AlchemY

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