the occult world - alchemy

552

CHAPTER FIFTY-FIVE

ALCHEMY

Georgiana Hedesan

INTRODUCTION

Until relatively recently, scholars dei ned alchemy as the theory and practice of metallic transmutation, particularly of baser metals into gold and silver. This description was often accompanied by the belief that alchemy was a pseudo-science that vanished around the time of the so-called Scientii c Revolution. However, recent scholarship has shown that the separation of metallic-transmutation alchemy from other movements, such as Paracelsian iatrochemistry, spagyrics or distillation theory and practice is artii cial. Today, alchemy is increasingly seen as a complex and wide discipline that had a variety of purposes distinct from simply the making of gold. For instance, Harry J. Sheppard (1996, 313) dei ned alchemy as the pursuit of three possible goals: (a) the search for the lapis philosophorum (the philosophers stone) that could transform metals, (b) the preparation of an elixir of life for health and longevity, and (c) a spiritual-symbolic goal. This approach to alchemy may still be too restrictive to describe the domain, as it still does not take account of other medical goals of alchemy, or of the application of alchemical principles in other areas, such as agriculture or physics.

The following discussion views alchemy as a diffuse realm of theories and practices that involved the belief in the ability of human beings to transmute matter, spirit, or both from a qualitatively lower state to a higher state. The goal of alchemy in general was one of improvement, whether from a fundamental or simply pragmatic standpoint. This tentative dei nition implies that alchemy could be seen as a wider and fuzzier domain than chemistry, even as alchemy generally involved chemical techniques.

This description suggests that in some cases it may be necessary and fruitful to differentiate between different types of alchemy: metallic-transmutation alchemy is referred to by the term chrysopoeialiterally, the making of gold, even if transformation into other metals may have been involved; alchemy undertaken for medical purposes is referred to as medical alchemy; spiritual alchemy is used in reference to modern (post-Enlightenment) practices that did not involve the transformation of matter, but of the human spirit.

The Occult World.indb 552The Occult World.indb 552 9/15/2014 1:15:55 PM9/15/2014 1:15:55 PM

c h a p t e r 5 5 : A l c h e m y

553

The following overview is primarily historical, concentrating on alchemy in the Mediterranean world. For a review of Chinese and Indian alchemy the reader is invited to consult such works as Needham (197483), Sivin (1968), Cooper (1990) and White (1996).

ORIGINS OF ALCHEMY

The etymology of the word alchemy is shrouded in mystery. While the al- part of the term has long been recognised as referring to the dei nite article in Arabic, the chem- root has been the subject of intensive debate. Some have attributed it to the Egyptian word keme (black), suggesting the Egyptian origin of alchemy, while others have preferred the Greek term cheo, to pour. More fanciful explanations, deriving the word from the biblical Apocrypha or the name of a mythical hero, have long been rejected.

Like the obscure etymology, the origins of alchemy are disputed. Alchemists and some early scholars believed that the origin of alchemy was to be found in Egypt. By the mid-twentieth century, many scholars changed their mind in favour of China (after briel y considering Mesopotamia). Chinese alchemy may have started slightly earlier than the GreekEgyptian counterpart, but that does not necessarily support the argument for transmission. As Sheppard (1970) and Halleux (1979) have shown, Chinese and Western alchemy may have formed parallel traditions without a common point of origin. Indeed, Chinese alchemy concentrated on long life from its earliest recorded beginnings, while the GreekEgyptian variant apparently was not. Moreover, no Chinese etymological roots have been uncovered in Western alchemical terminology.

GREEK ALCHEMY

Our knowledge of Greek alchemy is mainly based on collections of texts compiled by Byzantine scholars. The earliest alchemical treatise is the Physika kai mystika, which originates from around the third century bce. The Physika shares recipes with the Leiden-Stockholm papyri found in an Egyptian tomb. Despite this correspondence, the intentions behind the Physika and the papyri appear different. The author of the Physika seems committed to a belief in metallic transmutation, while the Leiden-Stockholm papyri are concerned with metallurgical techniques that transform base metals only into resemblances of gold or silver.

The Physika kai mystika is traditionally attributed to the Greek pre-Socratic philosopher Democritus. However, scholarly agreement attributes this to Bolos of Mendes living in the third century bce (Halleux 1979, 63). The treatise concerns the making of gold, silver, gems and purple, and evinces a belief in the homogeneity of matter, a theory which permits transmutation.

Also from around this period are many other treatises attributed to individuals such as Cleopatra, Mary the Jewess, Osthanes, Isis, Hermes and others. While these alchemists generally used pseudonyms, the fourth century ce alchemist, Zosimus of Panopolis (known in Latin treatises as Rosinus) did not. Zosimuss ideas were strongly coloured by a Hermetic-Gnostic religious outlook. He described technical processes in allegorical terms, which encouraged a dual reading of his texts, one


G e o r g i a n a H e d e s a n

554

mystical and one literal. In particular, his visions focussed on the symbolism of sacrii ce, death and resurrection.

Following Zosimus, important Greek alchemists included Synesius and Olympiodorus. Their tradition was continued during the Middle Ages by Stephanos of Alexandria (eighth century), Michael Psellus (101878), Cosmas (eleventh century) and Nicephorus Blemmydes (11971272). The late medieval period was characterised by the increasing inl uence of Arab and Latin alchemy.

ARABIC ALCHEMY

Following the Islamic conquest of the Middle East and North Africa, knowledge of alchemy passed to the Arabs. The i rst important Arabic alchemist was said to be the Umayyad prince Khalid ibn Yazid (d. 704) who was instructed in alchemical secrets by the Christian monk Marianus or Morienus, a student of Stephanos of Alexandria (Holmyard 1957).

The most famous of the Arabic alchemists are Jabir ibn Hayyan (eighth century) and Rhazes (tenth century). The huge Jabirian corpus was not entirely authored by Jabir, as Peter Kraus (194243) has shown. Some parts of it can be attributed to the tenth century, when the corpus was compiled by members of the Islamic Ismaili sect. The Jabirian corpus was informed by Aristotelian thought and the short text of the Emerald Table was attributed to the mythical Hermes Trismegistus. Jabir proposed the formation of metals from sulphur and mercury, and also developed the concept of mass balance, or equilibrium of natures.

An important anonymous alchemical piece, which has been dated to around the tenth century, is the Turba philosophorum, The Convention of Philosophers. The treatise is written as a debate between nine Greek pre-Socratic philosophers, including Pythagoras and Empedocles. The purpose of this work, according to Martin Plessner (1954), is to demonstrate the superior truth of Islamic religion over Greek philosophy.

The Arab alchemical tradition l ourished in the eleventh and twelfth centuries, when the important work De aluminibus et salibus and the pseudo-Avicennian texts were produced. Despite the famous denial of metallic transmutation by the Persian philosopher and physician Avicenna (9801037) in his Kitab al-Shifa (The Book of Remedy), his discussion of the generation of metals in terms of the sulphur-mercury theory proved highly inl uential. Translated into Latin as De congelatione et conglutinatione lapidarum and appended to Aristotles Meteorology, the treatise was long considered to belong to Aristotle himself. At the same time, Aristotles supposed denial of transmutation was complicated by the similarly incorrect attribution of the treatise Secreta secretorum to him. This work, also translated from Arabic into Latin, supported transmutation. The inconsistency helped to promulgate the idea that alchemy was an esoteric art, which had to be practiced in secret.

The twelfth century was the period of the great translation of alchemical treatises into Latin, which marked the birth of Latin alchemy. The Arabic alchemical tradition continued unabated into the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries. Although no great works have been produced since, alchemy is practiced in Islamic lands even to the present day.



555

LATIN ALCHEMY IN THE HIGH MIDDLE AGES (11001300)

The i rst known translation of an Arab treatise into Latin is The Testament of Morienus (1144) by the English scholar Robert of Chester. He was followed by many others, the most famous of whom was Gerard of Cremona (111487), who founded a school of translators.

Many scholars in the High Middle Ages focussed on the subject of metallic transmutation (chrysopoeia). In his Book of Minerals, the great scholar Albertus Magnus (c. 11931280) followed Avicennas lead in De congelatione et conglutinatione lapidarum to deny the possibility of transmutation. However, in the Little Book of Alchemy (Libellus de alchimia), which may be inauthentic, Albertus upheld the idea that alchemical gold can be made, albeit not to the perfection of natural gold. Albertuss pupil, Thomas Aquinas (122574), agreed that making gold and silver is possible, but extremely difi cult to accomplish. He too was considered a closet alchemist and several books were attributed to him, including the important Aurora consurgens, famous as an illuminated manuscript (Obrist 1982). (The consensus is that this was not an authentic work of Aquinas.) The authority of Albertus and Thomas helped establish alchemy as a component of medieval knowledge. Nevertheless, alchemy was never able to become a subject of study in medieval universities.

Another famous chrysopoeian alchemist of the High Middle Ages was Geber, who used the pseudonym of the Arabic philosopher Jabir for his works. That is to say, modern scholarship has established that several works attributed to Jabir were actually written by Geber, who lived in the latter half of 1200 (Kraus 194243, Newman 1991). In fact, William Newman has persuasively argued that behind the name of Geber lay the Italian Franciscan monk Paul of Taranto.

Gebers masterpiece is Summa perfectionis magisterii, which was inspired by Jabirs theory of sulphur and mercury. Having said that, Geber was also an original philosopher who brought a unique corpuscularian interpretation to Jabirian theory, namely that the true medicine of the metals was mercury (Newman 1993). This led to the so-called mercury only theory of transmutation, which was highly popular in the fourteenth and i fteenth centuries (Thorndike 1934, 58).

Besides Albertus and Geber, another key alchemical i gure of the High Middle Ages was Roger Bacon (121492). Bacon was engaged in a vast project of reforming knowledge, and he believed alchemy to be an important component of natural philosophy. He divided alchemy into two parts: speculative and practical. The speculative side was a philosophy concerned with the generation of new things, while practical alchemy taught not only the making of noble metals, but the creation of medicine as well. It was in this latter respect that Bacon was particularly original. He drew on the pseudo-Aristotelian Secreta secretorum to argue that it was possible to manufacture a universal medicine obtained from human blood which could radically extend life.



556

LATIN ALCHEMY IN THE LATER MIDDLE AGES (13001500)

The fourteenth century was a transformational period for alchemical thought. During this period, the pseudo-Arnaldian and pseudo-Lullian alchemical corpora were formed. Although both were attributed to two great medieval Catalan scholars, Arnau of Villanova (c. 12301311) and Ramon Llull (c. 1232-c. 1316), it is unlikely that they actually authored them.

At the root of the rich Pseudo-Lullian corpus stands the Testamentum, authored sometime before 1332 (Pereira 1989). The Testamentum is a highly original natural philosophical work. Inspired by Aristotelian and Lullian speculation, the treatise elaborates a theory of the elixir as a chrysopoeian and medical instrument. The Pseudo-Lullian corpus became highly inl uential in the i fteenth century. One of its strengths lay in its assimilation of the work of the Franciscan John of Rupescissa (c. 1310c. 1366), who will be discussed below.

The pseudo-Arnaldian corpus has received less scholarly scrutiny. Its best-known work is the Rosarium philosophorum (Telle 1992). The pseudo-Arnaldian corpus is characterised by a strong religious inclination and is particularly associated with the analogy between Christ and the work of alchemy, often referred to as the lapis-Christ analogy or parallel (Calvet 1993, 98). It also evinced a spiritual understanding of the water of life (aqua vitae) obtained by distillation. Such speculations in turn inl uenced another important alchemist of the period, John of Rupescissa (Halleux 1981, 26667), who is famous for his theory of the quintessence, a distilled medicine based on aqua ardens (alcohol) that had profound effects on the human body. Rupescissa drew on Aristotelian speculation on the i fth element of the heavens to argue that this could also be extracted by alchemical distillation from different earthly substances. Ingesting this quintessence would result in a profound reformation of the body that had religious and apocalyptic connotations (DeVun 2007).

As recent studies have shown, late medieval alchemy favoured medical alchemy in the detriment of chrysopoeia (Crisciani and Pereira 1995, 72). There were several reasons for this development. The medical applications of Rupescissas quintessence theory led to an increasing interest in medical alchemy on the part of trained physicians, such as Guglielmo Fabri (l . 1449), Michele Savonarola (13851468) and Marsilio Ficino (143399).

In the meantime, the position of chrysopoeian alchemy was seriously weakened by the condemnation of Pope John XXII in the 1317 Bull Spondent quas non exhibent. The situation was aggravated in 1396, when the Aragonese Inquisitor Nicholas Eymerich (c. 131699) further condemned alchemy in his Tractatus contra alchimistas (Newman 2004, 9197). Outside of the church, prohibitions were also given by rulers such as, in France, Charles V (1380), in England, Henry IV (1403/4) and VI (1452), and by legislators in the cities of Venice (1488) and Nuremberg (1493). Such bans and criticism did not, of course, lead to the demise of chrysopoeia, which was still supported by such famous alchemists as George Ripley (c. 141590), Thomas Norton (c. 14331513), Giovanni Augurelli (c. 14411524) and Giovanni Bracesco (c. 1482c. 1555). If anything, interest in metallic transmutation increased particularly at princely courts, which were always searching for ways to increase their i nances (e.g. Moran 1991). Particularly signii cant, however, was that this period saw the propagation of a rhetoric that differentiated evil, greedy alchemists, from genuine and honest ones.



557

Late medieval alchemy also emphasised the association between the Christian religion and alchemy. The fourteenth and i fteenth century saw the proliferation of alchemical treatises containing Christian themes, including the New Pearl of Great Price (Pretiosa margarita novella) by Petrus Bonus of Ferrara, the anonymous Book of the Holy Trinity (Buch der heiligen Dreifaltigkeit), and the Alchemical Mass of Melchior Cibinensis. In the 1400s and early 1500s alchemical religious themes could also be found in the work of George Ripley, Ludovico Lazzarelli (14471500), and Giovanni Mercurio da Correggio (l . 1451).

RENAISSANCE ALCHEMY AND PARACELSUS (SIXTEENTH CENTURY)

The sixteenth century saw a starker differentiation between the chrysopoeian and medical alchemy, with the latter often rejecting the pursuit of metallic transmutation on religious or ethical grounds. This period was also marked by the resurgence of occult philosophy, dominated by a renewed interest in Late Antique philosophy, particularly Neoplatonism and Hermeticism. The re-discovery of texts supposedly authored by the mythical founder of alchemy, Hermes Trismegistus, brought alchemy into a closer relationship with other esoteric forms of knowledge, such as magic, Kabbalah and prophecy. Consequently, Renaissance philosophers saw alchemy as being a component of a greater system usually dominated by ceremonial or learned magic. This is easily seen in Heinrich Cornelius Agrippas famous De occulta philosophia (1531), but also in Paracelsuss Astronomia magna (c. 1537). Magi like John Dee (15271608/9) and Guillaume Postel (151081) also saw alchemy as part of a wider worldview that focussed on the manipulation of occult forces.

Theophrastus Paracelsus (14931541) can be seen as a transitional i gure between Renaissance and early modern alchemy. On one hand, his interest in an eclectic philosophy dominated by high magic made him similar to other Renaissance i gures like Agrippa or Dee; on the other hand, he departed from the traditional framework by rejecting learned authority, emphasising direct illumination and paying particular attention to medical alchemy. Paracelsus described medical alchemy as being one of the four pillars of medicine and was singularly outspoken in his rejection of Galenic-Aristotelian medicine. Instead, he argued that the new medicine had to strongly rely on alchemical preparations obtained from inorganic sources. Distinguishing between medical and chrysopoeian alchemy, he rejected the latter as being an unethical pursuit. Yet this rejection became muddled after his death, when several pseudo-Paracelsian treatises emerged: these works praised metallic transmutation and described the process of creating the philosophers stone.

Paracelsus was such a towering i gure in the alchemical tradition that most early modern alchemy was somehow indebted to his ideas. His theories transformed the way alchemists thought about themselves and their ideas. He single-handedly generated a new alchemical philosophy, which was no longer reliant on Aristotelian and Galenic thought, and put a renewed emphasis on Christian ideas. Indeed, he formulated the ideal of the unii cation of natural philosophy and Christian thought.



558

EARLY MODERN ALCHEMY (SIXTEENTH AND SEVENTEENTH CENTURIES)

Early modern alchemy can be dei ned as a reckoning with the thought of Paracelsus: whether adopting or rejecting his ideas, most if not all alchemists were somehow indebted to Paracelsian thought. Early modern alchemy is sometimes referred to as chymistry to emphasise its transitional state between alchemy and modern chemistry (cf. Newman and Principe 1998).

The most prominent supporters of Paracelsus were chiel y learned physicians, notably Petrus Severinus (1540/21602), Oswald Croll (c. 15631609) and Joseph du Chesne (15441609). As several scholars have pointed out, Severinus was responsible for rescuing the thought of Paracelsus from relative disrepute and setting it in a clear medical framework (e.g. Shackelford 2004). In his 1571 work, Severinus sought to systematise Paracelsian ideas in a more Renaissance-friendly context. Hence, he placed Paracelsus within a lineage of enlightened philosophers that included Hippocrates, Hermes Trismegistus and medieval alchemists.

Severinuss view strongly inl uenced the next generation of Paracelsian supporters, chief of whom were Croll and du Chesne. Crolls Basilica chymica (1609) advocated a Paracelsianism with strong Christian overtones, advancing the idea that alchemy was a sacred philosophy. Du Chesne emphasised the Severinian concept of a prisca philosophia of alchemical persuasion and connected it with Mosaic and Christian thought.

This emphasis on the religious nature of alchemical speculation was an increasingly popular trope at the beginning of the seventeenth century. Many alchemists expressed their belief in the compatibility between alchemy and Christianity. Some, like Robert Fludd (15731637) and Jan Baptist Van Helmont (15791644), went further in their attempts to construct new philosophical systems based on alchemical and religious principles.

This period also marked the birth of a long-surviving offshoot of alchemy, theosophical thought (which should not be confused with the ideas of the Theosophical Society in the nineteenth century). Central to this tradition was Jacob Boehme (c. 15751624), a mystical thinker who emphasised the religious side of alchemy over its practice. His followers would become increasingly perceived as a religious dissenting group with little connection to practical alchemy, even though some continued to be involved in alchemical work well into the eighteenth centurysuch as the theosopher Friedrich Christoph Oetinger (170282).

The early seventeenth century was also a period marked by an increasing concern with theological orthodoxy. Many intellectuals began to worry about the religious claims of alchemy and its tendency to emphasise personal illumination over orthodox canon. Consequently, alchemical philosophers came under the close scrutiny of theologians and intellectuals, most famously Marin Mersenne (15881648). In the eyes of some philosophers of the period, religion and natural philosophy had to be treated separately to ensure that theological doctrine remained intact. This was a belief propagated by such alchemical sympathisers as Andreas Libavius (15551614) or Pierre Gassendi (15921655). Libavius in particular is credited with dei ning chemistry (which he called alchemy) as an independent, but non-speculative branch of knowledge. The increasing institutionalisation of alchemy within older, conservative



559

institutions, like the universities, would help to transform it into a purely natural-philosophical or scientii c endeavour.

Yet in mid-seventeenth century, it was not yet obvious that alchemy would become chemistry, as we know it today. The 1650s saw the dissemination of the writings of J.B. Van Helmont, a reformed Paracelsian who i rmly believed in the possibility of unifying alchemy and religion in a Christian philosophy. His view was embraced by a new wave of alchemical enthusiasts, including the reformists of the Hartlib Circle, George Starkey (162865) and young Robert Boyle (162791) (Newman and Principe 2002). Van Helmont propagated the ideas of a universal solvent (the Alkahest) which could reduce matter into its initial components, as well as an universal medicine that would remarkably extend life. Van Helmont was chiel y a medical alchemist, but he did not reject chrysopoeia as Paracelsus had done. Indeed, this period saw a l ourishing of interest in metallic transmutation, promoted by the re-discovery of medieval tracts. An astounding amount of alchemical tracts and compendia were published in the seventeenth century, including the six-volume Theatrum chemicum (160462), the Musaeum Hermeticum (1625), the Theatrum chemicum Britannicum (1652), the Bibliotheca chemica curiosa (1702) and others. The result was a blurring of the lines between medical and chrysopoeian alchemy, as well as an increasing fascination with the latter. Some philosophers now saw chrysopoeia as a supreme and sacred art, or even as the culmination of all knowledge. Such thinkers included Boyle and Isaac Newton (16421727) whose incursions into chrysopoeia have been subject to much analysis in the twentieth century (e.g. Dobbs 1991).

Moreover, the exaltation of chrysopoeia contributed to an increased division between exoteric and esoteric knowledge at the end of the seventeenth century. This view distinguished levels of accessibility of alchemical knowledge, with the highest secrets being reserved for the adepts, alchemists who had reached a superior level of knowledge that set them apart from everyone else. Legends of alchemical adepts who performed metallic transmutation became increasingly popular during this period, particularly due to the testimonies of Michael Sendivogius (15661636), Van Helmont, Starkey, and Helvetius (16251709). In turn, they fuelled the literary trope of the lonesome or immortal alchemist that often appeared in Romantic and Victorian writings.

ALCHEMY IN THE ENLIGHTENMENT

In the eighteenth century, alchemy and chemistry began to part ways. Signii cantly, they were entered as two separate categories in Diderots Encyclopdie (1751). That said, the author of the entry on alchemy, Paul Jacques Malouin (170178), could still relate the two by describing alchemy as the most subtle chemistry.

The differentiation between alchemy and chemistry can be described in at least four ways. First, the goal of alchemy came to be dei ned as predominantly chrysopoeian and centred on the philosophers stone. That the philosophers stone could both be an agent of metallic transmutation and human healing was, of course, a medieval trope that returned to prominence with the demise of Paracelsianism. Van Helmont still differentiated between the goals of making gold and those of prolonging life, but had accepted the idea that the stone also healed diseases. By the late seventeenth century many saw the philosophers stone as the single goal of alchemy and medicine.



560

Second, alchemy became associated with secrecy. Malouin argued that once alchemical knowledge was diffused it lost its miraculous character and became debased into chemistry. Increasingly, alchemy was associated with occult societies, arcane knowledge and theosophical circles. This was particularly so in the Gold-und Rosenkreutz current in Germany, which thrived under the leadership of Prussian King Frederick Wilhelm II (178697). The Gold-und Rosenkreutz still included practical alchemy in its curriculum, as did the members of the Hermetische Gesellschaft (c. 17961810), but many others may not have. In the freemasonic current established by Martinez de Pasqually (172774) and Louis-Claude de Saint-Martin (174368), alchemy was perceived in theosophical and religious-millenarian terms.

Third, the reality of the theory of transmutation came under increasing attack within the chemistry community. Yet chrysopoeian alchemy did not completely fall into disrepute. Chrysopoeian goals were pursued by respected Royal Society Fellow James Price (175283), German theologian J.S. Semler (172591), or the French author Dom A. J. Pernety (171696). Charismatic i gures like the Count of Saint Germain (170184) and Giuseppe Cagliostro (174395) also perpetuated and further coloured the adept alchemist legend.

Finally, seventeenth-century medical alchemy became subsumed within the iatrochemical school associated with Georg Stahl (16591734). Stahl was inl uential in not only promoting ideas from the previous century, such as the phlogiston theory, but also in promoting a new current, vitalism, in opposition to mechanicism. His ideas were later developed by vitalist physicians at the Medical School of Montpellier.

During this period, medical alchemy lost some of its philosophical and religious force. Few dared to maintain that alchemy or chemistry had a privileged understanding of the nature of matter. An illustrious chemist like Hermann Boerhaave (16681738) accepted the primacy of Newtonianism and mechanical philosophy over chemical philosophy. Even so, chemistry remained a relatively autonomous science until the advent of the so-called Chemical Revolution of Antoine Lavoisier (174394).

Besides the iatrochemical school and the vitalists, the Paracelsian-Helmontian alchemical tradition also indirectly inl uenced the Romantic current of Naturphilosophie in the German lands. The physician and scientist Samuel Hahnemann (17551843) clearly drew on the medical alchemical tradition and distillation techniques to invent medical homeopathy (Goodrick-Clarke 2004). Other Naturphilosophs drew on alchemical ideas for inspiration in their theories of magnetism, electricity, psychology and mesmerism. However, these sciences were only remotely connected to chemical laboratory work. Moreover, alchemical ideas, themes and symbolism, often passed via theosophical currents, also inl uenced Romantic philosophers such as J. G. Herder (17731803), Franz von Baader (17651841) and G. W. F. Hegel (17701831).

ALCHEMY IN THE NINETEENTH CENTURY

In the nineteenth century, both traditions of chrysopoeian and medical alchemy came under threat from the forces of modernity. Post-Lavoisierian chemistry rejected the theory of transmutation and uprooted the iatrochemical school. Homeopathy was similarly ostracised by the medical community. Aspects of the Paracelsian-Helmontian



561

legacy remained, but became increasingly subsumed within the wider domain of the occult sciences. Alchemical work in secret societies became less and less of a practical nature and increasingly linked with spiritual techniques.

Alchemical ideas, symbols and images gradually passed via theosophical and Pietistic circles as a form of inner, spiritual or sacred teaching. Indeed, it is only during this period that we can properly talk of a spiritual alchemy removed from laboratory work. This interpretation was rooted in theosophys appropriation of alchemical symbolism for religious purposes, as in the works of Angelus Silesius (162477), Georg Gichtel (16381710), and French Martinists (Coudert 2004). Alchemical symbolism was also increasingly absorbed in Masonic and Rosicrucian rituals as a path of self-development.

In mid-1850, Mary Ann Atwood (18171910) and Ethan Allen Hitchcock (17981870) developed the idea that alchemy was in fact a spiritual discipline rather than a practical one, arguing that its true subject was the perfection of humanity. These theses were consonant with the views current in the occult societies emerging at the end of the nineteenth century, and they found support in several quarters.

During the nineteenth century, practical alchemists remained active, but were few in number and usually reluctant to publish their ideas. Amongst those who did, the most famous was the mysterious French alchemist Cyliani, who published the inl uential Hermes dvoil in 1832. Others included Karl von Eckartshausen (17521802) and Louis Cambriel (1764-c. 1850). Johann Gottfried Rademacher (17721850) and Carl Friedrich Zimpel (180179) also continued the Paracelsian-Helmontian tradition of medical alchemy through their research into plant spagyrics.

ALCHEMY IN THE TWENTIETH CENTURY

During the early twentieth century, alchemy became a popular subject that was treated in remarkably different ways. An important aspect was the rise of interest in the history of alchemy. An early devotee of alchemical studies was Arthur E. Waite (18571942), who translated and edited a large number of old alchemical texts. Other early historians of alchemy included E. J. Holmyard, F. Sherwood Taylor and J.R. Partington.

The revival of interest in alchemy can also be linked with the discovery of radioactivity by Ernest Rutherford (18711937) and Frederick Soddy (18771958). The transformation of nitrogen and radioactive materials into other elements was often interpreted as a coni rmation of the truth of transmutation alchemy (Morrison 2007). Sir William Ramsay (18521916) even believed that the philosophers stone and elixir of life would soon come within the reach of scientists.

The i rst half of the century was also marked by a l ourishing of systems of spiritual alchemy. Traditionalists like Rene Gunon (18861951) and Julius Evola (18981974) or the anthroposophist Rudolf Steiner (18611925) explored this understanding of alchemy. Most famously, it bred the still-inl uential interpretation of Carl Gustav Jung (18751961), who used alchemy as a path of self-discovery.

The early twentieth century was also marked by the appearance of a number of societies that took an interest in alchemy. In France, Francois Jollivet-Castelot (18741937) founded the Societ alchimique francaise at the turn of the century, followed in France by the Societ Alchemica Italiana (1909) and the English Alchemical



562

Society (1912). These societies were eventually disbanded, but the Society for the History of Alchemy and Chemistry (set up in 1935) is still active today.

The twentieth century also saw a revival of practical alchemy. In the early twentieth century, famous alchemists included Archibald Cockren (c. 18801960) and Fulcanelli. After World War II, practical alchemy continued to i nd adepts. A famous modern alchemist was Eugene Canseliet (18991982), Fulcanellis disciple. Other alchemists, some of whom are still alive today, include Baron Alexander von Bernus (18801965), Manfred Junius (19292004), Ren Alleau (b. 1917), Armand Barbault (b. 1906), Albert Richard Riedel alias Frater Albertus (191184).

REFERENCES AND FURTHER READING

Calvet, A. (1993) Alchimie et Joachimisme dans les Alchimica Pseudo-Arnaldiens, in Margolin and Matton, eds., Alchimie et philosophie la Renaissance, 93107.

Caron, R. (2005) Alchemy V: 19th and 20th Century, in Hanegraaff, ed., Dictionary of Gnosticism and Western Esotericism, 5058.

Cooper, J.C. (1990) Chinese Alchemy: The Daoist Quest for Immortality, New York: Sterling Publishing, 5570.

Coudert, A. (2005) Alchemy IV: 16th18th Century, in Hanegraaff, ed., Dictionary of Gnosticism and Western Esotericism, 4250.

Crisciani, C. and M. Pereira (1996) Larte del sole e della luna: Alchimia e i losoi a nel medioevo, Spoleto: SISMEL.

Debus, A. (1977) The Chemical Philosophy: Paracelsian Science and Medicine in the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries, London: Dover.

DeVun, L. (2009) Prophecy, Alchemy and The End of Time: John of Rupescissa in the Late Middle Ages, New York: Columbia University Press.

Dobbs, B.J.T. (1991) The Janus Face of Genius: The Role of Alchemy in Newtons Thought, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Goodrick-Clarke, C. (2004) Rationalist, Empiricist, or Naturphilosoph? Samuel Hahnemann and his Legacy, Politica Hermetica 18, 2645.

Halleux, R. (1981) Les ouvrages alchimiques de Jean de Rupescissa, in Histoire Littraire de la France, 41, 24156.

(1979) Les textes alchimiques, Turnhout: Brepols.Hanegraaff, W.J., ed. (2004) Dictionary of Gnosticism and Western Esotericism, Leiden: Brill.Holmyard, E.J. (1957) Alchemy, London: Harmondsworth.Kraus, P. (194243) Jabir ibn Hayyan: Contribution lhistoire des ides scientii ques dans

lIslam, Cairo: Institute of Egypt.Margolin, J.C. and S. Matton, eds (1993). Alchimie et philosophie la Renaissance, Paris:

Vrin.McIntosh, C. (1992) The Rose Cross and the Age of Reason: Eighteenth-Century Rosicrucianism

in Central Europe and its Relationship to the Enlightenment, Leiden: Brill.Moran, B. (2005) Distilling Knowledge: Alchemy, Chemistry and the Scientii c Revolution,

Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.(1991) The Alchemical World of the German Court, Stuttgart: Franz Steiner.Morrison, M. (2007) Modern Alchemy: Occultism, Science, and the Ownership of Atomic

Theory, 18951939, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Needham, J. (197483) Science and Civilisation in China, vol. V, Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press.Newman, W.R. and L.M. Principe (2002) Alchemy Tried in the Fire: The Fate of Helmontian

Chymistry, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.



563

(1998) Alchemy vs Chemistry: The Etymological Origins of a Historiographic Mistake, Early Science and Medicine, 3:1 (1998), 3265.

Newman, W.R. (2004) Promethean Ambitions: Alchemy and the Quest to Perfect Nature, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

(1993) Linl uence de la Summa perfectionis du Pseudo-Geber, in Margolin and Matton, eds., Alchimie et philosophie la Renaissance, 6577.

(1991) The Summa perfectionis of Pseudo-Geber: Edition with Commentary and English Translation, Leiden: Brill.

Obrist, B. (1982) Les dbuts de limagerie alchimique (XIVe-XVe sicles), Paris: Le Sycomore.Pagel, W. (1958) Paracelsus: An Introduction to Philosophical Medicine in the Era of the

Renaissance, Basel: Karger.Pereira, M. (1989) The Alchemical Corpus Attributed to Raimond Lull, London: Warburg

Institute.Plessner, M. (1954) The Place of the Turba philosophorum in the Development of Alchemy,

Isis, 45, 3138.Shackelford, J. (2004) A Philosophical Path for Parcelsian Medicine: The Ideas, Intellectual

Context, and Inl uence of Petrus Severinus (1540/21602), Copenhagen: Museum Tusculanum Press.

Sheppard, H.J. (1996) La perfezione della materia, in Crisciani and Pereira, Larte del sole e della luna, 31318.

(1970) Alchemy: Origin or Origins? Ambix 17: 6984.Sivin, Nathan (1968) Chinese Alchemy: Preliminary Studies, Cambridge, MA: Harvard

University Press.Telle, J. (1992) Rosarium Philosophorum: Ein alchemisches Florilegium des Spatmittelalters,

Weinheim: VCH Verlag.Thorndike, L. (192358) A History of Magic and Experimental Science, 8 vols, New York:

Columbia University Press.White, D.G. (1996) The Alchemical Body: Siddha Traditions in Medieval India, Chicago:

Chicago University Press.


the occult world - alchemy

Documents