³1username³2BryceHarrington³2name³2text_default³2version³21³2ts³2980544307³2ip³263.85.63.20³2data³2newauthor³31³3minor³30³3text³3'''Who were the alchemists of the Middle Ages and what did they believe in?'''

This question defies a simple answer, as the alchemists were different
things at different times.  Also, different historians have postulated
different interpretations of these ancient scientists.  By carefully
examining these different perspectives in relation to their historical
contexts it will be possible to identify the alchemists as they existed
in the Middle Ages.

To gain a thorough understanding of the alchemists, this paper will
first briefly look at the origins of alchemy in Egypt and Greece, then
trace its development in the Middle East.  Once this background has been
laid out, a systematic examination of the medieval development of the
alchemical art will be commenced, emphasizing the role of individuals and
identifying the changing characteristics that defined alchemy.  For sake
of continuity, a brief look at alchemy's degeneration and death in the
Renaissance will be taken.  But first, a general overview of the
prevalent ideas about the alchemists should be addressed.

Asked the common man of the street what the alchemists were, and one
will hear that they were pseudo-scientists who attempted to turn lead
into gold, believed everything was composed of the four elements earth,
air, fire, and water, and who believed in mystical-magical nonsense.
This is about the limit of most people's understanding of the art, but
for a single sentence definition it is not too incorrect.

For a deeper understanding of alchemy, one might turn to a chemistry
textbook.  But according to a college textbook used at the University of
Southern California, "By about 400 B.C. [the Greeks] had proposed that
all matter was composed of four fundamental substances:  fire, earth,
water, and air...  The next 2000 years of chemical history were
dominated by a pseudo-science called alchemy.  Alchemists were often
mystics and fakes who were obsessed with the idea of turning cheap
metals into gold."  (Zumdahl pg. 38)  So much for a deeper
understanding.

Historians of a more occultists bent look at the alchemists as true
magicians who actually accomplished the work of transforming lead into
gold.  beyond this, occultists saw th e alchemists as religious mystics
who tried to discover the secret to purifying man's soul through
learning about the workings of nature.  (Edwards, p. 17; Gettings,
p. 13)

Another view looks at the alchemists in a more philosophical way,
alchemists were religious reformers who worked in secret and used
chemical terms in a secret code that really referred to theological and
philosophical beliefs to escape persecution from the church of their
day.  (Hitchcock, pp. iii-x; Burckhard, pp 28-31)

Of course it should be possible to use bits and pieces of each of these
theories to assemble a realistic idea of what the alchemists were, but
before this is done a question arising from these theories must be
addressed:  Where do these diverse theories come from?  The answer lies
in the writings put forth by the alchemists themselves.  The best way to
describe how confusion should arise is to give an example taken from an
alchemical writer:

    Concerning the Nature and Properties of Mercury.

    ALL THINGS ARE concealed in all.  One of them all is the concealer
    of the rest- their corporeal vessel, external, visible, and
    movable.  All liquifactions are manifested in that vessel.  For
    the vessel is a living and corporeal spirit, and so all coagulations
    or congelations enclosed in it, when prevented from flowing and
    surrounded, are not therewith content.  (Paracelsus, p. 415)

One can understand how confusion can arise.  This writer was said to
have been fairly clear in his writings.  This passage was not really
about mercury, but about the human body.  In any case, the alchemists
intentionally wrote cryptically, it seams to have been a hallmark of
their art.  Artiphius, a medieval alchemist, refers to this by writing,
"Is it not recognized that [alchemy] is... passed on orally, and is full
of secrets?...  Are you so simple as to believe that we would clearly
and openly teach the greatest and most important of all secrets, with
the result that you would take our words literally?" (Burckhardt, p28)
This is only one of many examples in which alchemical writers refer to
the cryptical phrasings of their works.  It is almost a tradition among
the alchemists and can be traced back to the Greek founders of the Art.
The "cipher" was passed on from teacher to student orally, and
unfortunately the "code" to decipher these texts has been lost.  Modern
historical interpretations invariably differ as to exactly what the
alchemists were writing about.   (Burckhardt, pp.30-3)


'''History and Development of Alchemy'''

Alchemy's origins are shrouded in the mists of time, but can be traced
clear back to the ancient Egyptians.  Metallurgy and mysticism were
inexorably tied together in the ancient world, as the techniques of
turning ugly ores into an almost holy metal seemed to be a priestly
art.  In fact, alchemy in Egypt was the domain of the priest class.
(Burckhardt, p.15)

Legend has it that the founder of alchemy was a man named Thoth or
Hermes.  According to these Egyptian legends, Thoth wrote forty-two
books on knowledge, covering law, medicine, alchemy, etc.  Over time,
Thoth, if he even existed at all, came to be regarded as a god by the
Egyptians.  Even later, as Egyptian knowledge passed to the Greeks,
Thoth was called Hermes Trismegistus, or Hermes the thrice-greatest.
(Lindsay, pp. 160-9)  The work of Hermes, often referred to in early
alchemical texts is, sadly, completely lost to modern scholars.
However, Hermes' "Emerald Table" has been transmitted through Arab
sources.  It is generally understood that the twelve principles
expounded in the manuscript formed the basis for alchemy, called the
heremitical philosophy by the early alchemists.

The first point of the "Emerald Tablet" tells the purpose of heremitical
science:  "in truth certainly and without doubt, whatever is below is
like that which is above, and whatever is above is like that which is
below, to accomplish the miracles of one thing."  (Burckhardt, p. 196-7)
 This is the macrocosm-microcosm belief central to the hermetic
philosophy.  IN other words, the human body (the microcosm) is affected
by the exterior world (the macrocosm), which includes the heavens
through astrology, and the earth through the elements.  (Burckhardt,
p. 34-42)

The Greeks appropriated the heremitical beliefs and added
pythagoreanism, ionianism, and gnosticism.  Pythagorean philosophy is
basically the belief that numbers rule the universe, originating from
the observations of sound, stars, and geometric shapes like triangles.
Ionian thought was based on the belief that the universe could be
explained through concentration on natural phenomena; this philosophy
was developed by Plato and Aristotle, whose works came to be an integral
part of alchemy.  The third component introduced to heremitical
philosophy by the Greeks was gnosticism, a belief prevalent in the
pre-Christian and early post-Christian Roman Empire.  Gnosticism was the
conviction that earthly matter is evil and by learning about the nature
of matter will lead to salvation.  By the end of the Roman Empire these
philosophies had been joined to the heremitical philosophies of the
Egyptians.  (Lindsay)

At this point alchemy moved east to be taken up by the Arabs, but before
moving on, Augustian views of science should be illustrated, as they had
a profound impact on Western thought up until the retransmission of Arab
philosophy in the eleventh and twelfth centuries.  Saint Augustine was
an early Christian philosopher who wrote of his beliefs shortly before
the fall of the Roman Empire.  In essence, he felt that reason and faith
could be used to understand God, but experimental philosophy was evil:
"There is also present in the soul, by means of these same bodily sense,
a kind of empty longing and curiosity which aims not at taking pleasure
in the flesh but at acquiring experience through the flesh, and this
empty curiosity is dignified by the names of learning and science."
(Augustine, p. 245)  Augustinian ideas were decidedly
anti-experimental, yet when Aristotelean experimental techniques were
made available to the West they were not shunned.  Still Augustinian
thought was well ingrained in medieval society and was used to show
alchemy as being un-Godly.

Much work was done on the development of alchemy by the Arabs but it
shall only be summarized here for the sake of brevity.  Much more is
known about Islamic alchemy because more was written down.  In
Alexandria, where much of the alchemical work was done in the Roman
Empire, the art was mainly oral and little was committed to paper for
the sake of secrecy.  (Lindsay, p. 155)  It is possible that some
writing was done in Alexandria and was subsequently lost or destroyed in
fires and the turbulent periods that followed.

In any case, most of the earliest writings that have come down through
the years are Islamic texts.  (Burckhardt p. 46)

The Arab world was a melting pot for alchemy.  Platonic and Aristotelean
thought, which had already been somewhat appropriated into heremitical
science, continued to be assimilated.  One very important Aristotelean
idea was that of the four elements: earth, air, water, and fire.
According to Aristotle, each element had a sphere which it belonged to
and would return to if left undisturbed.  (Lindsay, p. 16)  Alchemists
adapted this a little:  The four elements were really qualitative
aspects of matter, not quantitative, as our modern elements are.
"...true alchemy never regarded earth, air, water, and fire as corporeal
or chemical substances in the present-day sense of the word.  The four
elements are simply the primary, and most general, qualities by means of
which the amorphous and purely quantitative substance of all bodies
first reveals itself in differentiated form."  (Hitchcock, p. 66)
Platonic and neo-Platonic theories about universals and the omnipotence
of god were also absorbed.

Of the many Arab heremitic philosophers, Jabir ibn-Hayyn of the eighth
century was the most noteworthy.  To Aristotelean physics he added the
four properties of hotness, coldness, dryness, and moistness.
(Burkhardt, p. 29)  Each element was characterized by these qualities:
Fire was both hot and dry, earth cold and dry, water cold and moist,
and air hot and moist.  In metals two of these qualities were interior
and two were exterior.  For example, lead was cold and dry and got was
hot and moist.  Thus, Jabir, theorized, by rearranging the qualities of
one metal, a different metal would result.  (Burckhardt, p. 29)

By this reasoning, the search for the philosopher's stone was introduced
to the west.  The search for the stone, or grand elixir, had originated
from China, most scholars believe, and was supposed to have the added
effect of being able to make one immortal.  (Edwards, p. 38)  It is not
known how much Chinese alchemy was added to the Islamic version of the
Art, but that Chinese theories influenced Arabic scientists has been
commonly accepted.  (Edwards pp. 33-59; Burckhardt, p. 10-22)

Likewise, Hindu learning was assimilated into Islamic alchemy, but again
the extent and effects have not been researched to any worthwhile
extent.  An eleventh century alchemist named Alberuni testified to the
existence of Hindu alchemy saying that they "have a science similar to
alchemy which is quite peculiar to them.  They call it Rasayana.  it
means the art which is restricted to certain operations, drugs,
compounds, and medicines, most of which are taken from plants.  its
principles restored the health of those who were ill beyond hope and
gave back youth to fading old age."  Islamic numerology was also taken
by the Arabs, but assimilation of this into alchemy was left for the
European alchemists of the Renaissance.  (Lindsay p. 87-8; Edwards,
p. 28)

Arabic beliefs were intrinsically tied to Islamic alchemy, and when
Europeans appropriated the philosophies of the Arabs, alchemy came along
for the ride, so to speak.  Because these beliefs had originated from a
Christian society they were not too difficult to adapt to Christian
theology.  Gerbert of Arillac (d. 1003) was among the first to bring
Islamic science to Europe from Spain.  Later men such as Adelard of Bath
(d. 1144) brought additional learning.  But until the thirteenth century
the moves were mainly assimilative.  (Hollister p. 124, 294)

There were some exceptions to this trend.  Saint Anselm (1033-1109) was
an Augustinian who believed faith must precede rationalism, as Augustine
and most theologians prior to Anselm had believed, but Anselm put forth
the opinion that faith and rationalism were compatible and encouraged
rationalism in a Christian context.  His views set the stage for the
philosophical explosion to occur.  Saint Abelard followed in Anselm's
work, laying the foundation Aristotelian thought before the first works
of Aristotle reached the West.  His major influence on alchemy was his
belief that Platonic universals did not have a separate existence
outside of man's conscience.  Abelard also systematized the analysis of
philosophical contradictions.  (Hollister, p. 287-8)

Robert Grosseteste (1170-1253) was a pioneer of the scientific theory
that would later be used and refined by the alchemists.  he took
Abelard's methods of analysis and added the use of observations,
experimentation, and conclusions in making scientific evaluations.
Grosseteste also did much work to bridge Platonic and Aristotelian
thinking.  (Hollister pp. 294-5)

Albertus Magnus (1193-1280) and Thomas Aquinus (1225-
1274) were both Dominicans who studied Aristotle and
worked at reconciling the differences between philosophy
and Christianity.  Aquinas also did a great deal of work
in developing the scientific method.  He even went so far
as to claim that universals could only be discovered 
through reasoning:  this ran contrary to the commonly held
Platonic belief that universals were found through divine 
illumination alone.  Magnus and Aquinas were among the 
first to take up the examination of alchemical theory, and
could be considered to be alchemists themselves, but for
the fact that these two did little in the way of
experimentation.  One major contribution of Aquinas was 
the belief that since reason could not run in opposition 
to God, reason must be compatible to theology.  (Hollister
p. 290-4, 355)

The first true alchemist in Medieval Europe was Roger
Bacon.  His work did as much for alchemy as Robert Boyle
did for chemistry and Galileo did for astronomy and
physics.  Bacon (121401294) was an Oxford Franciscan who
explored optics, languages, and alchemy.  The Franciscan
ideals of taking on the world rather than rejecting the
world led to his conviction that experimentation was more
important than reasoning:  "Of the three ways in which men
think that they acquire knowledge of things - authority,
reasoning, and experience - only the last is effective and
able to bring peace to the intellect."  (Bacon p. 367)
"Experimental Science controls the conclusions of all
other sciences.  It reveals truths which reasoning from 
general principles would never have discovered."
(Hollister p. 294-5)  Roger Bacon has also been attributed
with originating the search for the philosopher's stone
and the elixir of life:  "That medicine which will remove
all impurities and corruptibilities from the lesser metals
will also, in the opinion of the wise, take off so much of
the corruptibility of the body that human life may be
prolonged for many centuries."  The idea of immortality
was replaced with the notion of long life; after all,
man's time on Earth was simply to wait and prepare for
immortality in the world of God.  Immortality on Earth did
not mesh with Christian theology.  (Edwards p. 37-8)

Bacon was not the only alchemist of the high middle
ages, but he was the most significant.  His works were
used by countless alchemists of the fifteenth through
nineteenth centuries.  Other alchemists of Bacon's time
shared several traits.  First, and most obviously, nearly
all were members of the clergy.  This was simply because
few people outside the secular schools had the education
to examine the Arabic-derived works.  Also, alchemy at
this time was sanctioned by the church as a good method
of exploring and developing theology.  Alchemy was
interesting to the wide variety of churchmen because it
offered a rationalistic view of the universe when men were
just beginning to learn about rationalism.  (Edwards
p. 24-7)

So by the end of the thirteenth century, alchemy had 
developed into a fairly structured system of belief.
First and foremost, the alchemists were all true 
Christians.  They believed in the macrocosm-microcosm 
theories of Hermes, that is to say, they believed that
processes that affect minerals and other substances could
have an effect on the human body (i.e., if one could learn
the secret of purifying gold, one could use the technique
to purify the human soul.)  These men believed the 
philosophers' stone was a substance that was capable of
purifying base metals (and thereby transmuting them to
gold) as well as purify the soul.  They believed in the
four elements and the four qualities as described above,
and they had a strong tradition of cloaking their written
ideas in a labyrinth of coded jargon set with traps to
mislead the uninitiated.  Finally, the alchemists
practiced their art: they actively experimented with
chemicals and made observations and theories about how the
universe operated.  Their entire philosophy was based 
around their belief that man's soul was divided within
himself after the fall of Adam.  By purifying the two
parts of man's soul, man could be reunited with God.
(Burckhardt p. 149)

But in the fourteenth century, all this was to 
change.  William of Ockham, an Oxford Franciscan who died
in 1349, attacked the Thomist view of compatibility
between faith and reason.  According to his view, widely
accepted today, was that God must be accepted on faith
alone, He could not be limited by human reason.  Of
course, this view was not incorrect, but it virtually
erased alchemy from practice in the fourteenth and 
fifteenth centuries.  (Hollister p. 335)  Pope John XXII in 
the early 1300's issued an edict against alchemy, which 
effectively removed all church personnel from the practice of
the Art (the inquisition didn't help, either.)  (Edwards, p.49)

Alchemy was kept alive by men such as Nicolas Flamel,
who was not noteworthy except for the fact that he was one
of the few alchemists writing in those times of war,
plague, famine, and persecution.  Flamel lived from 1330
to 1417 and was an alchemist in every sense of the word.
He was not a religious scholar as were many of his 
predecessors, and his entire interest in the subject
revolved around the pursuit of the philosopher's stone,
which he is reputed to have found; he spends a great deal 
of time describing the processes and reactions, but never
actually gives the formula for carrying out the
transmutations.   Most of his work was aimed at gathering
alchemical knowledge that had existed before him, 
especially as regarded the philosophers' stone.
(Burckhardt pp.170-181)

Through the high middle ages (1300-1500) alchemists
were much like Nicolas Flamel:  they concentrated on looking
for the philosophers' stone and the elixir of youth (now
believed to be separate things.)  This had only one 
possible consequence; the cryptic allusions and symbolism
lead to a wide interpretation of the art and, while many
"true", that is, inducted, alchemists existed, many new
alchemists who interpreted the purification of the soul to
mean the transmutation of lead into gold and pursued this
track.  These men came to be viewed as magicians and
sorcerers by the common people, and were often persecuted
for their practices.  (Edwards pp. 50-75; Norton
pp lxiii-lxvii)

One of these men who emerged at the beginning of the
sixteenth century was named Cornelius Agrippa.  This
alchemist believed himself to be a wizard and actually
thought himself capable of summoning spirits.  his
influences were negligible, but like Flamel, he produced
writings which were referred back to by alchemists of
later years.  Again like Flamel, he did much to change
alchemy from a mystical philosophy to an occultist magic.
He did keep alive the philosophies of the earlier
alchemists, including experimental science, numerology,
etc., but he added magic theory, which reinforced the idea
of alchemy as an occultist belief.  In spite of all this,
Agrippa was still a Christian, though his views often came
into conflict with the church.  (Edwardes p56-9; Wilson 
p.23-9)

Alchemy continued in this way through the opening
scenes of the Renaissance.  Alchemist/con-artists
abounded, who would use popular beliefs and slight of hand
to convince a noteworthy person such as a professor or a
minor noble that the secret of transmutation was possessed
by the alchemist.  Invariably the "alchemist" was summoned
to the local lord's court for a presentation.  When none
was forthcoming, nasty things happened to the imposter.
(Wilson p.31-44)

Then, in the early sixteenth century a man named
Philippus Aureolus Paracelsus (1493-1541) remolded alchemy
into a new form rejecting the accumulated occult
paraphernalia that had accumulated over the years and
calling for new observations and experiments.  Paracelsian
dogma was the last "ism" to be latched onto alchemy before
its death.  Paracelsus rejected Aristotelean traditions,
but kept much of the Heremitical, neo-Platonic, and
Pythagorean philosophies; however, Heremitical science had 
so much Aristotelean theory that his rejection of it was
meaningless for all intents and purposes.  Basically, what
Paracelsus rejected was the magic theories of Agrippa and
Flamel; Paracelsus did not think of himself as a magician 
and deprecated those who did.  (Williams p.239-45)

Paracelsus pioneered the use of chemicals and
minerals in medicine.  He coined the words "alcohol" and
"zinc" and used experimentation in learning about the
human body.  His heremitical views were that sickness and
health in the body relied on the harmony of man the
microcosm and Nature the macrocosm.  He took and approach 
different than those before him, using this analogy not in
the soul-purification manner but in the manner that humans
must have certain balances of minerals in their bodies,
and in the manner that certain illnesses of the body had
chemical remedies that could cure the sicknesses.  (Debus &
Multhauf, p.6-12)  His views were summarized by himself:
"Many have said of Alchemy, that it is for the making of
gold and silver.  For me such is not the aim, but to
consider only what virtue and power may lie in medicines."
(Edwardes, p.47)

While the Paracelsian interpretation led to the
development of modern medicine, a different offshoot led
to modern chemistry.  Robert Boyle (1627-1691) is well
known for his studies of gases (i.e. Boyles law) But few
realize the importance of this man to modern chemistry.
In the early 1600's, alchemy was used synonymously for
medicine and chemistry.  Alchemists had disposed of most 
of the occultist beliefs that once plagued the Art, but
still they clung to the heremitical beliefs that had been
carried down through the millennia.  Boyle did away with
this.  he assumed nothing in his experiments and compiled
every piece of relevant data; in a typical experiment, 
Boyle would collect data on the place in which the 
experiment was carried out, the wind characteristics, the
position of the sun and moon, and the barometer reading,
all just in case they proved to be relevant.  (Pilkington
p.11)

With the birth of modern chemistry, alchemy was made
impotent.  As scientists began to discover and rationalize
the clockwork of the universe, alchemical theories were
thrown to the waste bucket, unneeded and forgotten.  it is
hard to believe that alchemy, after having such a rich and
colorful two thousand years of history could be so easily 
and so totally ostracized by scientists and common
citizens.

-- Written by BryceHarrington
³3summary³3Paper on Alchemy I wrote for a medieval history class, long ago...³2tscreate³2980544307³2keepts³2980544375³2id³21108³2host³2gkca-public.discoverbrokerage.com³2revision³21³1username³2BryceHarrington³2name³2text_default³2version³21³2ts³2980544375³2ip³263.85.63.20³2data³2text³3'''Who were the alchemists of the Middle Ages and what did they believe in?'''

This question defies a simple answer, as the alchemists were different
things at different times.  Also, different historians have postulated
different interpretations of these ancient scientists.  By carefully
examining these different perspectives in relation to their historical
contexts it will be possible to identify the alchemists as they existed
in the Middle Ages.

To gain a thorough understanding of the alchemists, this paper will
first briefly look at the origins of alchemy in Egypt and Greece, then
trace its development in the Middle East.  Once this background has been
laid out, a systematic examination of the medieval development of the
alchemical art will be commenced, emphasizing the role of individuals and
identifying the changing characteristics that defined alchemy.  For sake
of continuity, a brief look at alchemy's degeneration and death in the
Renaissance will be taken.  But first, a general overview of the
prevalent ideas about the alchemists should be addressed.

Asked the common man of the street what the alchemists were, and one
will hear that they were pseudo-scientists who attempted to turn lead
into gold, believed everything was composed of the four elements earth,
air, fire, and water, and who believed in mystical-magical nonsense.
This is about the limit of most people's understanding of the art, but
for a single sentence definition it is not too incorrect.

For a deeper understanding of alchemy, one might turn to a chemistry
textbook.  But according to a college textbook used at the University of
Southern California, "By about 400 B.C. [the Greeks] had proposed that
all matter was composed of four fundamental substances:  fire, earth,
water, and air...  The next 2000 years of chemical history were
dominated by a pseudo-science called alchemy.  Alchemists were often
mystics and fakes who were obsessed with the idea of turning cheap
metals into gold."  (Zumdahl pg. 38)  So much for a deeper
understanding.

Historians of a more occultists bent look at the alchemists as true
magicians who actually accomplished the work of transforming lead into
gold.  beyond this, occultists saw th e alchemists as religious mystics
who tried to discover the secret to purifying man's soul through
learning about the workings of nature.  (Edwards, p. 17; Gettings,
p. 13)

Another view looks at the alchemists in a more philosophical way,
alchemists were religious reformers who worked in secret and used
chemical terms in a secret code that really referred to theological and
philosophical beliefs to escape persecution from the church of their
day.  (Hitchcock, pp. iii-x; Burckhard, pp 28-31)

Of course it should be possible to use bits and pieces of each of these
theories to assemble a realistic idea of what the alchemists were, but
before this is done a question arising from these theories must be
addressed:  Where do these diverse theories come from?  The answer lies
in the writings put forth by the alchemists themselves.  The best way to
describe how confusion should arise is to give an example taken from an
alchemical writer:

    Concerning the Nature and Properties of Mercury.

    ALL THINGS ARE concealed in all.  One of them all is the concealer
    of the rest- their corporeal vessel, external, visible, and
    movable.  All liquifactions are manifested in that vessel.  For
    the vessel is a living and corporeal spirit, and so all coagulations
    or congelations enclosed in it, when prevented from flowing and
    surrounded, are not therewith content.  (Paracelsus, p. 415)

One can understand how confusion can arise.  This writer was said to
have been fairly clear in his writings.  This passage was not really
about mercury, but about the human body.  In any case, the alchemists
intentionally wrote cryptically, it seams to have been a hallmark of
their art.  Artiphius, a medieval alchemist, refers to this by writing,
"Is it not recognized that [alchemy] is... passed on orally, and is full
of secrets?...  Are you so simple as to believe that we would clearly
and openly teach the greatest and most important of all secrets, with
the result that you would take our words literally?" (Burckhardt, p28)
This is only one of many examples in which alchemical writers refer to
the cryptical phrasings of their works.  It is almost a tradition among
the alchemists and can be traced back to the Greek founders of the Art.
The "cipher" was passed on from teacher to student orally, and
unfortunately the "code" to decipher these texts has been lost.  Modern
historical interpretations invariably differ as to exactly what the
alchemists were writing about.   (Burckhardt, pp.30-3)


'''History and Development of Alchemy'''

Alchemy's origins are shrouded in the mists of time, but can be traced
clear back to the ancient Egyptians.  Metallurgy and mysticism were
inexorably tied together in the ancient world, as the techniques of
turning ugly ores into an almost holy metal seemed to be a priestly
art.  In fact, alchemy in Egypt was the domain of the priest class.
(Burckhardt, p.15)

Legend has it that the founder of alchemy was a man named Thoth or
Hermes.  According to these Egyptian legends, Thoth wrote forty-two
books on knowledge, covering law, medicine, alchemy, etc.  Over time,
Thoth, if he even existed at all, came to be regarded as a god by the
Egyptians.  Even later, as Egyptian knowledge passed to the Greeks,
Thoth was called Hermes Trismegistus, or Hermes the thrice-greatest.
(Lindsay, pp. 160-9)  The work of Hermes, often referred to in early
alchemical texts is, sadly, completely lost to modern scholars.
However, Hermes' "Emerald Table" has been transmitted through Arab
sources.  It is generally understood that the twelve principles
expounded in the manuscript formed the basis for alchemy, called the
heremitical philosophy by the early alchemists.

The first point of the "Emerald Tablet" tells the purpose of heremitical
science:  "in truth certainly and without doubt, whatever is below is
like that which is above, and whatever is above is like that which is
below, to accomplish the miracles of one thing."  (Burckhardt, p. 196-7)

This is the macrocosm-microcosm belief central to the hermetic
philosophy.  In other words, the human body (the microcosm) is affected
by the exterior world (the macrocosm), which includes the heavens
through astrology, and the earth through the elements.  (Burckhardt,
p. 34-42)

The Greeks appropriated the heremitical beliefs and added
pythagoreanism, ionianism, and gnosticism.  Pythagorean philosophy is
basically the belief that numbers rule the universe, originating from
the observations of sound, stars, and geometric shapes like triangles.
Ionian thought was based on the belief that the universe could be
explained through concentration on natural phenomena; this philosophy
was developed by Plato and Aristotle, whose works came to be an integral
part of alchemy.  The third component introduced to heremitical
philosophy by the Greeks was gnosticism, a belief prevalent in the
pre-Christian and early post-Christian Roman Empire.  Gnosticism was the
conviction that earthly matter is evil and by learning about the nature
of matter will lead to salvation.  By the end of the Roman Empire these
philosophies had been joined to the heremitical philosophies of the
Egyptians.  (Lindsay)

At this point alchemy moved east to be taken up by the Arabs, but before
moving on, Augustian views of science should be illustrated, as they had
a profound impact on Western thought up until the retransmission of Arab
philosophy in the eleventh and twelfth centuries.  Saint Augustine was
an early Christian philosopher who wrote of his beliefs shortly before
the fall of the Roman Empire.  In essence, he felt that reason and faith
could be used to understand God, but experimental philosophy was evil:
"There is also present in the soul, by means of these same bodily sense,
a kind of empty longing and curiosity which aims not at taking pleasure
in the flesh but at acquiring experience through the flesh, and this
empty curiosity is dignified by the names of learning and science."
(Augustine, p. 245)  Augustinian ideas were decidedly
anti-experimental, yet when Aristotelean experimental techniques were
made available to the West they were not shunned.  Still Augustinian
thought was well ingrained in medieval society and was used to show
alchemy as being un-Godly.

Much work was done on the development of alchemy by the Arabs but it
shall only be summarized here for the sake of brevity.  Much more is
known about Islamic alchemy because more was written down.  In
Alexandria, where much of the alchemical work was done in the Roman
Empire, the art was mainly oral and little was committed to paper for
the sake of secrecy.  (Lindsay, p. 155)  It is possible that some
writing was done in Alexandria and was subsequently lost or destroyed in
fires and the turbulent periods that followed.

In any case, most of the earliest writings that have come down through
the years are Islamic texts.  (Burckhardt p. 46)

The Arab world was a melting pot for alchemy.  Platonic and Aristotelean
thought, which had already been somewhat appropriated into heremitical
science, continued to be assimilated.  One very important Aristotelean
idea was that of the four elements: earth, air, water, and fire.
According to Aristotle, each element had a sphere which it belonged to
and would return to if left undisturbed.  (Lindsay, p. 16)  Alchemists
adapted this a little:  The four elements were really qualitative
aspects of matter, not quantitative, as our modern elements are.
"...true alchemy never regarded earth, air, water, and fire as corporeal
or chemical substances in the present-day sense of the word.  The four
elements are simply the primary, and most general, qualities by means of
which the amorphous and purely quantitative substance of all bodies
first reveals itself in differentiated form."  (Hitchcock, p. 66)
Platonic and neo-Platonic theories about universals and the omnipotence
of god were also absorbed.

Of the many Arab heremitic philosophers, Jabir ibn-Hayyn of the eighth
century was the most noteworthy.  To Aristotelean physics he added the
four properties of hotness, coldness, dryness, and moistness.
(Burkhardt, p. 29)  Each element was characterized by these qualities:
Fire was both hot and dry, earth cold and dry, water cold and moist,
and air hot and moist.  In metals two of these qualities were interior
and two were exterior.  For example, lead was cold and dry and got was
hot and moist.  Thus, Jabir, theorized, by rearranging the qualities of
one metal, a different metal would result.  (Burckhardt, p. 29)

By this reasoning, the search for the philosopher's stone was introduced
to the west.  The search for the stone, or grand elixir, had originated
from China, most scholars believe, and was supposed to have the added
effect of being able to make one immortal.  (Edwards, p. 38)  It is not
known how much Chinese alchemy was added to the Islamic version of the
Art, but that Chinese theories influenced Arabic scientists has been
commonly accepted.  (Edwards pp. 33-59; Burckhardt, p. 10-22)

Likewise, Hindu learning was assimilated into Islamic alchemy, but again
the extent and effects have not been researched to any worthwhile
extent.  An eleventh century alchemist named Alberuni testified to the
existence of Hindu alchemy saying that they "have a science similar to
alchemy which is quite peculiar to them.  They call it Rasayana.  it
means the art which is restricted to certain operations, drugs,
compounds, and medicines, most of which are taken from plants.  its
principles restored the health of those who were ill beyond hope and
gave back youth to fading old age."  Islamic numerology was also taken
by the Arabs, but assimilation of this into alchemy was left for the
European alchemists of the Renaissance.  (Lindsay p. 87-8; Edwards,
p. 28)

Arabic beliefs were intrinsically tied to Islamic alchemy, and when
Europeans appropriated the philosophies of the Arabs, alchemy came along
for the ride, so to speak.  Because these beliefs had originated from a
Christian society they were not too difficult to adapt to Christian
theology.  Gerbert of Arillac (d. 1003) was among the first to bring
Islamic science to Europe from Spain.  Later men such as Adelard of Bath
(d. 1144) brought additional learning.  But until the thirteenth century
the moves were mainly assimilative.  (Hollister p. 124, 294)

There were some exceptions to this trend.  Saint Anselm (1033-1109) was
an Augustinian who believed faith must precede rationalism, as Augustine
and most theologians prior to Anselm had believed, but Anselm put forth
the opinion that faith and rationalism were compatible and encouraged
rationalism in a Christian context.  His views set the stage for the
philosophical explosion to occur.  Saint Abelard followed in Anselm's
work, laying the foundation Aristotelian thought before the first works
of Aristotle reached the West.  His major influence on alchemy was his
belief that Platonic universals did not have a separate existence
outside of man's conscience.  Abelard also systematized the analysis of
philosophical contradictions.  (Hollister, p. 287-8)

Robert Grosseteste (1170-1253) was a pioneer of the scientific theory
that would later be used and refined by the alchemists.  he took
Abelard's methods of analysis and added the use of observations,
experimentation, and conclusions in making scientific evaluations.
Grosseteste also did much work to bridge Platonic and Aristotelian
thinking.  (Hollister pp. 294-5)

Albertus Magnus (1193-1280) and Thomas Aquinus (1225-
1274) were both Dominicans who studied Aristotle and
worked at reconciling the differences between philosophy
and Christianity.  Aquinas also did a great deal of work
in developing the scientific method.  He even went so far
as to claim that universals could only be discovered 
through reasoning:  this ran contrary to the commonly held
Platonic belief that universals were found through divine 
illumination alone.  Magnus and Aquinas were among the 
first to take up the examination of alchemical theory, and
could be considered to be alchemists themselves, but for
the fact that these two did little in the way of
experimentation.  One major contribution of Aquinas was 
the belief that since reason could not run in opposition 
to God, reason must be compatible to theology.  (Hollister
p. 290-4, 355)

The first true alchemist in Medieval Europe was Roger
Bacon.  His work did as much for alchemy as Robert Boyle
did for chemistry and Galileo did for astronomy and
physics.  Bacon (121401294) was an Oxford Franciscan who
explored optics, languages, and alchemy.  The Franciscan
ideals of taking on the world rather than rejecting the
world led to his conviction that experimentation was more
important than reasoning:  "Of the three ways in which men
think that they acquire knowledge of things - authority,
reasoning, and experience - only the last is effective and
able to bring peace to the intellect."  (Bacon p. 367)
"Experimental Science controls the conclusions of all
other sciences.  It reveals truths which reasoning from 
general principles would never have discovered."
(Hollister p. 294-5)  Roger Bacon has also been attributed
with originating the search for the philosopher's stone
and the elixir of life:  "That medicine which will remove
all impurities and corruptibilities from the lesser metals
will also, in the opinion of the wise, take off so much of
the corruptibility of the body that human life may be
prolonged for many centuries."  The idea of immortality
was replaced with the notion of long life; after all,
man's time on Earth was simply to wait and prepare for
immortality in the world of God.  Immortality on Earth did
not mesh with Christian theology.  (Edwards p. 37-8)

Bacon was not the only alchemist of the high middle
ages, but he was the most significant.  His works were
used by countless alchemists of the fifteenth through
nineteenth centuries.  Other alchemists of Bacon's time
shared several traits.  First, and most obviously, nearly
all were members of the clergy.  This was simply because
few people outside the secular schools had the education
to examine the Arabic-derived works.  Also, alchemy at
this time was sanctioned by the church as a good method
of exploring and developing theology.  Alchemy was
interesting to the wide variety of churchmen because it
offered a rationalistic view of the universe when men were
just beginning to learn about rationalism.  (Edwards
p. 24-7)

So by the end of the thirteenth century, alchemy had 
developed into a fairly structured system of belief.
First and foremost, the alchemists were all true 
Christians.  They believed in the macrocosm-microcosm 
theories of Hermes, that is to say, they believed that
processes that affect minerals and other substances could
have an effect on the human body (i.e., if one could learn
the secret of purifying gold, one could use the technique
to purify the human soul.)  These men believed the 
philosophers' stone was a substance that was capable of
purifying base metals (and thereby transmuting them to
gold) as well as purify the soul.  They believed in the
four elements and the four qualities as described above,
and they had a strong tradition of cloaking their written
ideas in a labyrinth of coded jargon set with traps to
mislead the uninitiated.  Finally, the alchemists
practiced their art: they actively experimented with
chemicals and made observations and theories about how the
universe operated.  Their entire philosophy was based 
around their belief that man's soul was divided within
himself after the fall of Adam.  By purifying the two
parts of man's soul, man could be reunited with God.
(Burckhardt p. 149)

But in the fourteenth century, all this was to 
change.  William of Ockham, an Oxford Franciscan who died
in 1349, attacked the Thomist view of compatibility
between faith and reason.  According to his view, widely
accepted today, was that God must be accepted on faith
alone, He could not be limited by human reason.  Of
course, this view was not incorrect, but it virtually
erased alchemy from practice in the fourteenth and 
fifteenth centuries.  (Hollister p. 335)  Pope John XXII in 
the early 1300's issued an edict against alchemy, which 
effectively removed all church personnel from the practice of
the Art (the inquisition didn't help, either.)  (Edwards, p.49)

Alchemy was kept alive by men such as Nicolas Flamel,
who was not noteworthy except for the fact that he was one
of the few alchemists writing in those times of war,
plague, famine, and persecution.  Flamel lived from 1330
to 1417 and was an alchemist in every sense of the word.
He was not a religious scholar as were many of his 
predecessors, and his entire interest in the subject
revolved around the pursuit of the philosopher's stone,
which he is reputed to have found; he spends a great deal 
of time describing the processes and reactions, but never
actually gives the formula for carrying out the
transmutations.   Most of his work was aimed at gathering
alchemical knowledge that had existed before him, 
especially as regarded the philosophers' stone.
(Burckhardt pp.170-181)

Through the high middle ages (1300-1500) alchemists
were much like Nicolas Flamel:  they concentrated on looking
for the philosophers' stone and the elixir of youth (now
believed to be separate things.)  This had only one 
possible consequence; the cryptic allusions and symbolism
lead to a wide interpretation of the art and, while many
"true", that is, inducted, alchemists existed, many new
alchemists who interpreted the purification of the soul to
mean the transmutation of lead into gold and pursued this
track.  These men came to be viewed as magicians and
sorcerers by the common people, and were often persecuted
for their practices.  (Edwards pp. 50-75; Norton
pp lxiii-lxvii)

One of these men who emerged at the beginning of the
sixteenth century was named Cornelius Agrippa.  This
alchemist believed himself to be a wizard and actually
thought himself capable of summoning spirits.  his
influences were negligible, but like Flamel, he produced
writings which were referred back to by alchemists of
later years.  Again like Flamel, he did much to change
alchemy from a mystical philosophy to an occultist magic.
He did keep alive the philosophies of the earlier
alchemists, including experimental science, numerology,
etc., but he added magic theory, which reinforced the idea
of alchemy as an occultist belief.  In spite of all this,
Agrippa was still a Christian, though his views often came
into conflict with the church.  (Edwardes p56-9; Wilson 
p.23-9)

Alchemy continued in this way through the opening
scenes of the Renaissance.  Alchemist/con-artists
abounded, who would use popular beliefs and slight of hand
to convince a noteworthy person such as a professor or a
minor noble that the secret of transmutation was possessed
by the alchemist.  Invariably the "alchemist" was summoned
to the local lord's court for a presentation.  When none
was forthcoming, nasty things happened to the imposter.
(Wilson p.31-44)

Then, in the early sixteenth century a man named
Philippus Aureolus Paracelsus (1493-1541) remolded alchemy
into a new form rejecting the accumulated occult
paraphernalia that had accumulated over the years and
calling for new observations and experiments.  Paracelsian
dogma was the last "ism" to be latched onto alchemy before
its death.  Paracelsus rejected Aristotelean traditions,
but kept much of the Heremitical, neo-Platonic, and
Pythagorean philosophies; however, Heremitical science had 
so much Aristotelean theory that his rejection of it was
meaningless for all intents and purposes.  Basically, what
Paracelsus rejected was the magic theories of Agrippa and
Flamel; Paracelsus did not think of himself as a magician 
and deprecated those who did.  (Williams p.239-45)

Paracelsus pioneered the use of chemicals and
minerals in medicine.  He coined the words "alcohol" and
"zinc" and used experimentation in learning about the
human body.  His heremitical views were that sickness and
health in the body relied on the harmony of man the
microcosm and Nature the macrocosm.  He took and approach 
different than those before him, using this analogy not in
the soul-purification manner but in the manner that humans
must have certain balances of minerals in their bodies,
and in the manner that certain illnesses of the body had
chemical remedies that could cure the sicknesses.  (Debus &
Multhauf, p.6-12)  His views were summarized by himself:
"Many have said of Alchemy, that it is for the making of
gold and silver.  For me such is not the aim, but to
consider only what virtue and power may lie in medicines."
(Edwardes, p.47)

While the Paracelsian interpretation led to the
development of modern medicine, a different offshoot led
to modern chemistry.  Robert Boyle (1627-1691) is well
known for his studies of gases (i.e. Boyles law) But few
realize the importance of this man to modern chemistry.
In the early 1600's, alchemy was used synonymously for
medicine and chemistry.  Alchemists had disposed of most 
of the occultist beliefs that once plagued the Art, but
still they clung to the heremitical beliefs that had been
carried down through the millennia.  Boyle did away with
this.  he assumed nothing in his experiments and compiled
every piece of relevant data; in a typical experiment, 
Boyle would collect data on the place in which the 
experiment was carried out, the wind characteristics, the
position of the sun and moon, and the barometer reading,
all just in case they proved to be relevant.  (Pilkington
p.11)

With the birth of modern chemistry, alchemy was made
impotent.  As scientists began to discover and rationalize
the clockwork of the universe, alchemical theories were
thrown to the waste bucket, unneeded and forgotten.  it is
hard to believe that alchemy, after having such a rich and
colorful two thousand years of history could be so easily 
and so totally ostracized by scientists and common
citizens.

-- Written by BryceHarrington
³3minor³30³3newauthor³30³3summary³3*³2tscreate³2980544307³2keepts³2981681845³2id³21108³2host³2gkca-public.discoverbrokerage.com³2revision³22