Thomas Charnock (1524-1581).

[63]Robert Alfred Vaughan, B.A.:Hours with the Mystics(7th edition, 1895), vol. ii. bk. 8, chap. ix. p. 134.[64]Arthur Edward Waite:The Real History of the Rosicrucians, (1887).

[63]Robert Alfred Vaughan, B.A.:Hours with the Mystics(7th edition, 1895), vol. ii. bk. 8, chap. ix. p. 134.

[64]Arthur Edward Waite:The Real History of the Rosicrucians, (1887).

§50.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 Charnockwas 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 hisBreviary 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 describedin 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 aGentlemanthat oughte me great malliceCaused me to be prest to goe serve atCallys: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.”[65]

[65]Thomas Charnock:The Breviary of Naturall Philosophy(seeTheatrum Chemicum Britannicum, edited by Ashmole, 1652, p. 295.)

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 Libaviuswas born at Halle in Germany in 1540, where he studied medicine and practiced 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 ofspiritus 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 beregarded as the first text-book of Chemistry. It was held in high esteem for a considerable time, being reprinted on several occasions.

PLATE 9.PORTRAIT OF EDWARD KELLEY.PORTRAIT OF JOHN DEE.To face page 68]

PLATE 9.

PORTRAIT OF EDWARD KELLEY.

PORTRAIT OF JOHN DEE.

To face page 68]

§52.Edward Kelley or Kelly (seeplate 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’sJohn Dee(1909). Edward Kelley, according to some accounts, was brought up as an apothecary.[66]He is also said to have entered Oxford University under the pseudonym of Talbot.[67]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,[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(seeplate 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;[69]andunder the date May 10, 1588, we find the following recorded: “E.K. did open the great secret to me, God be thanked!”[70]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.”

[66]See, for example,William Lilly:History of His Life and Times(1715, reprinted in 1822, p. 227).[67]SeeAnthony à Wood’saccount of Kelley’s life inAthenæ Oxonienses(3rd edition, edited by Philip Bliss, vol. i. col. 639.)[68]William Lilly, the astrologer, in hisHistory 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.[69]The Private Diary of Dr. John Dee(The Camden Society, 1842), p. 22.[70]The Private Diary of Dr. John Dee(The Camden Society, 1842), p. 27.

[66]See, for example,William Lilly:History of His Life and Times(1715, reprinted in 1822, p. 227).

[67]SeeAnthony à Wood’saccount of Kelley’s life inAthenæ Oxonienses(3rd edition, edited by Philip Bliss, vol. i. col. 639.)

[68]William Lilly, the astrologer, in hisHistory 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.

[69]The Private Diary of Dr. John Dee(The Camden Society, 1842), p. 22.

[70]The Private Diary of Dr. John Dee(The Camden Society, 1842), p. 27.

It was during his incarceration that he wrote an alchemistic work entitledThe 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.[71]

[71]An English translation of Kelley’s alchemistic works were published under the editorship of Mr. A. E. Waite, in 1893.

§53.Henry Khunrathwas 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 themagnum opus, and . . . was undoubtedly aware of the larger issues, of Hermetic theorems”; he describes Khunrath’s chief work,Amphitheatrum Sapientiæ Æternæ, &c., as “purely mystical and magical.”[72]

[72]A. E. Waite:Lives of Alchemystical Philosophers(1888), p. 159.

§54.The date and birthplace ofAlexander Sethon, a Scottish alchemist, do not appear to have been recorded, butMichael Sendivogiuswas 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 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 entitledThe New Chemical Lightunder 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 tractOn Sulphurwhich 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 afinesseto hide his true character as an alchemistic adept. He died in 1646.[73]

[73]See F. B.:Lives of Alchemystical Philosophers(1815), pp. 66-69.

TheNew Chemical Lightwas held in great esteem by the alchemists. The first part treats atlength 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 gulled 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.”[74]The second part treats of the Elements and Principles (see§§ 17and19).

[74]The New Chemical Light, Part I. (seeThe Hermetic Museum, vol. ii. p. 125).

PLATE 10.[by J. Brunn]PORTRAIT OFMICHAEL MAIER.To face page 72

PLATE 10.

[by J. Brunn]

PORTRAIT OFMICHAEL MAIER.

To face page 72

§55.Michael Maier(seeplate 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 alchemisticignis fatuus—the Stone of the Philosophers—travelling about Germany and elsewhere in order to have converse with those who were regarded as adepts in theArt. 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’sCount 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 hisLusus 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.”[75]HisSubtle Allegory concerning the Secrets of Alchemy, very useful to possess and pleasant to read, will be found in theHermetic Museum, together with hisGolden Tripod,consisting of translations of “Valentine’s” “Practica” andTwelve Keys, Norton’sOrdinaland Cremer’s spuriousTestament.

[75]Michael Maier:Lusus Serius: or Serious Passe-time(1654), p. 138.

Plate 11.PORTRAIT OFJACOB BOEHME.To face page 74]

Plate 11.

PORTRAIT OFJACOB BOEHME.

To face page 74]

§56.Jacob Boehme, or Behmen (seeplate 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, theAurora, 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 1624, and in the same year was there taken ill with a fever. Returning to Görlitz, he expired in a condition of ecstasy.

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;[76]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 Phylosophers Stoneis a very dark disesteemed Stone, of aGraycolour, but therein lyeth the highest Tincture.”[77]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.[78]

[76]For a general discussion of spiritual visions see the present writer’sMatter, 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.[77]Jacob Boehme:Epistles(translated by J. E., 1649), Ep. iv. § 111, p. 65.[78]The Book of the Prophet Isaiah, chap, liii., vv. 2 and 3, R.V.

[77]Jacob Boehme:Epistles(translated by J. E., 1649), Ep. iv. § 111, p. 65.

[78]The Book of the Prophet Isaiah, chap, liii., vv. 2 and 3, R.V.

§57.John Baptist van Helmont(seeplate 12) was born in Brussels in 1577. He devoted himself to the study of medicine, at first following Galen, butafterwards 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.

PLATE 12.PORTRAITS OFJ. B. AND F. M. VAN HELMONT.(From the Frontispiece to J. B. van Helmont’sOriatrike).To face page 76]

PLATE 12.

PORTRAITS OFJ. B. AND F. M. VAN HELMONT.(From the Frontispiece to J. B. van Helmont’sOriatrike).

To face page 76]

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)[79]and vapours (which give liquids on cooling). In particular he investigated the gas that is now known as carbon-dioxide (carbonic anhydride), which he termedgas sylvestre; but he lacked suitable apparatus for thecollection of gases, and hence was led in many cases to erroneous conclusions.

[79]It has since been discovered that all gases can be condensed, given a sufficient degree of cold and pressure.

Francis Mercurius van Helmont(seeplate 12), the son of John Baptist, born in 1618, gained the reputation of having also achieved themagnum 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 Glauberwas 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, 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.[80]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.”[81]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.

[80]SeeAnthony à Wood:Athenæ Oxonienses, edited by Philip Bliss, vol. iii. (1817), cols. 722-726.[81]Thomas Vaughan(“Eugenius Philalethes”):Anima Magica Abscondita(seeThe Magical Writings of Thomas Vaughan, edited by A. E. Waite, 1888, p. 71).

[80]SeeAnthony à Wood:Athenæ Oxonienses, edited by Philip Bliss, vol. iii. (1817), cols. 722-726.

[81]Thomas Vaughan(“Eugenius Philalethes”):Anima Magica Abscondita(seeThe Magical Writings of Thomas Vaughan, edited by A. E. Waite, 1888, p. 71).

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 lovetowards 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 mentionedAnthroposophia Theomagica,Anima Magica Abscondita(which were published together), andMagia 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.[82]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 publishedTheMarrow 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. TheOpen Entrance to the Closed Palace of the King(the most famous of these) and theThree Treatisesof the same author will be found inThe Hermetic Museum. Some of his views have already been noted (see§§ 1and22). 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.”[83]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. . . .”[84]Well might this have been said of the electron of modern scientific theory.

[82]See Mr. A. E. Waite’sLives of Alchemystical Philosophers, art. “Eirenæus Philalethes,” and the Biographical Preface to hisThe 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. 106et seq., and Professor G. L. Kittredge’sDoctor Robert Child, The Remonstrant(Camb., Mass., 1919). The last mentioned writer strongly urges the identification of “Eirenæus Philalethes” with George Starkey.[83]“Eirenæus Philalethes”:The Metamorphosis of Metals(seeThe Hermetic Museum, vol. ii. p. 236). Compare with van Helmont’s views,§ 57.[84]Ibid., p. 240.

[83]“Eirenæus Philalethes”:The Metamorphosis of Metals(seeThe Hermetic Museum, vol. ii. p. 236). Compare with van Helmont’s views,§ 57.

[84]Ibid., p. 240.

§61.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 manyapparenttransmutations 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 inthe 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.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.”[85]

[85]J. B. van Helmont:Life Eternal(seeOriatrike, translated by J. C., 1662; orvan 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).

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 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.”[86]

[86]J. B. van Helmont:The Tree of Life(seeOriatrikeorVan Helmont’s Workes, p. 807).

PLATE 13.HelvetiusTo face page 84]

PLATE 13.

To face page 84]

§63.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 authoritativemien, 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 Ihad 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.“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 methe 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 shouldhave protected your spoil with “yellow wax,” then it would have been able to penetrate the lead and to transmute it into gold.’ . . .

§65.“. . . 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 glitteredand 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.“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 strongaqua 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 theaqua fortishas 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.“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 itselfwas 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.”[87]

Back to Index Next