemists we may mention also Africanus, the Syrian;
Synesius, Bishop of Ptolemais, and the historian, Olympiodorus of Thebes.
32. Geber.
In the seventh century the Arabians conquered Egypt; and strangely enough,
Alchemy flourished under them to a remarkable degree. Of all the Arabian
alchemists, Geber has been regarded as the greatest; as Professor Meyer says:
"there can be no dispute that with the name Geber was propagated the memory of a
personality
Page 43
with which the chemical knowledge of the time was bound up." 4 Geber is supposed
to have lived about the ninth century, but of his life nothing definite is
known. A large number of works have been ascribed to him, of which the majority
are unknown, but the four Latin MSS. which have been printed under the titles
Summa Perfectionis Mettalorum, De Investigatione Perfectionis Metallorum, De
Invertione Veritatis and De Fornacibus Construendis, were, until a few years
ago, regarded as genuine. On the strength of these works, Geber has ranked high
as a chemist. In them are described the preparation of many important chemical
compounds; the most essential chemical operations, such as sublimation,
distillation, filtration, crystallisation (or coagulation, as the alchemists
called it), &c.; and also important chemical apparatus, for example, the
water-bath, improved furnaces, &c. However, it was shown by the late Professor
Berthelot that Summa Perfectionis Mettalorum is a forgery of the fourteenth
century, and the other works forgeries of an even later date. Moreover, the
original Arabic MSS. of Geber have been brought to light. These true writings of
Geber are very obscure; they give no warrant for believing that the famous
sulphur-mercury theory was due to this alchemist, and they prove him not to be
the expert chemist that he was supposed to have been. The spurious writings
mentioned above show that the pseudo-Geber was a man of wide chemical knowledge
and experience, and play a not inconsiderable part in the history of Alchemy.
Page 44
33. Other Arabian Alchemists.
Among other Arabian alchemists the most celebrated were Avicenna and Rhasis,
who are supposed to have lived some time after Geber; and to whom, perhaps, the
sulphur-mercury theory may have been to some extent due.
The teachings of the Arabian alchemists gradually penetrated into the Western
world, in which, during the thirteenth century, flourished some of the most
eminent of the alchemists, whose lives and teachings we must now briefly
consider.
34. Albertus Magnus.
Albertus Magnus, Albert Groot or Albert von Bollstädt (see plate 7), was born
at Lauingen, probably in 1193. He was educated at Padua, and in his later years
he showed himself apt at acquiring the knowledge of his time. He studied
theology, philosophy and natural science, and is chiefly celebrated as an
Aristotelean philosopher. He entered the Dominican order, taught publicly at
Cologne, Paris and elsewhere, and was made provincial of this order. Later he
had the bishopric of Regensburg conferred on him, but he retired after a few
years to a Dominican cloister, where he devoted himself to philosophy and
science. He was one of the most learned men of his time and, moreover, a man of
noble character. The authenticity of the alchemistic works attributed to him has
been questioned.
35. Thomas Aquinas.
The celebrated Dominican, Thomas Aquinas (see plate 8), was probably a pupil
of Thomas Albertus Magnus, from whom it is thought he imbibed alchemistic
learning. It is very probable, however, that the alchemistic works attributed to
him are spurious. The
PLATE 7.
PORTRAIT OF ALBERTUS MAGNUS.
[by de Bry]
Page 45
author of these works manifests a deeply religious tone, and, according to
Thomson's History of Chemistry, he was the first to employ the term "amalgam" to
designate an alloy of mercury with some other metal. 5
36. Roger Bacon.
Roger Bacon, the most illustrious of the mediæval alchemists, was born near
Ilchester in Somerset, probably in 1214. His erudition, considering the general
state of ignorance prevailing at this time, was most remarkable. Professor Meyer
says: "He is to be regarded as the intellectual originator of experimental
research, if the departure in this direction is to be coupled with any one name
-- a direction which, followed more and more as time went on, gave to the
science [of Chemistry] its own peculiar stamp, and ensured its steady
development."6 Roger Bacon studied theology and science at Oxford and at Paris;
and he joined the Franciscan order, at what date, however, is uncertain. He was
particularly interested in optics, and certain discoveries in this branch of
physics have been attributed to him, though probably erroneously. It appears,
also, that he was acquainted with gunpowder, which was, however, not employed in
Europe until many years later. 7 Unfortunately, he earned the undesirable
reputation of being in communication with the powers of darkness, and as he did
not hesitate to oppose many of the opinions current at the time, he
Page 46
suffered much persecution. He was a firm believer in the powers of the
Philosopher's Stone to transmute large quantities of "base" metal into gold, and
also to extend the life of the individual. "Alchimy," he says, "is a Science,
teaching how to transforme any kind of mettall into another: and that by a
proper medicine, as it appeareth by many Philosophers Bookes. Alchimy therefore
is a science teaching how to make and compound a certaine medicine, which is
called Elixir, the which when it is cast upon mettals or imperfect bodies, doth
fully perfect them in the verie projection."8 He also believed in Astrology;
but, nevertheless, he was entirely opposed to many of the magical and
superstitious notions held at the time, and his tract, De Secretis Operibus
Artis et Naturæ, et de Nullitate Magiæ, was an endeavour to prove that many
so-called "miracles" could be brought about simply by the aid of natural
science. Roger Bacon was a firm supporter of the Sulphur-Mercury theory: he
says: " . . . the natural principles in the mynes, are Argent-vive, and Sulphur.
All mettals and minerals, whereof there be sundrie and divers kinds, are
begotten of these two: but I must tel you, that nature alwaies intendeth and
striveth to the perfection of Gold: but many accidents coming between, change
the metalls.... For according to the puritie and impuritie of the two aforesaide
principles, Argent-vive and Sulphur, pure, and impure mettals are ingendred."9
He expresses surprise that any should employ animal and vegetable substances in
their attempts to prepare the Stone, a practice common to some alchemists but
warmly criticised by
Page 47
others. He says: "Nothing may be mingled with mettalls which hath not beene made
or sprung from them, it remaineth cleane inough, that no strange thing which
hath not his originall from these two [viz., sulphur and mercury], is able to
perfect them, or to make a chaunge and new transmutation of them: so that it is
to be wondered at, that any wise man should set his mind upon living creatures,
or vegetables which are far off, when there be minerals to bee found nigh
enough: neither may we in any wise thinke, that any of the Philosophers placed
the Art in the said remote things, except it were by way of comparison." 10 The
one process necessary for the preparation of the Stone, he tells us, is
"continuall concoction" in the fire, which is the method that "God hath given to
nature." 11 He died about 1294.
37. Arnold de Villanova.
The date and birthplace of Arnold de Villanova, or Villeneuve, are both
uncertain. He studied medicine at Paris, and in the latter part of the
thirteenth century practised professionally in Barcelona. To avoid persecution
at the hands of the Inquisition, he was obliged to leave Spain, and ultimately
found safety with Frederick II. in Sicily. He was famous not only as an
alchemist, but also as a skilful physician. He died (it is thought in a
shipwreck) about 1310-1313.
38. Raymond Lully.
Raymond Lully, the son of a noble Spanish family, was born at Palma (in
Majorca) about 1235. He was a man of somewhat eccentric character -- in his
youth a man of pleasure; in his maturity,
Page 48
a mystic and ascetic. His career was of a roving and adventurous character. We
are told that, in his younger days, although married, he became violently
infatuated with a lady of the name of Ambrosia de Castello, who vainly tried to
dissuade him from his profane passion. Her efforts proving futile, she requested
Lully to call upon her, and in the presence of her husband, bared to his sight
her breast, which was almost eaten away by a cancer. This sight -- so the story
goes -- brought about Lully's conversion. He became actuated by the idea of
converting to Christianity the heathen in Africa, and engaged the services of an
Arabian whereby he might learn the language. The man, however, discovering his
master's object, attempted to assassinate him, and Lully narrowly escaped with
his life. But his enthusiasm for missionary work never abated -- his central
idea was the reasonableness and demonstrability of Christian doctrine -- and
unhappily he was, at last, stoned to death by the inhabitants of Bugiah (in
Algeria) in 1315. 12
A very large number of alchemistic, theological and other treatises are
attributed to Lully, many of which are undoubtedly spurious; and it is a
difficult question to decide exactly which are genuine. He is supposed to have
derived a knowledge of Alchemy from Roger Bacon and Arnold de Villanova. It
appears more probable, however, either that Lully the alchemist was a personage
distinct from the Lully whose life we have sketched above, or that the
alchemistic writings attributed to him are forgeries of a similar nature to
Page 49
the works of pseudo-Geber ( 32). Of these alchemical writings we may here
mention the Clavicula. This he says is the key to all his other books on
Alchemy, in which books the whole Art is fully declared, though so obscurely as
not to be understandable without its aid. In this work an alleged method for
what may be called the multiplication of the "noble" metals rather than
transmutation is described in clear language; but it should be noticed that the
stone employed is itself a compound either of silver or gold. According to
Lully, the secret of the Philosopher's Stone is the extraction of the mercury of
silver or gold. He writes: "Metals cannot be transmuted.... in the Minerals,
unless they be reduced into their first Matter.... Therefore I counsel you, O my
Friends, that you do not work but about Sol and Luna, reducing them into the
first Matter, our Sulphur and Argent vive: therefore, Son, you are to use this
venerable Matter; and I swear unto you and promise, that unless you take the
Argent vive of these two, you go to the Practick as blind men without eyes or
sense. . . . "13
39. Peter Bonus.
In 1546, a work was published entitled Magarita Pretiosa, which claimed to be
a "faithful abridgement," by "Janus Lacinus Therapus, the Calabrian," of a MS.
written by Peter Bonus in the fourteenth century. An abridged English
translation of this book by Mr. A. E. Waite was published in 1894. Of the life
of Bonus, who is said to have been an inhabitant of Pola, a seaport
Page 50
of Istria, nothing is known; but the Magarita Pretiosa is an alchemistic work of
considerable interest. The author commences, like pseudo-Geber in his Sum of
Perfection, by bringing forward a number of very ingenious arguments against the
validity of the Art; he then proceeds with arguments in favour of Alchemy and
puts forward answers in full to the former objections; further difficulties,
&c., are then dealt with. In all this, compared with many other alchemists,
Bonus, though somewhat prolix, is remarkably lucid. All metals, he argues,
following the views of pseudo-Geber, consist of mercury and sulphur; but whilst
the mercury is always one and the same, different metals contain different
sulphurs. There are also two different kinds of sulphurs -- inward and outward.
Sulphur is necessary for the development of the mercury, but for the final
product, gold, to come forth, it is necessary that the outward and impure
sulphur be purged off. "Each metal," says Bonus, "differs from all the rest, and
has a certain perfection and completeness of its own; but none, except gold, has
reached that highest degree of perfection of which it is capable. For all common
metals there is a transient and a perfect state of inward completeness, and this
perfect state they attain either through the slow operation of Nature, or
through the sudden transformatory power of our Stone. We must, however, add that
the imperfect metals form part of the great plan and design of Nature, though
they are in course of transformation into gold. For a large number of very
useful and indispensable tools and utensils could not be provided at all if
there were no copper, iron, tin, or lead, and if all metals
Page 51
were either silver or gold. For this beneficent reason Nature has furnished us
with the metallic substance in all its different stages of development, from
iron, or the lowest, to gold, or the highest state of metallic perfection.
Nature is ever studying variety, and, for that reason, instead of covering the
whole face of the earth with water, has evolved out of that elementary substance
a great diversity of forms, embracing the whole animal, vegetable and mineral
world. It is, in like manner, for the use of men that Nature has differentiated
the metallic substance into a great variety of species and forms." 14 According
to this interesting alchemistic work, the Art of Alchemy consists, not in
reducing the imperfect metals to their first substance, but in carrying forward
Nature's work, developing the imperfect metals to perfection and removing their
impure sulphur.
40. Nicolas Flamel.
Nicolas Flamel (see plate 8) was born about 1330, probably in Paris. His
parents were poor, and Nicolas took up the trade of a scrivener. In the course
of time, Flamel became a very wealthy man and, at the same time, it appears, one
who exhibited considerable munificence. This increase in Flamel's wealth has
been attributed to supposed success in the Hermetic Art. We are told that a
remarkable book came into the young scrivener's possession, which, at first, he
was unable to understand, until, at last, he had the good fortune to meet an
adept who translated its mysteries for him. This book revealed the occult
secrets of Alchemy, and by its means Nicolas was enabled
Page 52
to obtain immense quantities of gold. This story, however, appears to be of a
legendary nature, and it seems more likely that Flamel's riches resulted from
his business as a scrivener and from moneylending. At any rate, all of the
alchemistic works attributed to Flamel are of more or less questionable origin.
One of these, entitled A Short Tract, or Philosophical Summary, will be found in
The Hermetic Museum. It is a very brief work, supporting the sulphur-mercury
theory.
41. "Basil Valentine" and "The Triumphal Chariot of Antimony".
Probably the most celebrated of all alchemistic books is the work known as
Triumph-Wagen des Antimonii. A Latin translation with a commentary by Theodore
Kerckringius was published in 1685, and an English translation of this version
by Mr A. E. Waite appeared in 1893. The author describes himself as "Basil
Valentine, a Benedictine monk." In his "Practica," another alchemistic work, he
says: "When I had emptied to the dregs the cup of human suffering, I was led to
consider the wretchedness of this world, and the fearful consequences of our
first parents' disobedience . . . I made haste to withdraw myself from the evil
world, to bid farewell to it, and to devote myself to the Service of God."15 He
proceeds to relate that he entered a monastery, but finding that he had some
time on his hands after performing his daily work and devotions, and not wishing
to pass this time in idleness, he took up the study of Alchemy, "the
investigation of those natural secrets by which God has
PLATE 8A.
PORTRAIT OF THOMAS AQUINAS
PLATE 8B.
PORTRAIT OF NICOLAS FLAMEL
Page 53
shadowed out eternal things," and at last his labours were rewarded by the
discovery of a Stone most potent in the curing of diseases. In The Triumphal
Chariot of Antimony are accurately described a large number of antimonial
preparations, and as Basil was supposed to have written this work some time in
the fifteenth century, these preparations were accordingly concluded to have
been, for the most part, his own discoveries. He defends with the utmost vigour
the medicinal values of antimony, and criticises in terms far from mild the
physicians of his day. On account of this work Basil Valentine has ranked very
high as an experimental chemist; but from quite early times its date and
authorship have been regarded alike as doubtful; and it appears from the
researches of the late Professor Schorlemmer "to be an undoubted forgery dating
from about 1600, the information being culled from the works of other writers. .
."16 Probably the other works ascribed to Basil Valentine are of a like nature.
The Triumphal Chariot of Antimony does, however, give an accurate account of the
knowledge of antimony of this time, and the pseudo-Valentine shows himself to
have been a man of considerable experience with regard to this subject.
42. Isaac of Holland.
Isaac of Holland and a countryman of the same name, probably his son, are
said to have been the first Dutch alchemists. They are supposed to have lived
during the fifteenth century, but of their lives nothing is known. Isaac,
although not free from superstitious opinions, appears to have been a practical
Page 54
chemist, and his works, which abound in recipes, were held in great esteem by
Paracelsus and other alchemists. He held that all things in this world are of a
dual nature, partly good and partly bad. " . . . All that God hath created good
in the upper part of the world," he writes, "are perfect and uncorruptible, as
the heaven: but whatsoever in these lower parts, whether it be in beasts,
fishes, and all manner of sensible creatures, hearbs or plants, it is indued
with a double nature, that is to say, perfect, and unperfect; the perfect nature
is called the Quintessence, the unperfect the Feces or dreggs, or the venemous
or combustible oile. . . God hath put a secret nature or influence in every
creature, and . . . to every nature of one sort or kind he hath given one common
influence and vertue, whether it bee on Physick or other secret works, which
partly are found out by naturall workmanship. And yet more things are unknown
than are apparent to our senses."17 He gives directions for extracting the
Quintessence, for which marvellous powers are claimed, out of sugar and other
organic substances; and he appears to be the earliest known writer who makes
mention of the famous sulphur-mercury-salt theory.
43. Bernard Trévisan.
Bernard Trévisan, a French count of the fifteenth century, squandered
enormous sums of money in the search for the Stone, in which the whole of his
life and energies were engaged. He seems to have become the dupe of one
charlatan after another,
Page 55
but at last, at a ripe old age, he says that his labours were rewarded, and that
he successfully performed the magnum opus. In a short, but rather obscure work,
he speaks of the Philosopher's Stone in the following words: "This Stone then is
compounded of a Body and Spirit, or of a volatile and fixed Substance, and that
is therefore done, because nothing in the World can be generated and brought to
light without these two Substances, to wit, a Male and Female: From whence it
appeareth, that although these two Substances are not of one and the same
species, yet one Stone doth thence arise, and although they appear and are said
to be two Substances, yet in truth it is but one, to wit, Argent-vive."18 He
appears, however, to have added nothing to our knowledge of chemical science.
44. Sir George Ripley.
Sir George Ripley, an eminent alchemistic philosopher of the fifteenth
century, entered upon a monastic life when a youth, becoming one of the canons
regular of Bridlington. After some travels he returned to England and obtaining
leave from the Pope to live in solitude, he devoted himself to the study of the
Hermetic Art. His chief work is The Compound of Alchymie . . . conteining twelve
Gates, which was written in 1471. In this curious work, we learn that there are
twelve processes necessary for the achievement of the magnum opus, namely,
Calcination, Solution, Separation, Conjunction, Putrefaction, Congelation,
Cibation, Sublimation, Fermentation,
Page 56
Exaltation, Multiplication, and Projection. These are likened to the twelve
gates of a castle which the philosopher must enter. At the conclusion of the
twelfth gate, Ripley says: --
"Now thou hast conqueryd the twelve Gates,
And all the Castell thou holdyst at wyll,
Keep thy Secretts in store unto thy serve;
And the commaundements of God looke thou fulfull:
In fyer conteinue thy glas styli,
And Multeply thy Medcyns ay more and more,
For wyse men done say store ys no sore." 19
At the conclusion of the work he tells us that in all that he wrote before he
was mistaken; he says: --
"I made Solucyons full many a one,
Of Spyrytts, Ferments, Salts, Yerne and Steele;
Wenyug so to make the Phylosophers Stone:
But fynally I lost eche dele,
After my Boks yet wrought I well;
Whych evermore untrue I provyd,
That made me oft full sore agrevyd." 20
Ripley did much to popularise the works of Raymond Lully in England, but does
not appear to have added to the knowledge of practical chemistry. His Bosom
Book, which contains an alleged method for preparing the Stone, will be found in
the Collectanea Chemica (1893).
45. Thomas Norton.
Thomas Norton, the author of the celebrated Ordinall of Alchemy, was probably
born shortly before
Page 57
the commencement of the fifteenth century. The Ordinall, which is written in
verse (and which will be found in Ashmole's Theatrum Chemicum Britannicum),21 is
anonymous, but the author's identity is revealed by a curious device. The
initial syllables of the proem and of the first six chapters, together with the
first line of the seventh chapter, give the following couplet: --
"Tomais Norton of Briseto,
A parfet Master ye maie him call trowe."
Samuel Norton, the grandson of Thomas, who was also an alchemist, says that
Thomas Norton was a member of the privy chamber of Edward IV. Norton's
distinctive views regarding the generation of the metals we have already
mentioned (see 20). He taught that true knowledge of the Art of Alchemy could
only be obtained by word of mouth from an adept, and in his Ordinall he gives an
account of his own initiation. He tells us that he was instructed by his master
(probably Sir George Ripley) and learnt the secrets of the Art in forty days, at
the age of twenty-eight. He does not, however, appear to have reaped the fruits
of this knowledge. Twice, he tells us, did he prepare the Elixir, and twice was
it stolen from him; and he is said to have died in 1477, after ruining himself
and his friends by his unsuccessful experiments.
1. It is perhaps advisable to mention here that the lives of the alchemists, for
the most part, are enveloped in considerable obscurity, and many points in
connection therewith are in dispute. The authorities we have followed will be
found, as a rule, specifically mentioned in what follows; but we may here
acknowledge our general indebtedness to the following works, though, as the
reader will observe, many others have been consulted as well: Thomas Thomson's
The History of Chemistry, Meyer's A History of Chemistry, the anonymous Lives of
Alchemystical Philosophers (1815), the works of Mr. A. E. Waite, the Dictionary
of National Biography, and certain articles in the Encyclopdæia Britannica. This
must not be taken to mean, however, that we have always followed the conclusions
reached in these works, for so far as the older of them are concerned, recent
researches by various authorities -- to whom reference will be found in the
following pages, and to whom, also, we are indebted -- have shown, in certain
cases, that such are not tenable.
2. Dr. Everard's translation of this work forms vol. ii. of the Collectanea
Hermetica, edited by W. Wynn Westcott, M. B., D.P.H. It is now, however, out of
print.
3. F. P. VENABLE, Ph.D.: A Short History of Chemistry (1896), p. 13.
4. ERNST VON MEYER: A History of Chemistry (translated by Dr. McGowan, 1906), p.
31.
5. THOMAS THOMSON: The History of Chemistry, vol. i. (1830), p. 33.
6. ERNST VON MEYER: A History of Chemistry (translated by Dr. McGowan, 1906), p.
35.
7. See ROGER BACON'S Discovery of Miracles, chaps. vi. and xi.
8. ROGER BACON: The Mirror of Alchimy (1597), p. 4.
9. Ibid. p. 2.
10. ROGER BACON: The Mirror of Alchimy (1597), p. 4.
11. Ibid. p. 9.
12. See Lives of Alchemystical Philosophers (1815), pp. 17 et seq.
13. RAYMOND LULLY: Clavicula, or, A little Key (see Aurifontina Chymica, 1680,
p. 167).
14. PETER BONUS: The New Pearl of Great Price (Mr. A. E Waite's translation, pp.
176-177).
15. "BASIL VALENTINE": The "Practica" (see The Hermetic Museum, vol. i. p. 313).
16. Sir H. E. ROSCOE, F.R.S., and C. SCHORLEMMER, F.R.S: A Treatise on
Chemistry, vol. i. (1905), p. 9.
17. One hundred and Fourteen Experiments and Cures of the Famous Physitian
Theophrastus Paracelsus, whereunto is added. . .certain Secrets of Isaac
Hollandus, concerning the Vegetall and Animall Work (1652), p. 35.
18. BERNARD, EARL OF TRÉVISAN: A Treatise of the Philosophers Stone, 1683 (see
Collectanea Chymica: A Collection of Ten Several Treatises in Chemistry, 1684,
P. 91).
19. Sir GEORGE RIPLEY: The Compound of Alchemy (see Theatrum Chemicum
Britannicum, edited by Elias Ashrnole, 1652, p. 186).
20. Ibid p. 189.
21. A prose version will be found in The Hermetic Museum translated back into
English from a Latin translation by Maier.
Page 58
Chapter 4
CHAPTER IV
THE ALCHEMISTS (continued)
(B. PARACELSUS AND AFTER)
46. Paracelsus.
That erratic genius, Paracelsus -- or, to give him his correct name, Philip
(?) Aureole (?) Theophrast Bombast von Hohenheim -- whose portrait forms the
frontispiece to the present work -- was born at Einsiedeln in Switzerland in
1493. He studied the and medical arts under his father, who was a physician, and
continued his studies later at the University of Basle. He also gave some time
to the study of magic and the occult sciences under the famous Trithemius of
Spanheim. Paracelsus, however, found the merely theoretical "book learning" of
the university curriculum unsatisfactory and betook himself to the mines, where
he might study the nature of metals at first hand. He then spent several years
in travelling, visiting some of the chief countries of Europe. At last he
returned to Basle, the chair of Medical Science of his old university being
bestowed upon him. The works of Isaac of Holland had inspired him with the
desire to improve upon the medical science of his day, and in his lectures
(which were,
Page 59
contrary to the usual custom, delivered not in Latin, but in the German
language) he denounced in violent terms the teachings of Galen and Avicenna, who
were until then the accredited authorities on medical matters. His use of the
German tongue, his coarseness in criticism and his intense self-esteem, combined
with the fact that he did lay bare many of the medical follies and frauds of his
day, brought him into very general dislike with the rest of the physicians, and
the municipal authorities siding with the aggrieved apothecaries and physicians,
whose methods Paracelsus had exposed, he fled from Basle and resumed his former
roving life. He was, so we are told, a man of very intemperate habits, being
seldom sober (a statement seriously open to doubt); but on the other hand, he
certainly accomplished a very large number of most remarkable cures, and,
judging from his writings, he was inspired by lofty and noble ideals and a
fervent belief in the Christian religion. He died in 1241.
Paracelsus combined in himself such opposite characteristics that it is a
matter of difficulty to criticise him aright. As says Professor Ferguson: "It is
most difficult . . . to ascertain what his true character really was, to
appreciate aright this man of fervid imagination, of powerful and persistent
conviction, of unbated honesty and love of truth, of keen insight into the
errors (as he thought them) of his time, of a merciless will to lay bare these
errors and to reform the abuses to which they gave rise, who in an instant
offends by his boasting, his grossness, his want of self-respect. It is a
problem how to reconcile his ignorance, his weakness, his superstition, his
crude
Page 60
notions, his erroneous observations, his ridiculous inferences and theories,
with his grasp of method, his lofty views of the true scope of medicine, his
lucid statements, his incisive and epigrammatic criticisms of men and motives."1
It is also a problem of considerable difficulty to determine which of the many
books attributed to him are really his genuine works, and consequently what his
views on certain points exactly were.
47. Views of Paracelsus.
Paracelsus was the first to recognise the desirability of investigating the
physical universe with a motive other than alchemistic. He taught that "the
object of chemistry is not to make gold, but to prepare medicines," and founded
the school of Iatro-chemistry or Medical Chemistry. This synthesis of chemistry
with medicine was of very great benefit to each science; new possibilities of
chemical investigation were opened up now that the aim was not purely
alchemistic. Paracelsus's central theory was that of the analogy between man,
the microcosm, and the world or macrocosm. He regarded all the actions that go
on in the human body as of a chemical nature, and he thought that illness was
the result of a disproportion in the body between the quantities of the three
great principles -- sulphur, mercury, and salt -- which he regarded as
constituting all things; for example, he considered an excess of sulphur as the
cause of fever, since sulphur was the fiery principle, &c. The basis of the
iatro-chemical doctrines, namely, that the healthy human body is a particular
combination of
Page 61
chemical substances: illness the result of some change in this combination, and
hence curable only by chemical medicines, expresses a certain truth, and is
undoubtedly a great improvement upon the ideas of the ancients. But in the
elaboration of his medical doctrines Paracelsus fell a prey to exaggeration and
the fantastic, and many of his theories appear to be highly ridiculous. This
extravagance is also very pronounced in the alchemistic works attributed to him;
for example, the belief in the artificial creation of minute living creatures
resembling men (called "homunculi") -- a belief of the utmost absurdity, if we
are to understand it literally. On the other hand, his writings do contain much
true teaching of a mystical nature; his doctrine of the correspondence of man
with the universe considered as a whole, for example, certainly being radically
true, though fantastically stated and developed by Paracelsus himself.
48. Iatro-Chemistry.
Between the pupils of Paracelsus and the older school of medicine, as might
well be supposed, a battle royal was waged for a considerable time, which
ultimately concluded, if not with a full vindication of Paracelsus's teaching,
yet with the acceptance of the fundamental iatro-chemical doctrines.
Henceforward it is necessary to distinguish between the chemists and the
alchemists -- to distinguish those who pursued chemical studies with the object
of discovering and preparing useful medicines, and later those who pursued such
studies for their own sake, from those whose object was the transmutation of the
"base" metals into gold, whether from purely selfish motives, or with the desire
to
Page 62
demonstrate on the physical plane the validity of the doctrines of Mysticism.
However, during the following century or two we find, very often, the chemist
and the alchemist united in one and the same person. Men such as Glauber and
Boyle, whose names will ever be remembered by chemists, did not doubt the
possibility of performing the magnum opus. In the present chapter, however, we
shall confine our attention for the most part to those men who may be regarded,
for one reason or another, particularly as alchemists. And the alchemists of the
period we are now considering present a very great diversity. On the one hand,
we have men of much chemical knowledge and skill such as Libavius and van
Helmont, on the other hand we have those who stand equally as high as exponents
of mystic wisdom -- men such as Jacob Boehme and, to a less extent, Thomas
Vaughan. We have those, who, although they did not enrich the science of
Chemistry with any new discoveries, were, nevertheless, regarded as masters of
the Hermetic Art; and, finally, we have alchemists of the Edward Kelley and
"Cagliostro" type, whose main object was their own enrichment at their
neighbours' expense. Before, however, proceeding to an account of the lives and
teachings of these men, there is one curious matter -- perhaps the most
remarkable of all historical curiosities -- that calls for some brief
consideration. We refer to the "far-famed" Rosicrucian Society.
49. The Rosicrucian Society.
The exoteric history of the Rosicrucian Society commences with the year 1614.
In that year there was published at Cassel in Germany a pamphlet entitled The
Discovery of the Fraternity of the Meritorious Order of the Rosy Cross,
addressed to
Page 63
the Learned in General and the Governors of Europe. After a discussion of the
momentous question of the general reformation of the world, which was to be
accomplished through the medium of a secret confederacy of the wisest and most
philanthropic men, the pamphlet proceeds to inform its readers that such an
association is in existence, founded over one hundred years ago by the famous
C.R.C., grand initiate in the mysteries of Alchemy, whose history (which is
clearly of a fabulous or symbolical nature) is given. The book concludes by
inviting the wise men of the time to join the Fraternity, directing those who
wished to do so to indicate their desire by the publication of printed letters,
which should come into the hands of the Brotherhood. As might well be expected,
the pamphlet was the cause of considerable interest and excitement, but although
many letters were printed, apparently none of them were vouchsafed a reply. The
following year a further pamphlet appeared, The Confession of the Rosicrucian
Fraternity, addressed to the Learned in Europe, and in 1616, The Chymical
Nuptials of Christian Rosencreutz. This latter book is a remarkable allegorical
romance, describing how an old man, a lifelong student of the alchemistic Art,
was present at the accomplishment of the magnum opus in the year 1459. An
enormous amount of controversy took place; it was plain to some that the Society
had deluded them, whilst others hotly maintained its claims; but after about
four years had passed, the excitement had subsided, and the subject ceased, for
the time being, to arouse any particular interest.
Some writers, even in recent times, more gifted for
Page 64
romance than for historical research, have seen in the Rosicrucian Society a
secret confederacy of immense antiquity and of stupendous powers, consisting of
the great initiates of all ages, supposed to be in possession of the arch
secrets of alchemistic art. It is abundantly evident, however, that it was
nothing of the sort. It is clear from an examination of the pamphlets already
mentioned that they are animated by Lutheran ideals; and it is of interest to
note that Luther's seal contained both the cross and the rose -- whence the term
"Rosicrucian." The generally accepted theory regards the pamphlets as a sort of
elaborate hoax perpetrated by Valentine Andrea, a young and benevolent Lutheran
divine; but more, however, than a mere hoax. As the late Mr. R. A. Vaughan
wrote: " . . . this Andrea writes the Discovery of the Rosicrucian Brotherhood,
a jeu-d'esprit with a serious purpose, just as an experiment to see whether
something cannot be done by combined effort to remedy the defect and abuses --
social, educational, and religious, so lamented by all good men. He thought
there were many Andreas scattered throughout Europe -- how powerful would be
their united systematic action! . . . He hoped that the few nobler minds whom he
desired to organize would see through the veil of fiction in which he had
invested his proposal; that he might communicate personally with some such, if
they should appear; or that his book might lead them to form among themselves a
practical philanthropic confederacy, answering to the serious purpose he had
embodied in his fiction." 2 His scheme was a
Page 65
failure, and on seeing its result, Andrea, not daring to reveal himself as the
author of the pamphlets, did his best to put a stop to the folly by writing
several works in criticism of the Society and its claims. Mr. A. E. Waite,
however, whose work on the subject should be consulted for further information,
rejects this theory, and suggests that the Rosicrucian Society was probably
identical with the Militia Crucifera Evangelica, a secret society founded in
Nuremburg by the Lutheran alchemist and mystic, Simon Studion.3
50. Thomas Charnock.
We must now turn our attention to the lives and teachings of the alchemists
of the period under consideration, treating them, as far as possible, in
chronological order; whence the first alchemist to come under our notice is
Thomas Charnock.
Thomas Charnock was born at Faversham (Kent), either in the year 1524 or in
1526. After some travels over England he settled at Oxford, carrying on
experiments in Alchemy. In 1557 he wrote his Breviary of Philosophy. This work
is almost entirely autobiographical, describing Charnock's alchemistic
experiences. He tells us that he was initiated into the mysteries of the
Hermetic Art by a certain James S. of Salisbury; he also had another master, an
old blind man, who on his death-bed instructed Charnock. Unfortunately, however,
Thomas was doomed to failure in his experiments. On the first attempt his
apparatus caught fire and his work was destroyed. His next experiments were
ruined by the negligence of a servant. His final misfortune shall be described
Page 66
in his own words. He had started the work for a third time, and had spent much
money on his fire, hoping to be shortly rewarded....
"Then a Gentlemen that oughte me great mallice
Caused me to be press to goe serve at Callys:
When I saw there was no other boote,
But that I must goe spight of my heart roote;
In my fury I tooke a Hatchet in my hand,
And brake all my Worke whereas it did stand." 4
Thomas Charnock married in 1562 a Miss Agnes Norden. He died in 1581. It is,
perhaps, unnecessary to say that his name does not appear in the history of
Chemistry.
51. Andreas Libavius.
Andreas Libavius was born at Halle in Germany in 1540, where he studied
medicine and practised for a short time as a physician. He accepted the
fundamental iatro-chemical doctrines, at the same time, however, criticising
certain of the more extravagant views expressed by Paracelsus. He was a firm
believer in the transmutation of the metals, but his own activities were chiefly
directed to the preparation of new and better medicines. He enriched the science
of Chemistry by many valuable discoveries, and tin tetra-chloride, which he was
the first to prepare, is still known by the name of spiritus fumans Libavii.
Libavius was a man possessed of keen powers of observation; and his work on
Chemistry, which contains a full account of the knowledge of the science of his
time, may be
Page 67
regarded as the first text-book of Chemistry. It was held in high esteem for a
considerable time, being reprinted on several occasions.
52. Edward Kelley and John Dee.
Edward Kelley or Kelly (see plate 9) was born at Worcester on August 1, 1555.
His life is so obscured by various traditions that It is very difficult to
arrive at the truth concerning it. The latest, and probably the best, account
will be found in Miss Charlotte Fell Smith's John Dee (1909). Edward Kelley,
according to some accounts, was brought up as an apothecary.5 He is also said to
have entered Oxford University under the pseudonym of Talbot. 6 Later, he
practised as a notary in London. He is said to have committed a forgery, for
which he had his ears cropped; but another account, which supposes him to have
avoided this penalty by making his escape to Wales, is not improbable. Other
crimes of which he is accused are coining and necromancy. He was probably not
guilty of all these crimes, but that he was undoubtedly a charlatan and
profligate the sequel will make plain. We are told that about the time of his
alleged escape to Wales, whilst in the neighbourhood of Glastonbury Abbey, he
became possessed, by a lucky chance, of a manuscript by St. Dunstan setting
forth the grand secrets of Alchemy, together with some of the two transmuting
tinctures, both white and red,7
Page 68
which had been discovered in a tomb near by. His friendship with John Dee, or
Dr. Dee as he is generally called, commenced in 1582. Now, John Dee (see plate
9) was undoubtedly a mathematician of considerable erudition. He was also an
astrologer, and was much interested in experiments in "crystal-gazing," for
which purpose he employed a speculum of polished cannel-coal, and by means of
which he believed that he had communication with the inhabitants of spiritual
spheres. It appears that Kelley, who probably did possess some mediumistic
powers, the results of which he augmented by means of fraud, interested himself
in these experiments, and not only became the doctor's "scryer," but also gulled
him into the belief that he was in the possession of the arch-secrets of
Alchemy. In 1583, Kelley and his learned dupe left England together with their
wives and a Polish nobleman, staying firstly at Cracovia and afterwards at
Prague, where it is not unlikely that the Emperor Rudolph II. knighted Kelley.
As instances of the belief which the doctor had in Kelley's powers as an
alchemist, we may note that in his Private Diary under the date December 19,
1586, Dee records that Kelley performed a transmutation for the benefit of one
Edward Garland and his brother Francis; 8 and
PLATE 9A.
PORTRAIT OF EDWARD KELLEY
PLATE 9B.
PORTRAIT OF JOHN DEE
Page 69
under the date May 10, 1588, we find the following recorded: "E.K. did open the
great secret to me, God be thanked!" 9 That he was not always without doubts as
to Kelley's honesty, however, is evident from other entries in his Diary. In
1587 occurred an event which must be recorded to the partners' lasting shame. To
cap his former impositions, Kelley informed the doctor that by the orders of a
spirit which had appeared to him in the crystal, they were to share "their two
wives in common"; to which arrangement, after some further persuasion, Dee
consented. Kelley's profligacy and violent temper, however, had already been the
cause of some disagreement between him and the doctor, and this incident leading
to a further quarrel, the erstwhile friends parted. In 1589, the Emperor Rudolph
imprisoned Kelley, the price of his freedom being the transmutative secret, or a
substantial quantity of gold, at least, prepared by its aid. He was, however,
released in 1593; but died in 1595; according to one account, as the result of
an accident incurred while attempting to escape from a second imprisonment. Dee
merely records that he received news to the effect that Kelley "was slayne."
It was during his incarceration that he wrote an alchemistic work entitled
The Stone of the Philosophers, which consists largely of quotations from older
alchemistic writings. His other works on Alchemy were probably written at an
earlier period. 10
Page 70
53. Henry Khunrath.
Henry Khunrath was born in Saxony in the second half of the sixteenth
century. He was a follower of Paracelsus, and travelled about Germany,
practising as a physician. "This German alchemist," says Mr. A. E. Waite, " . .
. is claimed as a hierophant of the psychic side of the magnum opus, and. . .
was undoubtedly aware of the larger issues of Hermetic theorems"; he describes
Khunrath's chief work, Amphitheatrum Salilentiæ Æternæ, &c., as "purely mystical
and magical."11
54. Alexander Sethon and Michael Sendivogius.
The date and birthplace of Alexander Sethon, a Scottish alchemist, do not
appear to have been recorded, but Michael Sendivogius was probably born in
Moravia about 1566. Sethon, we are told, was in possession of the arch-secrets
of Alchemy. He visited Holland in 1602, proceeded after a time to Italy, and
passed through Basle to Germany; meanwhile he is said to have performed many
transmutations. Ultimately arriving at Dresden, however, he fell into the
clutches of the young Elector, Christian II., who, in order to extort his
secret, cast him into prison, and put him to the torture, but without avail.
Now, it so happened that Sendivogius, who was in quest of the Philosopher's
Stone, was staying at Dresden, and hearing of Sethon's imprisonment obtained
permission to visit him. Sendivogius offered to effect Sethon's escape in return
for assistance in his alchemistic pursuits, to which arrangement the Scottish
alchemist willingly agreed. After some considerable outlay of money in bribery,
Sendivogius's
Page 71
plan of escape was successfully carried out, and Sethon found himself a free
man; but he refused to betray the high secrets of Hermetic philosophy to his
rescuer. However, before his death, which occurred shortly afterwards, he
presented him with an ounce of the transmutative powder. Sendivogius soon used
up this powder, we are told, in effecting transmutations and cures, and, being
fond of expensive living, he married Sethon's widow, in the hope that she was in
the possession of the transmutative secret. In this, however, he was
disappointed; she knew nothing of the matter, but she had the manuscript of an
alchemistic work written by her late husband. Shortly afterwards Sendivogius
printed at Prague a book entitled The New Chemical Light under the name of
"Cosmopolita," which is said to be this work of Sethon's but which Sendivogius
claimed for his own by the insertion of his name on the title-page, in the form
of an anagram. The tract On Sulphur which was printed at the end of later
editions, however, is said to have been the genuine work of the Moravian. Whilst
his powder lasted, Sendivogius travelled about, performing, we are told, many
transmutations. He was twice imprisoned in order to extort the secrets of
Alchemy from him, on one occasion escaping, and on the other occasion obtaining
his release from the Emperor Rudolph. Afterwards, he appears to have degenerated
into an impostor, but this is said to have been a finesse to hide his true
character as an alchemistic adept. He died in 1646.12
The New Chemical Light was held in great esteem by the alchemists. The first
part treats at
Page 72
length of the generation of the metals and also of the Philosopher's Stone, and
claims to be based on practical experience. The seed of Nature, we are told, is
one, but various products result on account of the different conditions of
development. An imaginary conversation between Mercury, an Alchemist and Nature
which is appended, is not without a touch of humour. Says the Alchemist, in
despair, "Now I see that I know nothing; only I must not say so. For I should
lose the good opinion of my neighbours, and they would no longer entrust me with
money for my experiments. I must therefore go on saying that I know everything;
for there are many that expect me to do great things for them.... There are many
countries, and many greedy persons who will suffer themselves to be gulfed by my
promises of mountains of gold. Thus day will follow day, and in the meantime the
King or the donkey will die, or I myself."13 The second part treats of the
Elements and Principles (see 17 and 19).
55. Michael Maier.
Michael Maier (see plate 10) was born at Rendsberg (in Holstein) about 1568.
He studied medicine assiduously, becoming a most successful physician, and he
was ennobled by Rudolf II. Later on, however, he took up the subject of Alchemy,
and is said to have ruined his health and wasted his fortune in the pursuit of
the alchemistic ignis fatuus -- the Stone of the Philosophers -- travelling
about Germany and elsewhere in order to have converse with those who were
regarded as adepts in the
PLATE 10.
PORTRAIT OF MICHAEL MAIER
[by J. Brunn]
Page 73
Art. He took a prominent part in the famous Rosicrucian controversy (see 49),
defending the claims of the alleged society in several tracts. He is said, on
the one hand, to have been admitted as a member of the fraternity; and on the
other hand, to have himself founded a similar institution. A full account of his
views will be found in the Rev. J. B. Craven's Count Michael Maier: Life and
Writings (1910). He was a very learned man, but his works are somewhat obscure
and abound in fanciful allegories. He read an alchemistic meaning into the
ancient fables concerning the Egyptian and Greek gods and heroes. Like most
alchemists, he held the supposed virtues of mercury in high esteem. In his Lusus
Serius: or, Serious Passe-time, for example, he supposes a Parliament of the
various creatures of the world to meet, in order that Man might choose the
noblest of them as king over all the rest. The calf, the sheep, the goose, the
oyster, the bee, the silkworm, flax and mercury are the chosen representatives,
each of which discourses in turn. It will be unnecessary to state that Mercury
wins the day. Thus does Maier eulogise it: "Thou art the miracle, splendour and
light of the world. Thou art the glory, ornament, and supporter of the Earth.
Thou art the Asyle, Anchor, and tye of the Universe. Next to the minde of Man,
God Created nothing more Noble, more Glorious, or more Profitable."14 His Subtle
Allegory concerning the Secrets of Alchemy, very useful to possess and pleasant
to read, will be found in the Hermetic Museum, together with his Golden Tripod,
Page 74
consisting of translations of "Valentine's" "Practica" and Twelve Keys, Norton's
Ordinal and Cremer's spurious Testament.
56. Jacob Boehme.
Jacob Boehme, or Behmen (see plate 11), was born at Alt Seidenberg, a village
near Görlitz, in 1575. His parents being poor, the education he received was of
a very rudimentary nature, and when his schooling days were over, Jacob was
apprenticed to a shoemaker. His religious nature caused him often to admonish
his fellow-apprentices, which behaviour ultimately caused him to be dismissed.
He travelled about as a journeyman shoemaker, returning, however, to Görlitz in
1594, where he married and settled in business. He claims to have experienced a
wonderful vision in 1598, and to have had a similar vision two years later. In
these visions, the first of which lasted for several days, he believed that he
saw into the inmost secrets of nature; but what at first appeared dim and vague
became clear and coherent in a third vision, which he tells us was vouchsafed to
him in 1610. It was then that he wrote his first book, the Aurora, which he
composed for himself only, in order that he should not forget the mysteries
disclosed to him. At a later period he produced a large number of treatises of a
mystical-religious nature, having spent the intervening years in improving his
early education. These books aroused the ire of the narrow-minded ecclesiastical
authorities of the town, and Jacob suffered considerable persecution in
consequence. He visited Dresden in 1694, and in the same year was there taken
ill with a fever. Returning to Görlitz, he expired in a condition of ecstasy.
PLATE 11.
PORTRAIT OF JACOB BOEHME
Page 75
Jacob Boehme was an alchemist of a purely transcendental order. He had, it
appears, acquired some knowledge of Chemistry during his apprentice days, and he
employed the language of Alchemy in the elaboration of his system of mystical
philosophy. With this lofty mystical-religious system we cannot here deal;
Boehme is, indeed, often accounted the greatest of true Christian mystics; but
although conscious of his superiority over many minor lights, we think this
title is due to Emanuel Swedenborg. The question of the validity of his visions
is also one which lies beyond the scope of the present work; 15 we must confine
our attention to Boehme as an alchemist. The Philosopher's Stone, in Boehme's
terminology, is the Spirit of Christ which must "tincture" the individual soul.
In one place he says, "The Phylosopher's Stone is a very dark disesteemed Stone,
of a Gray colour, but therein lyeth the highest Tincture."16 In the
transcendental sense, this is reminiscent of the words of Isaiah: "He hath no
form nor comeliness; and when we see him, there is no beauty that we should
desire him. . . He was despised and we esteemed him not," &c.17
57. John Baptist van Helmont.
John Baptist van Helmont (see plate 12) was born in Brussels in 1577. He
devoted himself to the study of medicine, at first following Galen, but
Page 76
afterwards accepting in part the teachings of Paracelsus; and he helped to a
large extent in the overthrow of the old medical doctrines. His purely chemical
researches were also of great value to the science. He was a man of profound
knowledge, of a religious temperament, and he possessed a marked liking for the
mystical. He was inspired by the writings of Thomas à Kempis to imitate Christ
in all things, and he practised medicine, therefore, as a work of benevolence,
asking no fee for his services. At the same time, moreover, he was a firm
believer in the powers of the Philosopher's Stone, claiming to have himself
successfully performed the transmutation of the metals on more than one
occasion, though unacquainted with the composition of the medicine employed (see
62). Many of his theoretical views are highly fantastical. He lived a life
devoted to scientific research, and died in 1644.
Van Helmont regarded water as the primary element out of which all things are
produced. He denied that fire was an element or anything material at all, and he
did not accept the sulphur-mercury-salt theory. To him is due the word "gas" --
before his time various gases were looked upon as mere varieties of air -- and
he also made a distinction between gases (which could not be condensed)18 and
vapours (which give liquids on cooling). In particular he investigated the gas
that is now known as carbon-dioxide (carbonic anhydride), which he termed gas
sylvestre; but he lacked suitable apparatus for the
PLATE 12.
PORTRAITS OF J.B. AND F.M. VON HELMONT
(From the Frontispiece to J.B. van Helmont's Oriatrike).
Page 77
collection of gases, and hence was led in many cases to erroneous conclusions.
Francis Mercurius van Helmont (see plate 12), the son of John Baptist, born
in 1618, gained the reputation of having also achieved the magnum opus, since he
appeared to live very luxuriously upon a limited income. He was a skilled
chemist and physician, but held many queer theories, metempsychosis included.
58. Johann Rudolf Glauber.
Johann Rudolf Glauber was born at Karlstadt in 1604. Of his life little is
known. He appears to have travelled about Germany a good deal, afterwards
visiting Amsterdam, where he died in 1668. He was of a very patriotic nature,
and a most ardent investigator in the realm of Chemistry. He accepted the main
iatro-chemical doctrines, but gave most of his attention to applied Chemistry.
He enriched the science with many important discoveries; and crystallised sodium
sulphate is still called "Glauber's Salt." Glauber, himself, attributed
remarkable medicinal powers to this compound. He was a firm believer in the
claims of Alchemy, and held many fantastic ideas.
59. Thomas Vaughan (Eugenius Philalethes).
Thomas Vaughan, who wrote under the name of "Eugenius Philalethes," was born
at Newton in Brecknockshire in 1622. He was educated at Jesus College, Oxford,
graduating as a Bachelor of Arts, and being made a fellow of his college. He
appears also to have taken holy orders and to have had the living of St.
Bridget's (Brecknockshire) conferred on him.19
Page 78
During the civil wars he bore arms for the king, but his allegiance to the
Royalist cause led to his being accused of "drunkenness, swearing, incontinency
and bearing arms for the King"; and he appears to have been deprived of his
living. He retired to Oxford and gave himself up to study and chemical research.
He is to be regarded as an alchemist of the transcendental order. His views as
to the nature of the true Philosopher's Stone may be gathered from the following
quotation: "This, reader," he says, speaking of the mystical illumination, "is
the Christian Philosopher's Stone, a Stone so often inculcated in Scripture.
This is the Rock in the wildernesse, because in great obscurity, and few there
are that know the right way unto it. This is the Stone of Fire in Ezekiel; this
is the Stone with Seven Eyes upon it in Zacharie, and this is the White Stone
with the New Name in the Revelation. But in the Gospel, where Christ himself
speakes, who was born to discover mysteries and communicate Heaven to Earth, it
is more clearly described." 20 At the same time he appears to have carried out
experiments in physical Alchemy, and is said to have met with his death in 1666
through accidentally inhaling the fumes of some mercury with which he was
experimenting.
Thomas Vaughan was an ardent disciple of Cornelius Agrippa, the
sixteenth-century theosophist. He held the peripatetic philosophy in very slight
esteem. He was a man devoted to God, though probably guilty of some youthful
follies, full of love
Page 79
towards his wife, and with an intense desire for the solution of the great
problems of Nature. Amongst his chief works, which are by no means wanting in
flashes of mystic wisdom, may be mentioned Anthroposophia Theomagica, Anima
Magica Abscondita (which were published together), and Magia Adamica; or, the
Antiquitie of Magic. With regard to his views as expressed in the first two of
these books, a controversy ensued between Vaughan and Henry Moore, which was
marked by considerable acrimony. 60. The use of the pseudonym "Philalethes" has
not been confined to one alchemist. The cosmopolitan adept who wrote under the
name of "Eirenæus Philalethes," has been confused, on the one hand, with Thomas
Vaughan, on the other hand with George Starkey (?-1665). He has also been
identified with Dr. Robert Child (1613-1654); but his real identity remains
shrouded in mystery. 21 George Starkey (or Stirk), the son of George Stirk,
minister of the Church of England in Bermuda, graduated at Harvard in 1646 and
practised medicine in the United States of America from 1647 to 1650. In 1651 he
came to England and practised medicine in London. He died of the plague in 1665.
In 1654-5 he published The
Page 80
Marrow of Alchemy, by "Eirenæus Philoponos Philalethes," which some think he had
stolen from his Hermetic Master. Other works by "Eirenæus Philalethes" appeared
after Starkey's death and became immensely popular. The Open Entrance to the
Closed Palace of the King (the most famous of these) and the Three Treatises of
the same author will be found in The Hermetic Museum. Some of his views have
already been noted (see 1 and 22). On certain points he differed from the
majority of the alchemists. He denied that fire was an element, and, also, that
bodies are formed by mixture of the elements. According to him there is one
principle in the metals, namely, mercury, which arises from the aqueous element,
and is termed "metalically differentiated water, i.e., it is water passed into
that stage of development, in which it can no longer produce anything but
mineral substances."22 Philalethes's views as to "metallic seed" are also of
considerable interest. Of the seed of gold, which he regarded as the seed, also,
of all other metals, he says: "The seed of animals and vegetables is something
separate, and may be cut out, or otherwise separately exhibited; but metallic
seed is diffused throughout the metal, and contained in all its smallest parts;
neither can it be discerned from its body: its extraction is therefore a task
which may well tax the ingenuity of the most experienced philosopher...." 23
Well might this have been said of the electron of modern scientific theory.
1. JOHN FERGUSON, M.A.: Article "Paracelsus," Encyclopaedia Britannica, 9th
edition (1885), vol. xviii. p. 236.
2. ROBERT ALFRED VAUGHAN, B.A.: Hours with the Mystics (7th edition, 1895), vol.
ii. bk. 8, chap. ix. p. 134.
3. ARTHUR EDWARD WAITE: The Real History of the Rosicrucians, (1887).
4. THOMAS CHARNOCK: The Breviary of Naturall Philosophy (see Theatrum Chemicum
Britannicum, edited by Ashmole, 1652, p. 295.)
5. See, for example, WILLIAM LILLY: History of His Life and Times (1715,
reprinted in 1822, p. 227).
6. See ANTHONY À WOOD'S account of Kelley's life in Athenæ Oxonienses (3rd
edition, edited by Philip Bliss, vol. i. col. 639.)
7. William Lilly, the astrologer, in his History of His Life and Times (1822
reprint, pp. 225-226), relates a different story regarding the manner in which
Kelley is supposed to have obtained the Great Medicine, but as it is told at
third hand, it is of little importance. We do not suppose that there can be much
doubt that the truth was that Dee and others were deceived by some skilful
conjuring tricks, for whatever else Kelley may have been, he certainly was a
very ingenious fellow.
8. The Private Diary of Dr. John Dee (The Camden Society, 1842), p. 22.
9. The Private Diary of Dr. John Dee (The Camden Society, 1842), p. 27.
10. An English translation of Kelley's alchemistic works were published under
the editorship of Mr. A. E. Waite, in 1893.
11. A. E. WAITE: Lives of Alchemystical Philosophers (1888), p. 159.
12. See F. B.: Lives of Alchemystical Philosophers (1815), pp. 66-69.
13. The New Chemical Light, Part I. (see The Hermetic Museum, vol. ii. p. 125).
14. MICHAEL MAIER: Lusus Serius: or Serious Passe-time (1654), p. 138.
15. For a general discussion of spiritual visions see the present writer's
Matter, Spirit and the Cosmos (Rider, 1910), Chapter IV., "On Matter and
Spirit." Undoubtedly Boehme's visions involved a valuable element of truth, but
at the same time much that was purely relative and subjective.
16. JACOB BOEHME: Epistles (translated by J. E., 1649), Ep. iv. III, p. 65.
17. The Book of the Prophet Isaiah, chap. liii., vv. 2 and 3, R.V.
18. It has since been discovered that all gases can be condensed, given a
sufficient degree of cold and pressure.
19. See ANTHONY A WOOD: Athenæ Oxonienses, edited by Philip Bliss, vol. iii.
(1817), cols. 722-726.
20. THOMAS VAUGHAN ("Eugenius Philalethes"): Anima Magica Abscondita (see The
Magical Writings of Thomas Vaughan, edited by A. E. Waite, 1888, p. 71).
21. See Mr. A. E Waite's Lives of Alchemysitcal Philosophers, art. "Eirenæus
Philalethes," and the Biographical Preface to his The Works of Thomas Vaughan
(1919); also the late Professor Ferguson's " `The Marrow of Alchemy'," The
Journal of The Alchemical Society, vol. iii. (1915), pp. 106 et seq., and
Professor G. L. Kittredge's Doctor Robert Child, The Remonstrant (Camb., Mass.,
1919). The last mentioned writer strongly urges the identification of "Eirenæus
Philalethes" with George Starkey.
22. "EIRENÆUS PHILALETHES" The Metamorphosis of Metals (see The Hermetic Museum,
vol. ii. p. 236). Compare with van Helmont's views, 57.
23. Ibid., p. 240.
Page 81
Chapter 5
CHAPTER V
THE OUTCOME OF ALCHEMY
61. Did the Alchemists achieve the "Magnum Opus"?.
The alchemists were untiring in their search for the Stone of the
Philosophers, and we may well ask whether they ever succeeded in effecting a
real transmutation. That many apparent transmutations occurred, the observers
being either self-deceived by a superficial examination -- certain alloys
resemble the "noble metals" -- or deliberately cheated by impostors, is of
course undoubted. But at the same time we must not assume that, because we know
not the method now, real transmutations have never taken place. Modern research
indicates that it may be possible to transmute other metals, such as lead or
bismuth, into gold, and consequently we must admit the possibility that amongst
the many experiments carried out, a real transmutation was effected. On the
other hand, the method which is suggested by the recent researches in question
could not have been known to the alchemists or accidentally employed by them;
and, moreover, the quantity of gold which is hoped for, should such a method
prove successful, is far below the smallest amount that would have been detected
in
Page 82
the days of Alchemy. But if there be one method whereby the metals may be
transmuted, there may be other methods. And it is not altogether an easy task to
explain away the testimony of eminent men such as were van Helmont and
Helvetius.
62. The Testimony of van Helmont.
John Baptist van Helmont (see 57), who was celebrated alike for his skill as
a physician and chemist and for his nobility of character, testified in more
than one place that he had himself carried out the transmutation of mercury into
gold. But, as we have mentioned above, the composition of the Stone employed on
these occasions was unknown to him. He says: " . . . For truly, I have divers
times seen it [the Stone of the Philosophers], and handled it with my hands: but
it was of colour, such as is in Saffron in its Powder, yet weighty, and shining
like unto powdered Glass: There was once given unto me one fourth part of one
Grain: But I call a Grain the six hundredth part of one Ounce: This quarter of
one Grain therefore, being rouled up in Paper, I projected upon eight Ounces of
Quick-silver made hot in a Crucible; and straightway all the Quick-silver, with
a certain degree of Noise, stood still from flowing, and being congealed, setled
like unto a yellow Lump: but after pouring it out, the Bellows blowing, there
were found eight Ounces, and a little less than eleven Grains [eight Ounces less
eleven Grains] of the purest Gold: Therefore one only Grain of that Powder, had
transchanged 19186 [19156] Parts of Quick-silver, equal to itself, into the best
Gold."1
Page 83
And again: "I am constrained to believe that there is the Stone which makes
Gold, and which makes Silver; because I have at distinct turns, made projection
with my hand, of one grain of the Powder, upon some thousand grains of hot
Quick-silver; and the buisiness{sic} succeeded in the Fire, even as Books do
promise; a Circle of many People standing by, together with a tickling
Admiration of us all.... He who first gave me the Gold-making Powder, had
likewise also, at least as much of it, as might be sufficient for changing two
hundred thousand Pounds of Gold: . . . For he gave me perhaps half a grain of
that Powder, and nine ounces and three quarters of Quick-silver were thereby
transchanged: But that Gold, a strange man [a stranger], being a Friend of one
evenings acquaintance, gave me."2
63. The Testimony of Helvetius.
John Frederick Helvetius (see plate 13), an eminent doctor of medicine, and
physician to the Prince of Orange, published at the Hague in 1667 the following
remarkable account of a transmutation he claimed to have effected. Certain
points of resemblance between this account and that of van Helmont (e.g., in
each case the Stone is described as a glassy substance of a pale yellow colour)
are worth noticing: "On the 27 December, 1666, in the forenoon, there came to my
house a certain man, who was a complete stranger to me, but of an honest, grave
countenance, and an authoritative
Page 84
mien, clothed in a simple garb like that of a Memnonite . . .
"After we had exchanged salutations, he asked me whether he might have some
conversation with me. He wished to say something to me about the Pyrotechnic
Art, as he had read one of my tracts (directed against the sympathetic Powder of
Dr. Digby), in which I hinted a suspicion whether the Grand Arcanum of the Sages
was not after all a gigantic hoax. He, therefore, took that opportunity of
asking me whether I could not believe that such a grand mystery might exist in
the nature of things, by means of which a physician could restore any patient
whose vitals were not irreparably destroyed. I answered: `Such a Medicine would
be a most desirable acquisition for any physician; nor can any man tell how many
secrets there may be hidden in Nature; yet, though I have read much about the
truth of this Art, it has never been my good fortune to meet with a real Master
of the Alchemical Science.' I also enquired whether he was a medical man.... In
reply, he ... described himself as a brassfounder.... After some further
conversation, the Artist Elias (for it was he) thus addressed me: `Since you
have read so much in the works of the Alchemists about this Stone, its
substance, its colour, and its wonderful effects, may I be allowed the question,
whether you have not yourself prepared it?' On my answering his question in the
negative, he took out of his bag a cunningly-worked ivory box, in which there
were three large pieces of a substance resembling glass, or pale sulphur, and
informed me that here was enough of the Tincture for the production of 20 tons
of gold. When I
PLATE 13.
JOHANNES FREDERICUS HELVETIUS
Page 85
had held the precious treasure in my hand for a quarter of an hour (during which
time I listened to a recital of its wonderful curative properties), I was
compelled to restore it to its owner, which I could not help doing with a
certain degree of reluctance. After thanking him for his kindness in shewing it
to me, I then asked how it was that his Stone did not display that ruby colour,
which I had been taught to regard as characteristic of the Philosopher's Stone.
He replied that the colour made no difference, and that the substance was
sufficiently mature for all practical purposes. My request that he would give me
a piece of his Stone (though it were no larger than a coriander seed), he
somewhat brusquely refused, adding, in a milder tone, that he could not give it
me for all the wealth I possessed, and that not on account of its great
preciousness, but for some other reason which it was not lawful for him to
divulge; . . .
64. Helvetius obtains the Philosopher's Stone.
"When my strange visitor had concluded his narrative, I besought him to give
me a proof of his assertion, by performing the transmutatory operation on some
metals in my presence. He answered evasively, that he could not do so then, but
that he would return in three weeks, and that, if he was then at liberty to do
so, he would shew me something that would make me open my eyes. He appeared
punctually to the promised day, and invited me to take a walk with him, in the
course of which we discoursed profoundly on the secrets of Nature in fire,
though I noticed that my companion was very chary in imparting information about
the Grand Arcanum. . . . At last I asked him point-blank to show me
Page 86
the transmutation of metals. I besought him to come and dine with me, and to
spend the night at my house; I entreated; I expostulated; but in vain. He
remained firm. I reminded him of his promise. He retorted that his promise had
been conditional upon his being permitted to reveal the secret to me. At last,
however, I prevailed upon him to give me a piece of his precious Stone -- a
piece no larger than a grain of rape seed. He delivered it to me as if it were
the most princely donation in the world. Upon my uttering a doubt whether it
would be sufficient to tinge more than four grains of lead, he eagerly demanded
it back. I complied, in the hope that he would exchange it for a larger piece;
instead of which he divided it in two with his thumb, threw away one-half and
gave me back the other, saying: `Even now it is sufficient for you.' Then I was
still more heavily disappointed, as I could not believe that anything could be
done with so small a particle of the Medicine. He, however, bade me take two
drachms, or half an ounce of lead, or even a little more, and to melt it in the
crucible; for the Medicine would certainly not tinge more of the base metal than
it was sufficient for. I answered that I could not believe that so small a
quantity of Tincture could transform so large a mass of lead. But I had to be
satisfied with what he had given me, and my chief difficulty was about the
application of the Tincture. I confessed that when I held his ivory box in my
hand, I had managed to extract a few crumbs of his Stone, but that they had
changed my lead, not into gold, but only into glass. He laughed, and said that I
was more expert at theft than at the application of the Tincture. `You should
Page 87
have protected your spoil with "yellow wax," then it would have been able to
penetrate the lead and to transmute it into gold.' . . .
65. Helvetius performs a Transmutation.
" . . . With . . . a promise to return at nine o'clock the next morning, he
left me. But at the stated hour on the following day he did not make his
appearance; in his stead, however, there came, a few hours later, a stranger,
who told me that his friend the Artist was unavoidably detained, but that he
would call at three o'clock in the afternoon. The afternoon came; I waited for
him till half-past seven o'clock. He did not appear. Thereupon my wife came and
tempted me to try the transmutation myself. I determined, however, to wait till
the morrow, and in the meantime, ordered my son to light the fire, as I was now
almost sure that he was an impostor. On the morrow, however, I thought that I
might at least make an experiment with the piece of `Tincture' which I had
received; if it turned out a failure, in spite of my following his directions
closely, I might then be quite certain that my visitor had been a mere pretender
to a knowledge of this Art. So I asked my wife to put the Tincture in wax, and I
myself, in the meantime, prepared six drachms of lead; I then cast the Tincture,
enveloped as it was in wax, on the lead; as soon as it was melted, there was a
hissing sound and a slight effervescence, and after a quarter of an hour I found
that the whole mass of lead had been turned into the finest gold. Before this
transmutation took place, the compound became intensely green, but as soon as I
had poured it into the melting pot it assumed a hue like blood. When it cooled,
it glittered
Page 88
and shone like gold. We immediately took it to the goldsmith, who at once
declared it to be the finest gold he had ever seen, and offered to pay fifty
florins an ounce for it.
66. Helvetius's Gold Assayed.
"The rumour, of course, spread at once like wildfire through the whole city;
and in the afternoon, I had visits from many illustrious students of this Art; I
also received a call from the Master of the Mint and some other gentlemen, who
requested me to place at their disposal a small piece of the gold, in order that
they might subject it to the usual tests. I consented, and we betook ourselves
to the house of a certain silversmith, named Brechtil, who submitted a small
piece of my gold to the test called `the fourth': three or four parts of silver
are melted in the crucible with one part of gold, and then beaten out into thin
plates, upon which some strong aqua fortis [nitric acid] is poured. The usual
result of this experiment is that the silver is dissolved, while the gold sinks
to the bottom in the shape of a black powder, and after the aqua fortis has been
poured off, [the gold,] melted once again in the crucible, resumes its former
shape.... When we now performed this experiment, we thought at first that
one-half of the gold had evaporated; but afterwards we found that this was not
the case, but that, on the contrary, two scruples of the silver had undergone a
change into gold.
67. Helvetius's Gold Further Tested.
"Then we tried another test, viz., that which is performed by means of a
septuple of Antimony; at first it seemed as if eight grains of the gold had been
lost, but afterwards, not only had two scruples of the silver been converted
into gold, but the silver itself
Page 89
was greatly improved both in quality and malleability. Thrice I performed this
infallible test, discovering that every drachm of gold produced an increase of a
scruple of gold, but the silver is excellent and extremely flexible. Thus I have
unfolded to you the whole story from beginning to end. The gold I still retain
in my possession, but I cannot tell you what has become of the Artist Elias.
Before he left me, on the last day of our friendly intercourse, he told me that
he was on the point of undertaking a journey to the Holy Land. May the Holy
Angels of God watch over him wherever he is, and long preserve him as a source
of blessing to Christendom! This is my earnest prayer on his and our behalf."3
Testimony such as this warns us not to be too sure that a real transmutation
has never taken place. On the whole, with regard to this question, an agnostic
position appears to be the more philosophical.
68. The Genesis of Chemistry.
But even if the alchemists did not discover the Grand Arcanum of Nature, they
did discover very many scientifically important facts. Even if they did not
prepare the Philosopher's Stone, they did prepare a very large number of new and
important chemical compounds. Their labours were the seeds out of which modern
Chemistry developed, and this highly important science is rightfully included
under the expression "The Outcome of Alchemy." As we have already pointed out (
48), it was the iatro-chemists who first investigated chemical matters with an
object other than alchemistic,
Page 90
their especial end in view being the preparation of useful medicines, though the
medical-chemist and the alchemist were very often united in the one person, as
in the case of Paracelsus himself and the not less famous van Helmont. It was
not until still later that Chemistry was recognised as a distinct science
separate from medicine.
69. The Degeneracy of Alchemy.
In another direction the Outcome of Alchemy was of a very distressing nature.
Alchemy was in many respects eminently suitable as a cloak for fraud, and those
who became "alchemists" with the sole object of accumulating much wealth in a
short space of time, finding that the legitimate pursuit of the Art did not
enable them to realise their expectations in this direction, availed themselves
of this fact. There is, indeed, some evidence that the degeneracy of Alchemy had
commenced as early as the fourteenth century, but the attainment of the magnum
opus was regarded as possible for some three or more centuries.
The alchemistic promises of health, wealth and happiness and a
pseudo-mystical style of language were effectively employed by these impostors.
Some more or less ingenious tricks -- such as the use of hollow stirring-rods,
in which the gold was concealed, &c. -- convinced a credulous public of the
validity of their claims. Of these pseudo-alchemists we have already made the
acquaintance of Edward Kelley, but chief of them all is generally accounted the
notorious "Count Cagliostro." That "Cagliostro" is rightfully placed in the
category of pseudo-alchemists is certain, but it also appears equally certain
that, charlatan though he was, posterity has not always done him
Page 91
that justice which is due to all men, however bad they may be.
70. "Count Cagliostro".
Of the birth and early life of the personage calling himself "Count
Cagliostro" nothing is known with any degree of certainty, even his true name
being enveloped in mystery. It has, indeed, been usual to identify him with the
notorious Italian swindler, Giuseppe Balsamo, who, born at Palermo in 1743 (or
1748), apparently disappeared from mortal ken after some thirty years, of which
the majority were spent in committing various crimes. "Cagliostro's" latest
biographer,4 who appears to have gone into the matter very thoroughly, however,
throws very grave doubts on the truth of this theory.
If the earlier part of "Cagliostro's" life is unknown, the latter part is so
overlaid with legends and lies, that it is almost impossible to get at the truth
concerning it. In 1776 Cagliostro and his wife were in London, where
"Cagliostro" became a Freemason, joining a lodge connected with "The Order of
Strict Observance," a secret society incorporated with Freemasonry,
Page 92
and which (on the Continent, at least) was concerned largely with occult
subjects. "Cagliostro," however, was unsatisfied with its rituals and devised a
new system which he called Egyptian Masonry. Egyptian Masonry, he taught, was to
reform the whole world, and he set out, leaving England for the Continent, to
convert Masons and others to his views. We must look for the motive power of his
extraordinary career in vanity and a love of mystery-mongering, without any true
knowledge of the occult; it is probable, indeed, that ultimately his unbounded
vanity triumphed over his reason and that he actually believed in his own
pretensions. That he did possess hypnotic and clairvoyant powers is, we think,
at least probable; but it is none the less certain that, when such failed him,
he had no scruples against employing other means of convincing the credulous of
the validity of his claims. This was the case on his visit to Russia, which
occurred not long afterwards. At St. Petersburg a youthful medium he was
employing, to put the matter briefly, "gave the show away," and at Warsaw, where
he found it necessary to turn alchemist, he was detected in the process of
introducing a piece of gold in the crucible containing the base metal he was
about to "transmute." At Strasburg, which he reached in 1780, however, he was
more successful. Here he appeared as a miraculous healer of all diseases, though
whether his cures are to be ascribed to some simple but efficacious medicine
which he had discovered, to hypnotism, to the power of the imagination on the
part of his patients, or to the power of imagination on the part of those who
have recorded the alleged cures, is a question into which we do not
PLATE 14.
COMTE de CAGLIOSTRO
Page 93
propose to enter. At Strasburg "Cagliostro" came into contact with the Cardinal
de Rohan, and a fast friendship sprang up between the two, which, in the end,
proved "Cagliostro's" ruin. The "Count" next visited Bordeaux and Lyons,
successfully founding lodges of Egyptian Masonry. From the latter town he
proceeded to Paris, where he reached the height of his fame. He became
extraordinarily rich, although he is said to have asked, and to have accepted,
no fee for his services as a healer. On the other hand, there was a substantial
entrance-fee to the mysteries of Egyptian Masonry, which, with its alchemistic
promises of health and wealth, prospered exceedingly. At the summit of his
career, however, fortune forsook him. As a friend of de Rohan, he was arrested
in connection with the Diamond Necklace affair, on the word of the infamous
Countess de Lamotte; although, of whatever else he may have been guilty, he was
perfectly innocent of this charge. After lying imprisoned in the Bastille for
several months, he was tried by the French Parliament, pronounced innocent, and
released. Immediately, however, the king banished him, and he left Paris for
London, where he seems to have been persistently persecuted by agents of the
French king. He returned to the Continent, ultimately reaching Italy, where he
was arrested by the Inquisition and condemned to death on the charge of being a
Freemason (a dire offence in the eyes of the Roman Catholic Church). The
sentence, however, was modified to one of perpetual imprisonment, and he was
confined in the Castle of San Leo, where he died in 1795, after four years of
imprisonment, in what manner is not known.
1. J. B. VAN HELMONT: Life Eternal (see Oriatrike, translated by J. C., 1662;
{or??} Van Helmont's Workes, translated by J. C., 1664, which is merely the
former work with a new title-page and preliminary matter, pp. 751 and 752).
2. J. B, VAN HELMONT: The Tree of Life (see Oriatrike or Van Helmont's Workes,
p. 807).
3. J. F. HELVETIUS: The Golden Calf, ch. iii. (see The Hermetic Museum, vol. ii.
pp. 283 et. seq.).
4. W. R. H. TROWBRIDGE: Cagliostro: The Splendour and Misery of a Masler of
Magic (1910). We must acknowledge our indebtedness for many of the particulars
which follow to this work. It is, however, unfortunately marred by a ridiculous
attempt to show a likeness between "Cagliostro" and Swedenborg, for which, by
the way, Mr. Trowbridge has already been criticised by the Spectator. It may
justly be said of Swedenborg that he was scrupulously honest and sincere in his
beliefs as well as in his actions; and, as a philosopher, it is only now being
discovered how really great he was. He did, indeed, claim to have converse with
spiritual beings; but the results of modern psychical research have robbed such
claims of any inherent impossibility, and in Swedenborg's case there is very
considerable evidence for their validity.
Page 94
Chapter 6
CHAPTER VI
THE AGE OF MODERN CHEMISTRY
71. The Birth of Modern Chemistry.
Chemistry as distinct from Alchemy and iatro-chemistry commenced with Robert
Boyle (see plate 15), who first clearly recognised that its aim is neither the
transmutation of the metals nor the preparation of medicines, but the
observation and generalisation of a certain class of phenomena; who denied the
validity of the alchemistic view of the constitution of matter, and enunciated
the definition of an element which has since reigned supreme in Chemistry; and
who enriched the science with observations of the utmost importance. Boyle,
however, was a man whose ideas were in advance of his times, and intervening
between the iatro-chemical period and the Age of Modern Chemistry proper came
the period of the Phlogistic Theory -- a theory which had a certain affinity
with the ideas of the alchemists.
72. The Phlogiston Theory.
The phlogiston theory was mainly due to Georg Ernst Stahl (1660-1734), Becher
(1635-1682) had attempted to revive the once universally accepted
sulphur-mercury-salt theory of the alchemists in a somewhat modified form, by
the assumption that all substances consist of three earths -- the
PLATE 15. PORTRAIT OF ROBERT BOYLE
Page 95
combustible, mercurial, and vitreous; and herein is to be found the germ of
Stahl's phlogistic theory. According to Stahl, all combustible bodies (including
those metals that change on heating) contain phlogision, the principle of
combustion, which escapes in the form of flame when such substances are burned.
According to this theory, therefore, the metals are compounds, since they
consist of a metallic calx (what we now call the "oxide" of the metal) combined
with phlogiston; and, further, to obtain the metal from the calx it is only
necessary to act upon it with some substance rich in phlogiston. Now, coal and
charcoal are both almost completely combustible, leaving very little residue;
hence, according to this theory, they must consist very largely of phlogiston;
and, as a matter of fact, metals can be obtained by heating their calces with
either of these substances. Many other facts of a like nature were explicable in
terms of the phlogiston theory, and it became exceedingly popular. Chemists at
this time did not pay much attention to the balance; it was observed, however,
that metals increased in weight on calcination, but this was "explained" on the
assumption that phlogiston possessed negative weight. Antoine Lavoisier
(1743-1794), utilising Priestley's discovery of oxygen (called "dephlogisticated
air" by its discoverer) and studying the weight relations accompanying
combustion, demonstrated the non-validity of the phlogistic theory1 and proved
combustion to be the combination of the substance burnt
Page 96
with a certain constituent of the air, the oxygen. By this time Alchemy was to
all intents and purposes defunct, Boerhave (1668-1738) was the last eminent
chemist to give any support to its doctrines, and the new chemistry of Lavoisier
gave it a final death-blow. We now enter upon the Age of Modern Chemistry, but
we shall deal in this chapter with the history of chemical theory only so far as
is necessary in pursuance of our primary object, and hence our account will be
very far from complete.
73. Boyle and the Definition of an Element.
Robert Boyle (1626-1691) had defined an element as a substance which could
not be decomposed, but which could enter into combination with other elements
giving compounds capable of decomposition into these original elements. Hence,
the metals were classed among the elements, since they had defied all attempts
to decompose them. Now, it must be noted that this definition is of a negative
character, and, although it is convenient to term "elements" all substances
which have so far defied decomposition, it is a matter of impossibility to
decide what substances are true elements with absolute certainty; and the
possibility, however faint, that gold and other metals are of a compound nature,
and hence the possibility of preparing gold from the "base" metals or other
substances, must always remain. This uncertainty regarding the elements appears
to have generally been recognised by the new school of chemists, but this having
been so, it is the more surprising that their criticism of alchemistic art was
not less severe.
74. The Stoichiometric Laws.
With the study of the relative weights in
Page 97
which substances combine, certain generalisations or "natural laws" of supreme
importance were discovered. These stoichiometric laws, as they are called, are
as follows: --
1. "The Law of Constant Proportion" -- The same chemical compound always
contains the same elements, and there is a constant ratio between the weights of
the constituent elements present.
2. "The Law of Multiple Proportions" -- If two substances combine chemically in
more than one proportion, the weights of the one which combine with a given
weight of the other, stand in a simple rational ratio to one another.
3. "The Law of Combining Weights" -- Substances combine either in the ratio of
their combining numbers, or in simple rational multiples or submultiples of
these numbers. (The weights of different substances which combine with a given
weight of some particular substance, which is taken as the unit, are called the
combining numbers of such substances with reference to this unit. The usual unit
now chosen is 8 grammes of Oxygen.)2
As examples of these laws we may take the few following simple facts: --
Page 98
1. Pure water is found always to consist of oxygen and hydrogen combined in the
ratio of 1.008 parts by weight of the latter to 8 parts by weight of the former;
and pure sulphur-dioxide, to take another example, is found always to consist of
sulphur and oxygen combined in the ratio of 8.02 parts by weight of sulphur to 8
parts by weight of oxygen. (The Law of Constant Proportion.)
2. Another compound is known consisting only of oxygen and hydrogen, which,
however, differs entirely in its properties from water. It is found always to
consist of oxygen and hydrogen combined in the ratio of 1.008 parts by weight of
the latter to 16 parts by weight of the former, i.e., in it a definite weight of
hydrogen is combined with an amount of oxygen exactly twice that which is
combined with the same weight of hydrogen in water. No definite compound has
been discovered with a constitution intermediate between these two. Other
compounds consisting only of sulphur and oxygen are also known. One of these
(viz., sulphur-trioxide, or sulphuric anhydride) is found always to consist of
sulphur and oxygen combined in the ratio of 5.35 parts by weight of sulphur to 8
parts by weight of oxygen. We see, therefore, that the weights of sulphur
combined with a definite weight of oxygen in the two compounds called
respectively "sulphur-dioxide" and "sulphur-trioxide," are in the proportion of
8.02 to 5.35, i.e., 3:2. Similar simple ratios are obtained in the case of all
the other compounds. (The Law of Multiple Proportions.)
3. From the data given in (1) above we can fix the combining number of hydrogen
as 1.008, that of
Page 99
sulphur as 8.02. Now, compounds are known containing sulphur and hydrogen, and,
in each case, the weight of sulphur combined with 1.008 grammes of hydrogen is
found always to be either 8.02 grammes or some multiple or submultiple of this
quantity. Thus, in the simplest compound of this sort, containing only hydrogen
and sulphur (viz., sulphuretted-hydrogen or hydrogen sulphide), 1.008 grammes of
hydrogen is found always to be combined with 16.04 grammes of sulphur, i.e.,
exactly twice the above quantity. (The Law of Combining Weights.)
Berthollet (1748-1822) denied the truth of the law of constant proportion,
and a controversy ensued between this chemist and Proust (1755-1826), who
undertook a research to settle the question, the results of which were in entire
agreement with the law, and were regarded as completely substantiating it.
75. Dalton's Atomic Theory.
At the beginning of the nineteenth century, John Dalton (see plate 15{sic
should be 16}) put forward his Atomic Theory in explanation of these facts. This
theory assumes (1) that all matter is made up of small indivisible and
indestructible particles, called "atoms"; (2) that all atoms are not alike,
there being as many different sorts of atoms as there are elements; (3) that the
atoms constituting any one element are exactly alike and are of definite weight;
and (4) that compounds are produced by the combination of different atoms. Now,
it is at once evident that if matter be so constituted, the stoichiometric laws
must necessarily follow. For the smallest particle of any definite compound (now
called a "molecule") must consist of a definite assemblage of different atoms,
and these
Page 100
atoms are of definite weight: whence the law of constant proportion. One atom of
one substance may combine with 1, 2, 3 . . . atoms of some other substance, but
it cannot combine with some fractional part of an atom, since the atoms are
indivisible: whence the law of multiple proportions. And these laws holding
good, and the atoms being of definite weight, the law of combining weights
necessarily follows. Dalton's Atomic Theory gave a simple and intelligible
explanation of these remarkable facts regarding the weights of substances
entering into chemical combination, and, therefore, gained universal acceptance.
But throughout the history of Chemistry can be discerned a spirit of revolt
against it as an explanation of the absolute constitution of matter. The
tendency of scientific philosophy has always been towards Monism as opposed to
Dualism, and here were not merely two eternals, but several dozen; Dalton's
theory denied the unity of the Cosmos, it lacked the unifying principle of the
alchemists. It is only in recent times that it has been recognised that a
scientific hypothesis may be very useful without being altogether true. As to
the usefulness of Dalton's theory there can be no question; it has accomplished
that which no other hypothesis could have done; it rendered the concepts of a
chemical element, a chemical compound and a chemical reaction definite; and has,
in a sense, led to the majority of the discoveries in the domain of Chemistry
that have been made since its enunciation. But as an expression of absolute
truth, Dalton's theory, as is very generally recognised nowadays, fails to be
satisfactory. In the past, however, it has been the philosophers of the
materialistic school of thought,
PLATE 16.
PORTRAIT OF JOHN DALTON
[by Worthington, after Allen]
Page 101
rather than the chemists quâ chemists, who have insisted on the absolute truth
of the Atomic Theory; Kekulé, who by developing Franklin's theory of atomicity
or valency 3 made still more definite the atomic view of matter, himself
expressed grave doubts as to the absolute truth of Dalton's theory; but he
regarded it as chemically true, and thus voices what appears to be the opinion
of the majority of chemists nowadays, namely, there are such things as chemical
atoms and chemical elements, incapable of being decomposed by purely chemical
means, but that such are not absolute atoms or absolute elements, and
Page 102
consequently not impervious to all forms of action. But of this more will be
said later.
76. The Determination of the Atomic Weights of the Elements.
With the acceptance of Dalton's Atomic Theory, it became necessary to
determine the atomic weights of the various elements, i.e., not the absolute
atomic weights, but the relative weights of the various atoms with reference to
one of them as unit.4
We cannot in this place enter upon a discussion of the various difficulties,
both of an experimental and theoretical nature, which were involved in this
problem, save to remark that the correct atomic weights could be arrived at only
with the acceptance of Avogadro's Hypothesis. This hypothesis, which is to the
effect that equal volumes of different gases measured at the same temperature
and pressure contain an equal number of gaseous molecules, was put forward in
explanation of a number of facts connected with the physical behaviour of gases;
but its importance was for some time unrecognised, owing to the fact that the
distinction between atoms and molecules was not yet clearly drawn. A list of
those chemical substances at present recognised as "elements," together with
their atomic weights, will be found on pp. 106, 107.
77. Prout's Hypothesis.
It was observed by a chemist of the name of Prout, that, the atomic weight of
hydrogen being taken
Page 103
as the unit, the atomic weights of nearly all the elements approximated to whole
numbers; and in 1815 he suggested as the reason for this regularity, that all
the elements consist solely of hydrogen. Prout's Hypothesis received on the
whole a very favourable reception; it harmonised Dalton's Theory with the grand
concept of the unity of matter -- all matter was hydrogen in essence; and Thomas
Thomson undertook a research to demonstrate its truth. On the other hand,
however, the eminent Swedish chemist, Berzelius, who had carried out many atomic
weight determinations, criticised both Prout's Hypothesis and Thomson's research
(which latter, it is true, was worthless) in most severe terms; for the
hypothesis amounted to this -- that the decimals in the atomic weights obtained
experimentally by Berzelius, after so much labour, were to be regarded as so
many errors. In 1844, Marignac suggested half the hydrogen atom as the unit, for
the element chlorine, with an atomic weight of 35.5, would not fit in with
Prout's Hypothesis as originally formulated; and later, Dumas suggested
one-quarter. With this theoretical division of the hydrogen-atom, the hypothesis
lost its simplicity and charm, and was doomed to downfall. Recent and most
accurate atomic weight determinations show clearly that the atomic weights are
not exactly whole numbers, but that, nevertheless, the majority of them (if
expressed in terms of O = 16 as the unit) do approximate very closely to such.
The Hon. R. J. Strutt has recently calculated that the probability of this
occurring, in the case of certain of the commoner elements, by mere chance is
exceedingly small (about 1 in
Page 104
1,000),5 and several attempts to explain this remarkable fact have been put
forward. Modern scientific speculations concerning the constitution of atoms
tend towards a modified form of Prout's hypothesis, or to the view that the
atoms of other elements are, in a manner, polymerides of hydrogen and helium
atoms. As has been pointed out, it is possible, according to modern views, for
elements of different atomic weight to have identical chemical properties, since
these latter depend only upon the number of free electrons in the atom and not
at all upon the massive central nucleus. By a method somewhat similar to that
used for determining the mass of kathode particles (see 79), but applied to
positively charged particles, Sir Joseph Thomson and Dr. F. W. Aston discovered
that the element neon was a mixture of two isotopic elements in unequal
proportions, one having an atomic mass of 20, the other (present only to a
slight extent) having an atomic mass of 22. Dr. Aston has perfected this method
of analysing mixtures of isotopes and determining their atomic masses.6 The
results are of great interest. The atomic weight of hydrogen, 1.008, is
confirmed. The elements helium, carbon, nitrogen, oxygen, fluorine, phosphorus,
sulphur, arsenic, iodine and sodium are found to be simple bodies with
whole-number atomic weights. On the other hand, boron, neon, silicon, chlorine,
bromine, krypton, xenon,
Page 105
mercury, lithium, potassium and rubidium are found to be mixtures. What is
specially of interest is that the indicated atomic mass of each of the
constituents is a whole number. Thus chlorine, whose atomic weight is 35.46, is
found to be a mixture of two chemically-identical elements whose atomic weights
are 35 and 37. Some of the elements, e.g., xenon, are mixtures of more than two
isotopes.
It is highly probable that what is true of the elements investigated by Dr.
Aston is true of the remainder. It appears, therefore, that the irregularities
presented by the atomic weights of the ordinary elements, which have so much
puzzled men of science in the past, are due to the fact that these elements are,
in many cases, mixtures. As concerns hydrogen, it is only reasonable to suppose
that the close packing of electrically charged particles should give rise to a
slight decrease in their total mass, so that the atomic weights of other
elements referred to H = 1 should be slightly less than whole numbers, or, what
is the same thing, that the atomic weight of hydrogen referred to O = 16 should
be slightly more than unity.
78. The "Periodic Law".
A remarkable property of the atomic weights was discovered, in the sixties,
independently by Lothar Meyer and Mendeléeff. They found that the elements could
be arranged in rows in the order of their atomic weights so that similar
elements would be found in the same columns. A modernised form of the Periodic
Table will be found on pp. 106, 107. It will be noticed, for example, that the
"alkali" metals, Lithium, Sodium, Rubidium and Cæsium, which
Page 106
THE PERIODIC TABLE OF THE CHEMICAL ELEMENTS012345678
[Hydrogen
H=1o008]aHydrogen
H=1o008
Helium
He=4o00Lithium
Li=6o94Glucinum
Gl=9o1Boron
B=10o9Carbon
C=12o005Nitrogen
N=14.008Oxygen
O=16o00Flourine
F=19o0
Neon
Ne=20o2Sodium
Na=23o00Magnesium
Mg=24o32Aluminium
Al=27o1Silicon
Si=28o3Phosphorus
P=31o04Sulphur
S=32o06Chlorine
Cl=35o46
Argon
A=39o9'Potassiumb
K=39o10Calcium
Ca=40o07Scandium
Sc=45o1Titanium
Ti=48o1Vanadium
V=51o0Chromium
Cr=52o0Manganese
Mn=54o93Iron Fe=55o84c
Cobalt Co=58o97
Nickel Ni=58o68
Copper
Cu=63o57Zinc
Zn=65o37Gallium
Ga=70o1Germanium
Ge=72o5Arsenic
As=74o96Selenium
Se=79o2Bromine
Br=79o92
Krypton
Kr=82o92Rubidium
Rb=85o45Strontium
Sr=87o63Yttrium
Y=89o33Zirconium
Zr=90o6Columbium
Cb=93o1Molybdenum
Mo=96o0?Ruthenium Ru=101o7
Rhodium Rh=102o9
Palladium Pd=106o7
Silver
Ag=107o88Cadmium
Cd=112o40Indium
In=114o8Tin
Sn=118o7Antimony
Sb=120o2Tellurium
Te=127o5Iodined
I (orJ)-
126o92
Xenon
Xe=130o2Cæsium
Cs=132o81Barium
Ba=137o37Lanthanum
La=139o0Ceriume
Ce=140o25????
???????
?????Tantalum
Ta=181o5Tungsten
W=184o0?Osmium Os=190o9
Iridium Ir=193o1
Platinum Pt=195o2
Gold
Au=197o2Mercury
Hg=200o6Thallium
Tl=204o0Lead
Pb=207o20Bismuth
Bi=208o0Polonium
<210>?
Emanation
(Niton)222o0?Radium
Ra=226o0Actinium
?Thorium
Th=232o15Ekatantalum
?Uranium
U=238o2??
Page 107
NOTES.
There are several somewhat different forms of this Periodic Table. This is
one of the simplest, but it lacks certain advantages of some of the more
complicated forms. The atomic weights given are those of the International
Atomic Weights Committee for 1920-1. They are calculated on the basis. Oxygen =
16. The number of decimal places given in each case indicates the degree of
accuracy with which each atomic weight has been determined. The letter or
letters underneath the name of each element is the symbol by which it is
invariably designated by chemists.
The number above each column indicates the valency which the elements of each
group exhibit towards oxygen. Many of the elements are exceptional in this
respect.
[a] The exact position of Hydrogen is in dispute.
[b] The positions of Argon and Potassium have been inverted in order that
these elements may fall in the right columns with the elements they resemble;
[d] 50 also have the positions of Tellurium and Iodine.
[c] The whole of "Group 8" forms an exception to the Table.
[e] There are a number of ill-defined rare earth metals with atomic weights
lying between those of Cerium and Tantalum. They all appear to resemble the
elements of "Group 3," so that their positions in the Table cannot be decided
with accuracy.
Page 108
resemble one another very closely, fall in Column 1; the "alkaline earth"
metals occur together in Column 2; though in each case these are accompanied by
certain elements with somewhat different properties. Much the same holds good in
the case of the other columns of this Table; there is manifested a remarkable
regularity, with certain still more remarkable divergences (see notes appended
to Table on pp. 106, 107). This regularity exhibited by the "elements" is of
considerable importance, since it shows that, in general, the properties of the
"elements" are periodic functions of their atomic weights; and, together with
certain other remarkable properties of the "elements," distinguishes them
sharply from the "compounds." It may be concluded with tolerable certainty,
therefore, that if the "elements" are in reality of a compound nature, they are
all, in general, compounds of a like nature distinct from that of other
compounds.
It is now some years since the late Sir William Crookes attempted to explain
the periodicity of the properties of the elements on the theory that they have
all been evolved by a conglomerating process from some primal stuff -- the
protyle -- consisting of very small particles. He represented the action of this
generative cause by means of a "figure of eight" spiral, along which the
elements are placed at regular intervals, so that similar elements come
underneath one another, as in Mendeléeff's table, though the grouping differs in
some respects. The slope of the curve is supposed to represent the decline of
some factor (e.g., temperature) conditioning the process, which process is
assumed to be of a recurrent nature, like the swing of a pendulum After the
completion of one swing
Page 109
(to keep to the illustration of a pendulum) whereby one series of elements is
produced, owing to the decline of the above-mentioned factor, the same series of
elements is not again the result as would otherwise be the case, but a somewhat
different series is produced, each member of which resembles the corresponding
member of the former series. Thus, if the first series contains, for example,
helium, lithium, carbon, &c., the second series will contain instead, argon,
potassium, titanium, &c. The whole theory, though highly interesting, is,
however, by no means free from defects.
79. The Corpuscular Theory of Matter.
We must now turn our attention to those recent views of the constitution of
matter which originated to a great extent in the investigations of the passage
of electricity through gases at very low pressures. It will be possible,
however, on the present occasion, to give only the very briefest account of the
subject; but a fuller treatment is rendered unnecessary by the fact that these
and allied investigations and the theories to which they have given rise have
been fully treated in several well-known works, by various authorities on the
subject, which have appeared during the last few years. 7
When an electrical discharge is passed through a high-vacuum tube, invisible
rays are emitted from the kathode, generally with the production of a
greenish-yellow
Page 110
fluorescence where they strike the glass walls of the tube. These rays are
called "kathode rays." At one time they were regarded as waves in the ether, but
it was shown by Sir William Crookes that they consist of small electrically
charged particles, moving with a very high velocity. Sir J. J. Thomson was able
to determine the ratio of the charge carried by these particles to their mass or
inertia; he found that this ratio was constant whatever gas was contained in the
vacuum tube, and much greater than the corresponding ratio for the hydrogen ion
(electrically charged hydrogen atom) in electrolysis. By a skilful method, based
on the fact discovered by Mr. C. T. R. Wilson, that charged particles can serve
as nuclei for the condensation of water-vapour, he was further able to determine
the value of the electrical charge carried by these particles, which was found
to be constant also, and equal to the charge carried by univalent ions, e.g.,
hydrogen, in electrolysis. Hence, it follows that the mass of these kathode
particles must be much smaller than the hydrogen ion, the actual ratio being
about 1:1700. The first theory put forward by Sir J. J. Thomson in explanation
of these facts, was that these kathode particles ("corpuscles" as he termed
them) were electrically charged portions of matter, much smaller than the
smallest atom; and since the same sort of corpuscle is obtained whatever gas is
contained in the vacuum tube, it is reasonable to conclude that the corpuscle is
the common unit of all matter.
80. Proof that the Electrons are not Matter.
This eminent physicist, however, had shown mathematically that a charged
particle moving with a very high velocity (approaching that of light)
Page 111
would exhibit an appreciable increase in mass or inertia due to the charge, the
magnitude of such inertia depending on the velocity of the particle. This was
experimentally verified by Kaufmann, who determined the velocities, and the
ratios between the electrical charge and the inertia, of various kathode
particles and similar particles which are emitted by compounds of radium (see 89
and 90). Sir J. J. Thomson calculated these values on the assumption that the
inertia of such particles is entirely of electrical origin, and thereby obtained
values in remarkable agreement with the experimental. There is, therefore, no
reason for supposing the corpuscle to be matter at all; indeed, if it were, the
above agreement would not be obtained. As Professor Jones says: "Since we know
things only by their properties, and since all the properties of the corpuscle
are accounted for by the electrical charge associated with it, why assume that
the corpuscle contains anything but the electrical charge? It is obvious that
there is no reason for doing so.
"The corpuscle is, then, nothing but a disembodied, electrical charge,
containing nothing material, as we have been accustomed to use that term. It is
electricity, and nothing but electricity. With this new conception a new term
was introduced, and, now, instead of speaking of the corpuscle we speak of the
electron." 8 Applying this modification to the above view of the constitution of
matter, we have what is called "the electronic theory," namely, that the
Page 112
material atoms consist of electrons, or units of electricity in rapid motion;
which amounts to this -- that matter is simply an electrical phenomenon.
81. The Electronic Theory of Matter.
Sir J. J. Thomson has elaborated this theory of the nature and constitution
of matter; he has shown what systems of electrons would be stable, and has
attempted to find therein the significance of Mendeléeff's generalisation and
the explanation of valency. There can be no doubt that there is a considerable
element of truth in the electronic theory of matter; the one characteristic
property of matter, i.e., inertia, can be accounted for electrically. The
fundamental difficulty is that the electrons are units of negative electricity,
whereas matter is electrically neutral. Several theories have been put forward
to surmount this difficulty. Certainly the electron is a constituent of matter;
but is it the sole constituent? Recent research indicates that, as already
pointed out, all atoms consist of two distinct portions, a massive central
nucleus, whose net charge is positive, surrounded by a number of electrons, just
sufficient to neutralize this charge. The point of greatest interest is that the
indicated number of free electrons is exactly the number which expresses the
position of the element in the Periodic Table, reckoning helium as 2, lithium as
3, and so on; and it would seem that the chemical properties of the elements are
determined entirely by these electrons, and are, therefore, not, strictly
speaking, periodic functions of their atomic weights, as was formerly thought (
78), but of their atomic numbers. The exact nature of the nuclei of the various
atoms has yet to be
Page 113
determined: in the case of the atoms heavier than helium they would appear to be
made up of the nuclei of hydrogen and (or) helium atoms together with -- in many
cases -- electrons insufficient in number to neutralize the positive charges
associated with these.
82. The Etheric Theory of Matter.
The analysis of matter has been carried a step further. A philosophical view
of the Cosmos involves the assumption of an absolutely continuous and
homogeneous medium filling all space, for an absolute vacuum is unthinkable, and
if it were supposed that the stuff filling all space is of an atomic structure,
the question arises, What occupies the interstices between its atoms? This
ubiquitous medium is termed by the scientists of to-day "the Ether of Space."
Moreover, such a medium as the Ether is demanded by the phenomena of light. It
appears, however, that the ether of space has another and a still more important
function than the transmission of light: the idea that matter has its
explanation therein has been developed by Sir Oliver Lodge. The evidence
certainly points to the conclusion that matter is some sort of singularity in
the ether, probably a stress centre. We have been too much accustomed to think
of the ether as something excessively light and quite the reverse of massive or
dense, in which it appears we have been wrong. Sir Oliver Lodge calculates that
the density of the ether is far greater than that of the most dense forms of
matter; not that matter is to be thought of as a rarefaction of the ether, for
the ether within matter is as dense as that without. What we call matter,
however, is not a continuous substance; it consists,
Page 114
rather, of a number of widely separated particles, whence its comparatively
small density compared with the perfectly continuous ether. Further, if there is
a difficulty in conceiving how a perfect fluid like the ether can give rise to a
solid body possessed of such properties as rigidity, impenetrability and
elasticity, we must remember that all these properties can be produced by means
of motion. A jet of water moving with a sufficient velocity behaves like a rigid
and impenetrable solid, whilst a revolving disc of paper exhibits elasticity and
can act as a circular saw.10 It appears, therefore, that the ancient doctrine of
the alchemistic essence is fundamentally true after all, that out of the "One
Thing" all material things have been produced by adaptation or modification;
and, as we have already noticed ( 60), there also appears to be some resemblance
between the concept of the electron and that of the seed of gold, which seed, it
should be borne in mind, was regarded by the alchemists as the common seed of
all metals.
83. Further Evidence of the Complexity of the Atoms.
There are also certain other facts which appear to demand such a modification
of Dalton's Atomic Theory as is found in the Electronic Theory. One of the
characteristics of the chemical elements is that each one gives a spectrum
peculiar to itself. The spectrum of an element must, therefore, be due to its
atoms, which in some way are able, at a sufficiently high temperature, to act
upon the ether so as to produce vibrations of definite and characteristic
wave-length. Now, in many cases the number of lines of definite wavelength
Page 115
observed in such a spectrum is considerable, for example, hundreds of different
lines have been observed in the arc-spectrum of iron. But it is incredible that
an atom, if it were a simple unit, would give rise to such a number of different
and definite vibrations, and the only reasonable conclusion is that the atoms
must be complex in structure. We may here mention that spectroscopic examination
of various heavenly bodies leads to the conclusion that there is some process of
evolution at work building up complex elements from simpler ones, since the
hottest nebulæ appear to consist of but a few simple elements, whilst cooler
bodies exhibit a greater complexity.
84. Views of Wald and Ostwald.
Such modifications of the atomic theory as those we have briefly discussed
above, although profoundly modifying, and, indeed, controverting the
philosophical significance of Dalton's theory as originally formulated, leave
its chemical significance practically unchanged. The atoms can be regarded no
longer as the eternal, indissoluble gods of Nature that they were once supposed
to be; thus, Materialism is deprived of what was thought to be its scientific
basis.11 But the science of Chemistry is unaffected thereby; the atoms are not
the ultimate units out of which material things are built, but the atoms cannot
be decomposed by purely chemical means; the "elements" are not truly elemental,
but they are chemical elements. However, the atomic theory has been subjected to
a far more searching criticism. Wald argues that substances obey the law of
definite
Page 116
proportions because of the way in which they are prepared; chemists refuse, he
says, to admit any substance as a definite chemical compound unless it does obey
this law. Wald's opinions have been supported by Professor Ostwald, who has
attempted to deduce the other stoichiometric laws on these grounds without
assuming any atomic hypothesis12; but these new ideas do not appear to have
gained the approval of chemists in general. It is not to be supposed that
chemists will give up without a struggle a mental tool of such great utility as
Dalton's theory, in spite of its defects, has proved itself to be. There does
seem, however, to be logic in the arguments of Wald and Ostwald, but the trend
of recent scientific theory and research does not appear to be in the direction
of Wald's views. Certainly, however, it appears that, on the one hand, the
atomic theory is not necessitated by the so-called "stoichiometric laws"; but,
on the other hand, a molecular constitution of matter seems to be demanded by
the phenomenon known as the "Brownian Movement," i.e., the spontaneous,
irregular and apparently perpetual movement of microscopic portions of solid
matter when immersed in a liquid medium; such movement appearing to be
explicable only as the result of the motion of the molecules of which the liquid
in question is built up.13
1. It should be noted, however, that if by the term "phlogiston" we were to
understand energy and not some form of matter, most of the statements of the
phlogistics would be true so far as they go.
2. In order that these laws may hold good, it is, of course, necessary that the
substances are weighed under precisely similar conditions. To state these laws
in a more absolute form, we can replace the term "weight" by "mass," or in
preference, "inertia"; for the inertial of bodies are proportional to their
weights, providing that they are weighed under precisely similar conditions. For
a discussion of the exact significance of these terms "mass" and "inertia," the
reader is referred to the present writer's Matter, Spirit and the Cosmos (Rider,
1910), Chapter I., "On the Doctrine of the Indestructibility of Matter."
3. The term "valency" is not altogether an easy one to define; we will, however,
here do our best to make plain its significance. In a definite chemical compound
we must assume that the atoms constituting each molecule are in some way bound
together (though not, of course, rigidly), and we may speak of "bonds" or "links
of affinity," taking care, however, not to interpret such terms too literally.
Now, the number of "affinity links" which one atom can exert is not unlimited;
indeed, according to the valency theory as first formulated, it is fixed and
constant. It is this number which is called the "valency" of the element; but it
is now known that the "valency" in most cases can vary between certain limits.
Hydrogen, however, appears to be invariably univalent, and is therefore taken as
the unit of valency. Thus, Carbon is quadrivalent in the methane-molecule, which
consists of one atom of carbon combined with four atoms of hydrogen; and Oxygen
is divalent in the water-molecule, which consists of one atom of oxygen combined
with two atoms of hydrogen. Hence, we should expect to find one atom of carbon
combining with two of oxygen, which is the case in the carbon-dioxide --
(carbonic anhydride) -- molecule. For a development of the thesis, so far as the
compounds of carbon are concerned, that each specific "affinity link"
corresponds in general to a definite and constant amount of energy, which is
evolved as heat on disruption of the bond, the reader is referred to the present
writer's monograph On the Calculation of Thermo-Chemical Constants (Arnold,
1909). The phenomena of valency find their explanation in modern views
concerning the constitution of atoms (see 81).
4. Since hydrogen is the lightest of all known substances, the unit, Hydrogen =
1, was at one time usually employed. However, it was seen to be more convenient
to express the atomic weights in terms of the weight of the oxygen-atom, and the
unit, Oxygen = 16 is now always employed. This value for the oxygen-atom was
chosen so that the approximate atomic weights would in most cases remain
unaltered by the change.
5. Hon. R. J. STRUTT: "On the Tendency of the Atomic Weights to approximate to
Whole Numbers," Philosophical Magazine, [6], vol. i. (1901), pp. 311 et seq.
6. F W. ASTON: "Mass-spectra and Atomic Weights," Journal of the Chemical
Society, vol. cix. (1921), pp. 677 et seq.
7. We have found Prof. Harry Jones' The Electrical Nature of Matter and
Radioactivity (1906), Mr. Soddy's Radioactivity (1904), and Mr. Whetham's The
Recent Development of Physical Science (1909) particularly interesting. Mention,
of course, should also be made of the standard works of Prof. Sir J. J. Thomson
and Prof. Rutherford.
8. H. C. JONES: The Electrical Nature of Matter and Radioactivity (1906), p. 21
10. See Sir OLIVER LODGE, F.R.S.: The Ether of Space (1909).
11. For a critical examination of Materialism, the reader is referred to the
present writer's Matter, Spirit and the Cosmos (Rider, 1910), especially
Chapters I. and IV.
12. W. OSTWALD: "Faraday Lecture," Journal of the Chemical Society, vol. lxxxv.
(1904), PP. 506 et seq. See also W. OSTWALD: The Fundamental Principles of
Chemistry (translated by H. W. Morse, 1909), especially Chapters VI., VII. and
VIII.
13. For an account of this singular phenomenon, see Prof. JEAN PERRIN: Brownian
Movement and Molecular Reality (translated from the Annales de Chimie et de
Physique, 8me Séries, September, 1909, by F. Soddy, M.A., F.R.S., 1910).
Chapter 7
CHAPTER VII
MODERN ALCHEMY
85. "Modern Alchemy".
Correctly speaking, there is no such thing as "Modern Alchemy"; not that
Mysticism is dead, or that men no longer seek to apply the principles of
Mysticism to phenomena on the physical plane, but they do so after another
manner from that of the alchemists. A new science, however, is born amongst us,
closely related on the one hand to Chemistry, on the other to Physics, but
dealing with changes more profound and reactions more deeply seated than are
dealt with by either of these; a science as yet without a name, unless it be the
not altogether satisfactory one of "Radioactivity." It is this science, or,
perhaps we should say, a certain aspect of it, to which we refer (it may be
fantastically) by the expression "Modern Alchemy": the aptness of the title we
hope to make plain in the course of the present chapter.
Page 117
86. X-Ray's and Becquerel rays.
As is commonly known, what are called X-rays are produced when an electric
discharge is passed through a high-vacuum tube. It has been shown that these
rays are a series of irregular pulses in the ether, which are set up when the
kathode particles strike the walls of the glass vacuum
Page 118
tube,1 and it was found that more powerful effects can be produced by inserting
a disc of platinum in the path of the kathode particles. It was M. Becquerel who
first discovered that there are substances which naturally emit radiations
similar to X-rays. He found that uranium compounds affected a photographic plate
from which they were carefully screened, and he also showed that these uranium
radiations, or "Becquerel rays," resemble X-rays in other particulars. It was
already known that certain substances fluoresce (emit light) in the dark after
having been exposed to sunlight, and it was thought at first that the above
phenomenon exhibited by uranium salts was of a like nature, since certain
uranium salts are fluorescent; but M. Becquerel found that uranium salts which
had never been exposed to sunlight were still capable of affecting a
photographic plate, and that this remarkable property was possessed by all
uranium salts, whether fluorescent or not. This phenomenon is known as
"radioactivity," and bodies which exhibit it are said to be "radioactive."
Schmidt found that thorium compounds possess a similar property, and Professor
Rutherford showed that thorium compounds evolved also something resembling a
gas. He called this an "emanation."
87. The Discovery of Radium.
Mme. Curie2 determined the radioactivity of many uranium and thorium
compounds, and found that there was a proportion between the radioactivity
Page 119
of such compounds and the quantity of uranium or thorium in them, with the
remarkable exception of certain natural ores, which had a radioactivity much in
excess of the normal, and, indeed, in certain cases, much greater than pure
uranium. In order to throw some light on this matter, Mme. Curie prepared one of
these ores by a chemical process and found that it possessed a normal
radioactivity. The only logical conclusion to be drawn from these facts was that
the ores in question must contain some unknown, highly radioactive substance,
and the Curies were able, after very considerable labour, to extract from
pitchblende (the ore with the greatest radioactivity) minute quantities of the
salts of two new elements -- which they named "Polonium" and "Radium"
respectively -- both of which were extremely radioactive.
M. Debierne has obtained a third radioactive substance from pitchblende,
which he has called "actinium."
88. Chemical Properties of Radium.
Radium is an element resembling calcium, strontium, and barium in chemical
properties; its atomic weight was determined by Mme. Curie, and found to be
about 225, according to her first experiments; a redetermination gave a slightly
higher value, which has been confirmed by a further investigation carried out by
Sir T. E. Thorpe. 3 Radium gives a
Page 120
characteristic spectrum, and is intensely radioactive. It should be noted that
up to the middle of the year 1910 the element radium itself had not been
prepared; in all the experiments carried out radium salts were employed (i.e.,
certain compounds of radium with other elements), generally radium chloride and
radium bromide. In that year, however, Mme. Curie, in conjunction with M.
Debierne, obtained the free metal. It is described as a white, shining metal
resembling the other alkaline earth metals. It reacts very violently with water,
chars paper with which it is allowed to come in contact, and blackens in the
air, probably owing to the formation of a nitride. It fuses at 700o C., and is
more volatile than barium.4
89. The Radioactivity of Radium.
Radium salts give off three distinct sorts of rays, referred to by the Greek
letters , , . The -rays have been shown to consist of of electrically charged
(positive) particles, with a mass approximately equal to that of four hydrogen
atoms; they are slightly deviated by a magnetic field, and do not possess great
penetrative power. The -rays are similar to the kathode rays, and consist of
(negative) electrons; they are strongly deviated by a magnetic field, in a
direction opposite to that in which the -particles are deviated, and possess
medium penetrative power, passing for the most part through a thin sheet of
metal. The -rays resemble X-rays; they possess
Page 121
great penetrative power, and are not deviated by a magnetic field. The
difference in the effect of the magnetic field on these rays, and the difference
in their penetrative power, led to their detection and allows of their separate
examination. Radium salts emit also an emanation, which tends to become occluded
in the solid salt, but can be conveniently liberated by dissolving the salt in
water, or by heating it. The emanation exhibits the characteristic properties of
a gas, it obeys Boyle's Law (i.e., its volume varies inversely with its
pressure), and it can be condensed to a liquid at low temperatures; its density
as determined by the diffusion method is about 100. Attempts to prepare chemical
compounds of the emanation have failed, and in this respect it resembles the
rare gases of the atmosphere -- helium, neon, argon, krypton, and xenon --
whence it is probable that its molecules are monatomic, so that a density of 100
would give its atomic weight as 200.5 As can be seen from the table on pp. 106,
107, an atomic weight of about 220 corresponds to a position in the column
containing the rare gases in the periodic system. That the emanation actually
has an atomic weight of these dimensions was confirmed by further experiments
carried out by the late Sir William Ramsay and Dr. R. W. Gray.6 These chemists
determined the density of the emanation by actually weighing minute quantities
of known volume of the substance, sealed up in small capillary tubes, a
specially sensitive
Page 122
balance being employed. Values for the density varying from 108 to 113½,
corresponding to values for the atomic weight varying from 216 to 227, were
thereby: obtained. Sir William Ramsay, therefore, considered that there could no
longer be any doubt that the emanation was one of the elements of the group of
chemically inert gases. He proposed to call it Niton, and, for reasons which we
shall note later, considered that in all probability it had an atomic weight of
about 222½.
90. The Disintegration of the Radium Atom.
Radium salts possess another very remarkable property, namely, that of
continuously emitting light and heat. It seemed, at first, that here was a
startling contradiction to the law of the conservation of energy, but the whole
mystery becomes comparatively clear in terms of the corpuscular or the
electronic theory of matter. The radium-atom is a system of a large number (see
81) of corpuscles or electrons, and contains in virtue of their motion an
enormous amount of energy. But it is known from Chemistry that atomic systems
(i.e., molecules) which contain very much energy are unstable and liable to
explode. The same law holds good on the more interior plane -- the radium-atom
is liable to, and actually does, explode. And the result? Energy is set free,
and manifests itself partly as heat and light. Some free electrons are shot off
(the -rays), which, striking the undecomposed particles of salt, give rise to
pulses in the ether (the -rays),7 just as the kathode particles give rise to
X-rays when they
Page 123
strike the walls of the vacuum tube or a platinum disc placed in their path. The
and -rays do not, however, result immediately from the exploding radium-atoms,
the initial products being the emanation and one -particle from each radium-atom
destroyed.
91. Induced Radioactivity.
Radium salts have the property of causing surrounding objects to become
temporally radioactive. This "induced radioactivity," as it may be called, is
found to be due to the emanation, which is itself radioactive (it emits -rays
only), and is decomposed into minute traces of solid radioactive deposits. By
examining the rate of decay of the activity of the deposit, it has been found
that it is undergoing a series of sub-atomic changes, the products being termed
Radium A, B, C, &c. It has been proved that all the and -rays emitted by radium
salts are really due to certain of these secondary products. Radium F is thought
to be identical with Polonium ( 87). Another product is also obtained by these
decompositions, with which we shall deal later ( 94).
92. Properties of Uranium and Thorium.
Uranium and thorium differ in one important respect from radium, inasmuch as
the first product of the decomposition of the uranium and thorium atoms is in
both cases solid. Sir William Crookes8 was able to separate from uranium salts
by chemical means a small quantity of an intensely radioactive substance, which
he called Uranium X, the residual uranium having lost most of its activity; and
M.
Page 124
Becquerel, on repeating the experiment, found that the activity of the residual
uranium was slowly regained, whilst that of the uranium X decayed. This is most
simply explained by the theory that uranium first changes into uranium X. It has
been suggested that radium may be the final product of the breaking up of the
uranium-atom; at any rate, it is quite certain that radium must be evolved in
some way, as otherwise there would be none in existence -- it would all have
decomposed. This suggestion has been experimentally confirmed, the growth of
radium in large quantities of a solution of purified uranyl nitrate having been
observed. Uranium gives no emanation. Thorium probably gives at least three
solid products -- Meso-thorium, Radio-thorium, and Thorium X, the last of which
yields an emanation resembling that obtained from radium, but not identical with
it.
93. The Radium Emanation.
We must now more fully consider the radium emanation -- a substance with more
astounding properties than even the radium compounds themselves. By distilling
off the emanation from some radium bromide, and measuring the quantities of heat
given off by the emanation and the radium salt respectively, Professors
Rutherford and Barnes 9 proved that nearly three-fourths of the total amount of
heat given out by a radium salt comes from the minute quantity of emanation that
it contains. The amount of energy liberated as heat during the decay of the
emanation is enormous; one cubic centimetre liberates about four
Page 125
million times as much heat as is obtained by the combustion of an equal volume
of hydrogen. Undoubtedly this must indicate some profound change, and one may
well ask, What is the ultimate product of the decomposition of the emanation?
94. The Production of Helium from Radium.
It had been observed already that the radioactive minerals on heating give
off Helium -- a gaseous element, characterised by a particular yellow line in
its spectrum -- and it seemed not unlikely that helium might be the ultimate
decomposition product of the emanation. A research to settle this point was
undertaken by Sir William Ramsay and Mr. Soddy,10 and a preliminary experiment
having confirmed the above speculation, they carried out further very careful
experiments. "The maximum amount of the emanation obtained from 50 milligrams of
radium bromide was conveyed by means of oxygen into a U-tube cooled in liquid
air, and the latter was then extracted by the pump." The spectrum was observed;
it "was apparently a new one, probably that of the emanation itself.... After
standing from July 17 to 21 the helium spectrum appeared, and the characteristic
lines were observed." Sir William Ramsay performed a further experiment with a
similar result, in which the radium salt had been first of all heated in a
vacuum for some time, proving that the helium obtained could not have been
occluded in it; though the fact that the helium spectrum did not immediately
appear, in itself
Page 126
proves this point. Sir William Ramsay's results were confirmed by further
careful experiments by Sir James Dewar and other chemists. It was suggested,
therefore, that the -particle consists of an electrically charged helium-atom,
and not only is this view in agreement with the value of the mass of this
particle as determined experimentally, but it has been completely demonstrated
by Professor Rutherford and Mr. Royds. These chemists performed an experiment in
which the emanation from about one-seventh of a gramme of radium was enclosed in
a thin-walled tube, through the walls of which the -particles could pass, but
which were impervious to gases. This tube was surrounded by an outer jacket,
which was evacuated. After a time the presence of helium in the space between
the inner tube and the outer jacket was observed spectroscopically. 11 Now, the
emanation-atom results from the radium-atom by the expulsion of one -particle;
and since this latter consists of an electrically charged helium-atom, it
follows that the emanation must have an atomic weight of 226-4, i.e., 222. This
value is in agreement with Sir William Ramsay's determination of the density of
the emanation. We may represent the degradation of the radium-atom, therefore,
by the following scheme: --
Page 127
95. Nature of this Change.
Here, then, for the first time in the history of Chemistry, we have the
undoubted formation of one chemical element from another, for, leaving out of
the question the nature of the emanation, there can be no doubt that radium is a
chemical element. This is a point which must be insisted upon, for it has been
suggested that radium may be a compound of helium with some unknown element; or,
perhaps, a compound of helium with lead, since it has been shown that lead is
probably one of the end products of the decomposition of radium. The following
considerations, however, show this view to be altogether untenable: (i.) All
attempts to prepare compounds of helium with other elements have failed. (ii.)
Radium possesses all the properties of a chemical element; it has a
characteristic spectrum, and falls in that column in the Periodic Table with
those elements which it resembles as to its chemical properties. (iii.) The
quantity of heat liberated on the decomposition of the emanation is, as we have
already indicated, out of all proportion to that obtained even in the most
violent chemical reactions; and (iv.) one very important fact has been observed,
namely, that the rate of decay of the emanation is unaffected by even extreme
changes of temperature, whereas chemical actions are always affected in rate by
changes of temperature. It will also be advisable, perhaps, to indicate some of
the differences between helium and the emanation. The latter is a heavy gas,
condensable to a liquid by liquid air (recently it has been solidified12);
whereas helium
Page 128
is the lightest of all known gases with the exception of hydrogen and has been
liquefied only by the most persistent effort. 13 The emanation, moreover, is
radioactive, giving off -particles, whereas helium does not possess this
property.
96. Is this Change a true Transmutation?
It has been pointed out, however, that (in a sense) this change (viz., of
emanation into helium) is not quite what has been meant by the a expression
"transmutation of the elements"; for the reason that it is a spontaneous change;
no effort of ours can bring it about or cause it to cease.14 But the fact of the
change does go to prove that the chemical elements are not the discrete units of
matter that they were supposed to be. And since it appears that all matter is
radioactive, although (save in these exceptional cases) in a very slight degree,
15 we here have evidence of a process of evolution at work among the chemical
elements. The chemical elements are not permanent; they are all undergoing
change; and the common elements merely mark those points where the rate of the
evolutionary process is at its slowest. (See also 78 and 83.) Thus, the
essential truth in the old alchemistic doctrine of the growth of metals is
vindicated, for the metals do grow in the womb of Nature, although the process
may be far
Page 129
slower than appears to have been imagined by certain of the alchemists,16 and
although gold may not be the end product. As writes Professor Sir W. Tilden: " .
. . It appears that modern ideas as to the genesis of the elements, and hence of
all matter, stand in strong contrast with those which chiefly prevailed among
experimental philosophers from the time of Newton, and seem to reflect in an
altered form the speculative views of the ancients." " . . . It seems probable,"
he adds, "that the chemical elements, and hence all material substances of which
the earth, the sea, the air, and the host of heavenly bodies are all composed,
resulted from a change, corresponding to condensation, in something of which we
have no direct and intimate knowledge. Some have imagined this primal essence of
all things to be identical with the ether of space. As yet we know nothing with
certainty, but it is thought that by means of the spectroscope some stages of
the operation may be seen in progress in the nebulæ and stars...."17 We have
Page 130
next to consider whether there is any experimental evidence showing it to be
possible (using the phraseology of the alchemists) for man to assist in Nature's
work.
97. The Production of Neon from Emanation.
As we have already indicated above ( 93), the radium emanation contains a
vast store of potential energy, and it was with the idea of utilising this
energy for bringing about chemical changes that Sir William Ramsay18 undertook a
research on the chemical action of this substance -- a research with the most
surprising and the most interesting results, for the energy contained within the
radium emanation appeared to behave like a veritable Philosopher's Stone. The
first experiments were carried out on distilled water. It had already been
observed that the emanation decomposes water into its gaseous elements, oxygen
and hydrogen, and that the latter is always produced in excess. These results
were confirmed and the presence of hydrogen peroxide was detected, explaining
the formation of an excess of hydrogen; it was also shown that the emanation
brings about the reverse change to some extent, causing oxygen end hydrogen to
unite with the production of water, until a position of equilibrium is
Page 131
attained. On examining spectroscopically the gas obtained by the action of the
emanation on water, after the removal of the ordinary gases, a most surprising
result was observed -- the gas showed a brilliant spectrum of neon, accompanied
with some faint helium lines. A more careful experiment was carried out later by
Sir William Ramsay and Mr. Cameron, in which a silica bulb was employed instead
of glass. The spectrum of the residual gas after removing ordinary gases was
successfully photographed, and a large number of the neon lines identified;
helium was also present. The presence of neon could not be explained, in
Ramsay's opinion, by leakage of air into the apparatus, as the percentage of
neon in the air is not sufficiently high, whereas this suggestion might be put
forward in the case of argon. Moreover, the neon could not have come from the
aluminium of the electrodes (in which it might be thought to have been
occluded), as the sparking tube had been used and tested before the experiment
was carried out. The authors conclude: "We must regard the transformation of
emanation into neon, in presence of water, as indisputably proved, and, if a
transmutation be defined as a transformation brought about at will, by change of
conditions, then this is the first case of transmutation of which conclusive
evidence is put forward." 19 However, Professor Rutherford and Mr. Royds have
been unable to confirm this result. They describe 20 attempts to obtain neon by
the action of emanation
Page 132
on water. Out of five experiments no neon was obtained, save in one case in
which a small air leak was discovered; and, since the authors find that very
minute quantities of this gas are sufficient to give a clearly visible spectrum,
they conclude that Ramsay's positive results are due, after all, to leakage of
air into the apparatus. But if this is the true explanation of Ramsay's results,
it is difficult to understand why, in the case of the experiment with a solution
of a copper salt described below, the presence of neon was not detected, for, if
due to leakage, the proportions of the rare gases present should presumably have
been the same in all the experiments. Further research seems necessary
conclusively to settle the question.
98. Ramsay's Experiments on Copper.
The fact that an excess of hydrogen was produced when water was decomposed by
the emanation suggested to Sir William Ramsay and Mr. Cameron that if a solution
of a metallic salt was employed in place of pure water, the free metal might be
obtained. These "modern alchemists," therefore, proceeded to investigate the
action of radium emanation on solutions of copper and lead salts, and again
apparently effected transmutations. They found on removing the copper from a
solution of a copper-salt which had been subjected to the action of the
emanation, and spectroscopically examining the residue, that a considerable
quantity of sodium was present, together with traces of lithium; and the gas
evolved in the case of a solution of copper nitrate contained, along with much
nitric oxide and a little nitrogen, argon (which was detected
spectroscopically), but no helium. It certainly seemed like a dual
transformation of
Page 133
copper into lithium and sodium, and emanation into argon. They also observed
that apparently carbon dioxide is continually evolved from an acid solution of
thorium nitrate (see below, 100). It is worth while noticing that helium, neon
and argon occur in the same column in the Periodic Table with emanation; lithium
and sodium with copper, and carbon with thorium; in each case the elements
produced being of lighter atomic weight than those decomposed.21 The authors
make the following suggestions: "(1) That helium and the -particle are not
identical; (2) that helium results from the `degradation' of the large molecule
of emanation by its bombardment with -particles; (3) that this `degradation,'
when the emanation is alone or mixed with oxygen and hydrogen, results in the
lowest member of the inactive series, namely, helium; (4) that if particles of
greater mass than hydrogen or oxygen are associated with the emanation, namely,
liquid water, then the `degradation' of the emanation is less complete, and neon
is produced; (5) that when molecules of still greater weight and complexity are
present, as is the case when the emanation is dissolved in a solution of copper
sulphate, the product of `degradation' of the emanation is argon. We are
inclined to believe too [they say] that (6) the copper also is involved in this
process of degradation, and is reduced to the lowest term of its series, namely,
lithium; and at the same time, inasmuch as the weight of the residue of alkali,
produced when copper nitrate is present, is double that obtained from the blank
experiment, or from water alone, the supposition is not excluded that the
Page 134
chief product of the `degradation' of copper is sodium." 22
99. Further Experiments on Radium and Copper.
A little later Madame Curie and Mademoiselle Gleditsch 23 repeated Cameron
and Ramsay's experiments on copper salts, using, however, platinum apparatus.
They failed to detect lithium after the action of the emanation, and think that
Cameron and Ramsay's results may be due to the glass vessels employed. Dr.
Perman24 has investigated the direct action of the emanation on copper and gold,
and has failed to detect any trace of lithium. The transmutation of copper into
lithium, therefore, must be regarded as unproved, but further research is
necessary before any conclusive statements can be made on the subject.
100. Ramsay's Experiments on Thorium and allied Metals.
In his presidential address to the Chemical Society, March 25, 1909, after
having brought forward some exceedingly interesting arguments for the
possibility of transmutation, Sir William Ramsay described some experiments
which he had carried out on
Page 135
thorium and allied elements.25 It was found, as we have already stated ( 98),
that, apparently, carbon-dioxide was continually evolved from an acid solution
of thorium nitrate, precautions being taken that the gas was not produced from
the grease on the stopcock employed, and it also appeared that carbon-dioxide
was produced by the action of radium emanation on thorium nitrate. The action of
radium emanation on compounds (not containing carbon) of other members of the
carbon group, namely, silicon, zirconium and lead, was then investigated; in the
cases of zirconium nitrate and hydrofluosilicic acid, carbon-dioxide was
obtained; but in the case of lead chlorate the amount of carbon dioxide was
quite insignificant. Curiously enough, the perchlorate of bismuth, a metal which
belongs to the nitrogen group of elements, also yielded carbon-dioxide when
acted on by emanation. Sir William Ramsay concludes his discussion of these
experiments as follows: "Such are the facts. No one is better aware than I how
insufficient the proof is. Many other experiments must be made before it can
confidently be asserted that certain elements, when exposed to `concentrated
energy,' undergo degradation into carbon." Some such confirmatory experiments
were carried out by Sir William Ramsay and Mr. Francis L Usher, and they also
described an experiment with a compound of titanium. Their results confirm Sir
William Ramsay's former experiments. Carbon-dioxide was obtained in appreciable
quantities by the action of emanation on compounds
Page 136
of silicon, titanium, zirconium and thorium. In the case of lead, the amount of
carbon dioxide obtained was inappreciable. 26
101. The Possibility of Making Gold
It does not seem unlikely that if it is possible to "degrade" elements, it
may be possible to build them up. It has been suggested that it might be
possible to obtain, in this way, gold from silver, since these two elements
occur in the same column in the Periodic Table; but the suggestion still awaits
experimental confirmation. The question arises, What would be the result if gold
could be cheaply produced? That gold is a metal admirably adapted for many
purposes, for which its scarcity prevents its use, must be admitted. But the
financial chaos which would follow if it were to be cheaply obtained surpasses
the ordinary imagination. It is a theme that ought to appeal to a novelist of
exceptional imaginative power. However, we need not fear these results, for not
only is radium extremely rare, far dearer than gold, and on account of its
instability will never be obtained in large quantities, but, judging from the
above-described experiments, if, indeed, the radium emanation is the true
Philosopher's Stone, the quantity of gold that may be hoped for by its aid is
extremely small.
102. The Significance of "Allotropy."
A very suggestive argument for the transmutation of the metals was put
forward by Professor Henry M. Howe, LL.D., in a paper entitled "Allotropy or
Transmutation?" read before the British Association (Section B), Sheffield
Meeting, 1910.
Page 137
Certain substances are known which, although differing in their physical
properties very markedly, behave chemically as if they were one and the same
element, giving rise to the same series of compounds. Such substances, of which
we may mention diamond, graphite and charcoal (e.g., lampblack) -- all of which
are known chemically as "carbon" -- or, to take another example, yellow
phosphorus (a yellow, waxy, highly inflammable solid) and red phosphorus (a
difficultly-inflammable, dark red substance, probably possessing a minutely
crystalline structure), are, moreover, convertible one into the other.27 It has
been customary to refer to such substances as different forms or allotropic
modifications of the same element, and not to regard them as being different
elements. As Professor Howe says, "If after defining `elements' as substances
hitherto indivisible, and different elements as those which differ in at least
some one property, and after asserting that the elements cannot be transmuted
into each other, we are confronted with the change from diamond into lampblack,
and with the facts, first, that each is clearly
Page 138
indivisible hitherto and hence an element, and, second, that they differ in
every property, we try to escape in a circle by saying that they are not
different elements because they do change into each other. In short, we limit
the name `element' to indivisible substances which cannot be transmuted into
each other, and we define those which do transmute as ipso facto one element,
and then we say that the elements cannot be transmuted. Is not this very like
saying that, if you call a calf's tail a leg, then a calf has five legs? And if
it is just to reply that calling a tail a leg does not make it a leg, is it not
equally just to reply that calling two transmutable elements one element does
not make them so?
"Is it philosophical to point to the fact that two such transmutable elements
yield but a single line of derivatives as proof that they are one element? Is
not this rather proof of the readiness, indeed irresistibleness, of their
transmutation? Does not this simply mean that the derivativeless element,
whenever it enters into combination, inevitably transmutes into its mate which
has derivatives?28
According to the atomic theory the differences between what are termed
"allotropic modifications" are generally ascribed to differences in the number
and arrangement of the atoms constituting the molecules of such "modifications,"
and not to any differences in the atoms themselves. But we cannot argue that two
such "allotropic modifications" or elements which are transmutable into one
another
Page 139
are one and the same element, because they possess the same atomic weight, and
different elements are distinguished by different atomic weights; for the reason
that, in the determination of atomic weights, derivatives of such bodies are
employed; hence, the value obtained is the atomic weight of the element which
forms derivatives, from which that of its derivativeless mate may differ
considerably for all we know to the contrary, if we do, indeed, regard the
atomic weights of the elements as having any meaning beyond expressing the
inertia-ratios in which they combine one with another.
If we wish to distinguish between two such "allotropic modifications" apart
from any theoretical views concerning the nature and constitution of matter, we
can say that such "modifications" are different because equal weights of them
contain, or are equivalent to, different quantities of energy,29 since the
change of one "form" to another takes place only with the evolution or
absorption (as the case may be) of heat. 30 But, according to modern views
regarding the nature of matter, this is the sole fundamental
Page 140
difference between two different elements -- such are different because equal
weights of them contain or are equivalent to different quantities of energy. The
so-called "allotropic modifications of an element," therefore, are just as much
different elements as any other different elements, and the change from one
"modification" to another is a true transmutation of the elements; the only
distinction being that what are called "allotropic modifications of the same
element" differ only slightly in respect of the energy they contain, and hence
are comparatively easy to convert one into the other. whereas different elements
(so called) differ very greatly from one another in this respect, whence it is
to be concluded that the transmutation of one such element into another will
only be attained by the utilisation of energy in a very highly concentrated
form, such as is evolved simultaneously with the spontaneous decomposition of
the radium emanation.
103. Conclusion.
We have shown that modern science indicates the essential truth of
alchemistic doctrine, and our task is ended. Writing in 1904, Sir William Ramsay
said: "If these hypotheses [concerning the possibility of causing the atoms of
ordinary elements to absorb energy] are just, then the transmutations of the
elements no longer appears an idle dream. The philosopher's stone will have been
discovered, and it is not beyond the bounds of possibility that it may lead to
that other goal of the philosophers of the dark ages -- the elixir vitæ. For the
action of living cells is also dependent on the nature and direction of the
energy which they contain; and who can say that it will be
Page 141
impossible to control their action, when the means of imparting and controlling
energy shall have been investigated?" 31 Whatever may be the final verdict
concerning his own experiments, those of Sir Ernest Rutherford, referred to in
the Preface to the present edition, demonstrate the fact of transmutation; and
it is worth noticing how many of the alchemists' obscure descriptions of their
Magistery well apply to that marvellous something which we call Energy, the true
"First Matter" of the Universe. And of the other problem, the Elixir Vitæ, who
knows?
1. They must not be confused with the greenish-yellow phosphorescence which is
also produced: the X-rays are invisible.
2. See Madame SKLODOWSKA CURIE'S Radio-active Substances (2nd ed., 1904).
3. See Sir T. E. THORPE: "On the Atomic Weight of Radium" (Bakerian Lecture for
1907. Delivered before the Royal Society, June 20, 1907), Proceedings of the
Royal Society of London, vol. lxxx. pp. 298 et seq.; reprinted in The Chemical
News, vol. xcvii. pp. 229 et seq. (May 15, 1908).
4. Madame P. CURIE and M. A. DEBIERNE: "Sur le radium métallique," Comptes
Rendus heldomadaires des Séances l'Academie des Sciences, vol. cli. (1910), pp.
523-525. (For an English translation of this paper see The Chemical News, vol.
cii. p. 175.)
5. This follows from Avogadro's Hypothesis, see 76.
6. Sir WILLIAM RAMSAY and Dr. R. W. GRAY: "La densité de l'émanation du radium,"
Comptes Rendus hebdomadaires des Séances de l'Académie des Sciences, vol. cvi.
(1910), pp. 126 et seq.
7. This view regarding the -rays is not, however, universally accepted, some
scientists regarding them as consisting of a stream of particles moving with
very high velocities.
8. Sir WILLIAM CROOKES, F.R.S.: "Radio-activity of Uranium," Proceedings of the
Royal Society of London, vol. lxvi. (1900), pp. 409 et seq.
9. E. RUTHERFORD, F.R.S., and H. T. BARNES, D.Sc.: "Heating Effect of the Radium
Emanation," Philosophical Magazine [6], vol. vii. (1904), pp. 202 et seq.
10. Sir WILLIAM RAMSAY and FREDERICK SODDY: "Experiments in Radioactivity and
the Production of Helium from Radium," Proceedings of the Royal Society of
London, vol. lxxii. (1903), pp. 204 et seq.
11. E. RUTHERFORD, F.R.S., and T. ROYDS, M.Sc.: "The Nature of the -particle
from Radio-active Substances," Philosophical Magazine [6], vol. xvii. (1909),
pp. 281 et seq.
12. By Ramsay. See Proceedings of the Chemical Society, vol. xxv. (1909), pp. 82
and 83.
13. By Professor Onnes. See Chemical News, vol. xcviii. p. 37 (July 24, 1908).
14. See Professor H. C. JONES: The Electrical Nature of Matter and Radioactivity
(1906), pp. 125 -- 126.
15. It has been definitely proved, for example, that the common element
potassium is radioactive, though very feebly so (it emits -rays). It is also
interesting to note that many common substances emit corpuscles at high
temperatures.
16. Says Peter Bonus, however, " . . . we know that the generation of metals
occupies thousands of years . . . in Nature's workshop . . ." (see The New Pearl
of Great Price, Mr. A. E. Waite's translation, p. 55), and certain others of the
alchemists expressed a similar view.
17. Sir WILLIAM A. TILDEN: The Elements: Speculations as to their Nature and
Origin (1910), pp. 108, 109, 133 and 134. With regard to Sir William Tilden's
remarks, it is very interesting to note that Swedenborg (who was born when
Newton was between forty and fifty years old) not only differed from that great
philosopher on those very points on which modern scientific philosophy is at
variance with Newton, but, as is now recognised by scientific men, anticipated
many modern discoveries and scientific theories. It would be a most interesting
task to set forth the agreement existing between Swedenborg's theories and the
latest products of scientific thought concerning the nature of the physical
universe. Such, however, would lie without the confines of the present work.
18. Sir WILLIAM RAMSAY: "The Chemical Action of the Radium Emanation. Pt. I.,
Action on Distilled Water," Journal of the Chemical Society, vol. xci. (1907),
pp. 931 et seq. ALEXANDER T. CAMERON and Sir WILLIAM RAMSAY, ibid. "Pt. II., On
Solutions containing Copper, and Lead, and on Water," ibid. pp. 1593 et seq.
"Pt. III., On Water and Certain Gases," ibid. vol. xciii. (1908), pp. 966 et
seq. "Pt. IV., On Water," ibid. pp. 992 et seq.
19. Journal of the Chemical Society, vol. xciii. (1908), p. 997.
20. E. RUTHERFORD, F.R.S., and T. ROYDS, M.Sc.: "The Action of Radium Emanation
on Water," Philosophical Magazine [6], vol. xvi. (1908), pp. 812 et seq.
21. See pp. 106, 107.
22. Journal of the Chemical Society, vol. xci. (1907), pp. 1605-1606. More
recent experiments, however, proved that the -particle does consist of an
electrically charged helium-atom, and this view was latterly accepted by Sir
William Ramsay, so that the above suggestions must be modified in accordance
therewith. (See 94.)
23. Madame CURIE and Mademoiselle GLEDITSCH: "Action de 'émanation du radium sur
les solutions des sels de cuivre," Comptes Rendus hebdomadaires de Séances de
l'Acadimie des Sciences, vol. cxlvii. (1908), pp. 345 et seq. (For an English
translation of this paper, see The Chemical News, vol. xcviii. pp. 157 and 158.)
24. EDGAR PHILIP PERMAN: "The Direct Action of Radium on Copper and Gold,"
Proceedings of the Chemical Society, vol. xxiv. (1908), p. 214.
25. Sir WILLIAM RAMSAY: "Elements and Electrons," Journal of the Chemical
Society, vol. xcv. (1909), pp. 624 et seq.
26. For a brief account in English of these later experiments see The Chemical
News, vol. c. p. 209 (October 29, 1909).
27. Diamond is transformed into graphite when heated by a powerful electric
current between carbon poles, and both diamond and graphite can be indirectly
converted into charcoal. The artificial production of the diamond, however, is a
more difficult process; but the late Professor Moissan succeeded in effecting
it, so far as very small diamonds are concerned, by dissolving charcoal in
molten iron or silver and allowing it to crystallise from the solution under
high pressure. Graphite was also obtained. Red phosphorus is produced from
yellow phosphorus by heating the latter in absence of air. The temperature
240-250o C. is the most suitable; at higher temperatures the reverse change sets
in, red phosphorus being converted into yellow phosphorus.
28. Professor HENRY M. HOWE, LL.D.: "Allotropy or Transmutation." (See The
Chemical News, vol. cii. pp. 153 and 154, September 23, 1910.)
29. For a defence of the view that chemical substances may be regarded as
energy-complexes, and that this view is equally as valid as the older notion of
a chemical substance as an inertia-complex, i.e., as something made up entirely
of different units or atoms each characterised by the possession of a definite
and constant weight at a fixed point on the earth's surface, see an article by
the present writer, entitled "The Claims of Thermochemistry," Knowledge and
Scientific News, vol. vii. (New Series), pp. 227 et seq. (July, 1910).
30. In some cases the heat change accompanying the transformation of an element
into an "allotropic modication"{sic} can be measured directly. More frequently,
however, it is calculated as the difference between the quantities of heat
obtained when the two "forms" are converted into one and the same compound.
31. Sir WILLIAM RAMSAY: "Radium and its Products," Harper's Magazine (December
1904), vol. xlix. (European Edition), p. 57.
THE END.
Printed in Great Britain by
UNWIN BROTHERS, LIMITED
WOKING AND LONDON
Works by H. STANLEY REDGROVE, B.Sc. (Lond.), F.C.S. ON THE CALCULATION OF
THERMO-CHEMICAL CONSTANTS. (Arnold, 1909, 6s. net.)
MATTER, SPIRIT AND THE COSMOS; Some Suggestions towards a better Understanding
of the Whence and Why of their Existence. (Rider, Popular Edition, 1916, 1S.
net.)
A MATHEMATICAL THEORY OF SPIRIT. Being an Attempt to employ certain Mathematical
Principles in the Elucidation of some Metaphysical Problems. (Rider, 1912, 2S.
6d. net.)
EXPERIMENTAL MENSURATION. An Elementary Text-Book of Inductive Geometry.
(Heinemann, 1912, 2S. 6d. net.)
THE MAGIC OF EXPERIENCE. A Contribution to the Theory of Knowledge. With an
Introduction by Sir WILLIAM F. BARRETT, F.R.S. (Dent, 1916. Out of print.)
BYGONE BELIEFS. A Series of Excursions in the Byways of Thought. (Rider, 1920,
10S. 6d. net.)
PURPOSE AND TRANSCENDENTALISM. An Exposition of Swedenborg's Philosophical
Doctrine in Relation to Modern Thought. (Kegan Paul, 1920, 5S. net.)
ROGER BACON, the Father of Experimental Science, and Mediæval Occultism. (Rider,
1920, 1S. 6d. net.)
INDUSTRIAL GASES, together with the Liquefaction of Gases. By various authors,
including H. S. REDGROVE. (Crosby Lockwood, Second Impression, 1918, 9S. net.)
THE INDICTMENT OF WAR. An Anthology. Compiled by H. S. REDGROVE and J. H.
ROWBOTTOM. (Daniel, 1919, 10S. 6d. net.)
JOSEPH GLANVILL and Psychical Research in the Seventeenth Century. By H. S.
REDGROVE and I. M. L. REDGROVE. (Rider, 1921, 2S. net.)
London: WILLIAM RIDER & SON, Ltd., 8 Peternoster Row, E.C.4