Some English Alchemical Books
Being an Address
delivered to
The Alchemical Society
on
Friday, October loth, 1913,
by
Professor John Ferguson, LL.D.,
Honorary President.
<Reprinted from Volume II. of The Journal of the Alchemical SociETy, Edited by H. Stanley Redgrove, B.Sc.)
LONDON :
Published for The Alchemical Society
BY
H, K. LEWIS,
136, Gower Street, W.C.
1913.
All rights reserved.
The Alchemical Society,
Officers and Council for 191 3-- 191 4.
Prof. John Ferguson, M.A. (Glas.), LL.D. (St. Andrews), F.I.C., F.C.S., Honorary President.
H. Stanley Redgrove, B.Sc. (Lond.), F.C.S., Acting President.
Arthur Edward Waite. Honorary Vice-President.
W. Corn Old. Honorary Vice-President.
Mme. Isabelle de Steiger. Honorary Vice-President.
Ralph Shirley. Honorary Vice-President.
Ven. J. B. Craven, D.D., Archdeacon of Orkney. Honorary Vice-President. Sijil Abdul-Ali. Honorary Secretary.
Philip S. Wellby, M.A. (Cantab.). Honorary Treasurer.
Miss Clarissa Miles.
Lt.-Col. Jasper Gibson, V.D., LL.B. (Lend.).
B. R. Rowbottom.
J. Arthur Jutsum.
W. de Kerlor.
Gaston De Mengel.
The Alchemical Society was founded in 1912 for the study of the works and theories of the alchemists in all their aspects, philosophical, historical and scientific, and of all matters relating thereto. Papers dealing with these subjects for reading and discussion at the meetings of the Society and for publication in the Journal, will be welcomed by the Council. Further particulars, copies of the Rules, and application forms for membership, may be obtained from the Hon. Secretary, Mr. Sijil Abdul-Ali, 26, Bramshfll Gardens, Tufnell Park, N.W. Subscriptions should be forwarded to the Hon. Treasurer, Mr. Philip S. Wellby, M.A., c/o., Messrs. W. Rider and Son, Ltd., 8, Paternoster Row, E.C. All communications concerning the Journal should be addressed to the Editor, Mr. H. S. Redgrove, B.Sc., F.C.S., 191, Camden Road, N.W., from whom particulars as to advertising rates for the Journal may be obtained.
The responsibility for all statements in papers, etc., published in the Journal rests entirely with their authors, and neither with the Alchemical Society nor with the Editor of the Journal.
Alchemical Books
Being an Address
delivered to
The Alchemical Society
on
Friday, October loth, 1913,
by
Professor John Ferguson, LL.D.,
Honorary President.
(Reprinted from Volume II. of The Journal of the Alchemical SociETy, Edited by H. Stanley Redgrove, B.Sc.>
LONDON :
Published for The Alchemical Society
BY
H. K. LEWIS,
136, Gower Street, W.C,
1913.
All rights reserved.
SOME ENGLISH ALCHEMICAL BOOKS. By Prof. John Ferguson, LL.D.
English printed alchemical literature is not bulky; it may be precious, it has certainly become rare. I have thought that a brief survey of some of the books which 1 have come across in the course of my inquiries and on which I have made a few notes from time to time, may serve as an introduction to the work of the coming session.
After all, what we know about Alchemy is obtained from books and records. There are no remaining tangible, demon- strable facts. Even supposing that gold coins or medals were ever made from alchemical gold, it is a question whether such relics now exist, and it is still more a matter of evidence whether those extant, if there be such, — which I do not know — are genuine or not.
It is different with technical processes in other depart- ments. Both the methods are known and the objects them- selves produced by them, and we can tell how they may or must have been done, even though the described methods are not wholly intelligible, or differ from what we should do now. But in the case of a gold medal or other object, we see the medal certainly and can confirm that it is of gold, but, that the gold was made from mercury or lead or other metal there is no proof, and, even If we believe it, we do not know how it was effected and the books do not explain the process.
All the same, since we have undertaken to investigate the foundations upon which the idea of transmutation is based and the truths which the superstructure may contain, we may as well know what material we have to work upon.
The remark has been already made that the literature in English is not extensive, but it is not the less attractive on that account. It is select and suggests many questions.
In pursuing this survey, however, what exists in manu- script must be excluded, firstly, because of its abundance, which is too great for the brief possibilities of such an address as the present, and, secondly, because of relative inaccessibility. Numbers of manuscripts are preserved in the British Museum, and whoever takes the trouble to consult Black’s Catalogue of the Ashmolean MSS. at Oxford, will find more than enough to occupy his attention. 1 do not speak of the manuscripts which have offered themselves to me in past years, for thev were for the most part in Latin and very few indeed were in English, but even now there is no lack of alchemical manuscripts to be had, if one Is able and wil- ling to pay a price for them. They are dear, however, and late. One ne^’er sees an early manuscript on parchment or even on paper, which might be valuable for supplying a new or unknown tract, or various readings of those known.
Pul ting all these aside as material for an independent re- search, attention may be directed to the printed literature.
The printing generally of alchemical books in quan-
U
3
Some Enoiish Alchemical Books.
o
tity and especially so in English, began at a comparatively late period. So far as I know the hrst alchemical book of all was printed in Italy, possibly at Rome, between 1470-80, and It was the Summa Perfectionis of Geber. It may have been taken from the Vatican manuscript. There is something rather significant in this selection. It was the only alchemical book printed in the 15th century. It is true there is another work ascribed to the same author, entitled Flos Naturarum, which was printed in Italy and is dated 1473, but this is a book of receipts and contains only one or two paragraphs relating to Alchemy ; its rarity, besides, puts it out of con- sideration.
Within recent years it has become the fashion to speak of the reputed author of the Summa Perfectionis as the pseudo-Geber, to place him in the 12th Century and there to leave him, without further consideration. This is not the occasion for entering upon a controversial topic such as this, but it savours somewhat of affectation to employ such a quali- fication of his name, when the works of Dschabir-ben- Hayyan, if there be such a person, have never been in general circulation at all. I say advisedly, if there be such a person, for although his name has been recorded as early as the loth century and manuscripts of a few of his reputed writ- ings have long existed at Leyden, Paris, and elsewhere, the accounts of him are so discordant that good authorities have not hesitated to regard him as a myth, or a sort of general title for various wTiters. But whoever Geber may have been and whatever his date, it is remarkable, as has been said already, that his writings should have been selected for printing in preference tO' those ascribed to Roger Bacon, Avicenna, Arnoldus de Villanova, Raymond Lully, and others, which were not printed till long after. It may have been that the MS. was at hand for the printer ; it is also possible that the work was chosen as being the best of its kind then known. It retained this character to comparatively recent times, for editions and translations of Geber’s works have been printed steadily during all the centuries, until the 19th. But now, in the 20th, the merit of the Summa Perfec- tionis as a typical treatise is recognised, and a reprint of it is promised as one of a series of epoch-making books. That, it seems to me, is a weighty comment on the pseudo-Geber nomenclature, as if there had ever been another and real Geber whose place had been usurped.
Early in the sixteenth century after the rush of philo- sophy, school-theology, law and classics was over, those in- terested in natural history, medicine and science, began to print, and occasionally works on Alchemy appeared ; such as those of Pantheus, Augurellus, Raymond Lully, and a little later, Nazari, Picus Mirandulanus, Vallensis and others, for the most part in Latin. At Niirnberg in 1541, appeared one of the earlier collections of tracts, although it was not the first. This mode of publication became popular, and as time went on many gatherings were made : Gratarolo’s Verce Al- chemicE doctrina, Ars Aurifera, Albineus’ Bibliotheca Chemica
4
Prof. John Ferguson, LL.D.
Contracta, Preiiosa Margarita Novella, and others, ending in the six densely printed volumes of the Theatrum Chemicum, and Manget’s Bibliotheca Chemica Curiosa, Roth Scholtz’s German Bibliotheca Chemica, and Ashmole’s Theatrum Chemicum Britannicum , to be referred to below.
But as yet no alchemical book in English had made its appearance, for such treatises as The Treasure of Evony- mus, The Secrets of Alexis, Brunswick on Distillation (1527) and others, were books of medical and technical receipts, containing plenty of primitive chemical detail, but with no reference to transmutation.
In fact, in the sixteenth century. Alchemy was either not cultivated and pursued energetically in England or its literature was rigidly preserved and concealed in manu- script. This latter is probably the correct way of explaining why so little alchemical literature was issued before 1600.
So far as known to me at the present time — there may be others which I have forgotten or have never heard of — there are only two books in English belonging to the six- teenth century; one is George Ripley’s Compound of Al- chyrny, 1591, the other, Roger Bacon’s Mirror of Alchemy, 1597. Both have passed into the limbo of forgotten things, and arc now among the great rarities of alchemical litera- ture.
In the sixteenth century also lived John Hester at the sign of the Eurnaces at Paul’s Wharf, who called himself practitioner in the Art of Distillations, and who translated a number of books on chemistry and pharmacy. More par- ticularly, however, in connection with our present theme, he printed in 1591 the answer which Quercetanus wrote to the work of Aubertus on the origin of metals, in which the latter opposed the current chemical view of their com- position and formation. This point was of some importance, for on it turned the possibility and probability of trans- mutation.
This is a very meagre output on the subject, but either there is nothing more to be had or else I have missed it. This seems unlikely, for had it existed, it could hardly have es- caped notice altogether during the time I have been noting these books.
It is hardly better during the first half of the seventeenth century. There is a translation in 1605 of Quercetanus’ C/iy- mical Physick and Hermetical Physick, and Francis Antonie wrote an Apologie for his menstruum called Aurum Potahile, London, 1616; but these are mainly medical and do not refer to Alchemy.
There is a book by Th. Tymme : Philo sophical Dialogue, wherein Nature* s secret Closet is opened, London, 1612, 4°, which, from the title, one might expect would furnish an ex- position of views respecting the great secret ; and another like it by Tirnothy Willis, 1616, 8vo : A Search of Causes of a
Theosophical Investigation of the Possibility of Transmuta- tory Alchymy. These books I have just seen, but have not had the opportunity to examine carefully.
Sonic English Alchemical Books,
5
A little later, namely, during the year 1623, there ap- peared two of the very rarest tracts in English.
I he first of them is the brief pamphlet, A Revelation of the Secret Spirit, declaring the most concealed Secret of Alchymy written in Italian by Giovanni Battista Agnelli, and Englished by R. N. E., which initials are said to be those of Robert Napier of Merchiston. This is dedicated to Bishop 'Fhornborough, of Worcester, himself the author of a remark- able book, Lithotheoricos, which would have been included in this survey had it not unfortunately been in Latin, and just now these observations relate to books in English only. This little tract is written in the most allegorical, allusive and illusive manner; and, while there is no doubt about the secretness of the Spirit, one may well wonder and ask whereabout is the Revelation. It is not, however, a work to be dismissed off-hand, but w^ould require a searching examin- ation for itself.
The other work was Patrick Scot’s The Tillage of Eighty or a True Discoverie of the Philosophical Elixir. This, how- ever, is not an exposition, but a criticism of Alchemy, and the author maintains that the true philosopher pursues spiritual things and not the fabrication of gold with its concomitant evils. This tract belongs, therefore, to a different aspect of the subject.
In the year following, namely 1624, there appeared a translation of Flamel, whose story is w’cll known. It reads like a romance, w’hich in fact it is. His Hieroglyphical Figures were published in French in 1612, and were fre- quently reprinted in collections and in translations. Salmon printed his version in 1691, and the book appeared in London so recently as i88g, edited b}^ Dr. Westcott. Of course, the question ahvays remains in all those cases in which books have appeared under names that are doubtful : If not by
their accredited authors, then who were the authors? Al- most certainly such a person as Flamel is said to have been never existed, for if we are to believe the legendary history, he lived for some four hundred years, and for that matter may be alive still. Some authorities refuse to believe that Flamel w^as the author of any Hermetical w^ork, so that, as I have said, the question remains. Who did write the H iero glyphical Figures and other works ascribed to him? That is another topic for examination.
After these there was a lapse of five and twenty years, during which time I have no examples of any work on the subject; but about 1650 began the publication in earnest of alchemical writings of all kinds, to say nothing of mystical and occult books besides. Between the years 1650 and 1675 or 1680 more alchemical books appeared in English than in all the time before and after those dates. As has been pointed out, only a few appeared before this great outburst in 1650, and the outout began to slacken about i68o; there were a few in the i8th century and very few original works in the igth, though there were a good many reprints. The progress of chemical discovery and the preparation of medi-
6
Prof. John Ferguson, LL.D.
cines from a chemical point of view, the discussion of the nature of combustion and the criticism of the Aristotelian, and alchemical elements, the discovery of numerous new compounds and the stripping" away of mystery from chemical reactions, the failure of Alchemy to effect transmu- tation according to its doctrines and practice, and the evil repute into which it fell through unscrupulous impostors : these diew aw'ay attention from the main aim of Alchemy > and transferred it more and more to experimental chemistry and pharmacy. It must not be forgotten that in this same i7lh- century and parallel with the books presently to Ix^ noticed, there ran a whole series of genuine chemical text- books, giving clear and satisfactory directions for practical chemical manipulation, for the preparation of all the then known chemical substances, metals, acids, salts, tests of various kinds and so on, in language exact and definite; and if the theory was less profound than ours, that was an un- avoidable consequence of the less comprehensive knowledge of facts then possessed by the chemists.
Recurring to the alchemical publications of 1650, the first we encounter is one of the most notable of the collec- tions made by J. F., who was almost certainly John French, M.D. It is the quarto edition of The New Light of Alchynv'e with the Treatise of Sulphur, written by Sendivogius, Nine Books of the Nature of Things by Paracelsus, and a Chymi- call Dictionary . This volume also contains the famous Dia- logue between Mercury, the Alchymist and Nature. It is sornewhat hard to interpret this work and to decide whether it is to be taken literally as a satirical comment on the ordinary alchemist or as an allegory. In any case small respect is shown to the Alchemist."
A later edition appeared in 1674, in 8vo. and there was an independent translation, by John Digby, of the first tract in 1722. Though ascribed to Sendivogius, the disserta- tion is said to have been written by Alexander Seton, who, in the early seventeenth century, performed many striking transmutations, but, falling into the hands of the Elector of wSaxony, Christian II., was tortured to make him reveal the secret and then put in prison and closely guarded. From this prison he was rescued by Sendivogius, who took him to Poland. After Seton ’s death, Sendivogius obtained a quantity of transmuting powder and manuscripts which he ultimately published under his own name. But while the book is plain enough in -parts, it requires much explanation when it deals with the Great Work itself.
John French, about the same time, translated and edited other books on chemistry and Alchemy. In 1651, there came his edition of Glauber’s Philosophical Furnaces , one of the most original and notable books on chemistry of the cen- tury; there was his own book. The Art of Distillation, of which there were four editions between 1651 and 1667. The title docs not convey fully all that the book itself contains, for there are besides added to it alchemical tracts bv Para- celsus, Sendivogius, Pontanus, and the Smaragdine TabD
Some English Alchemical Books.
7
of Hermes. He also translated the Occult Philosophy of Cornelius Agrippa, and edited Dr. Everard’s translation of the Divine Pymander of Hermes Trismegistus.
The year 1652 was a fairly notable one in this record, for in it appeared a book which has to some extent the character of a classic, namely the Theatrum Chcmicum Bri- tannicurn of Elias Ashmole, alluded to above. It is note- worthy on several accounts : Firstly, it is an edition of pieces which, with two or three exceptions, existed previously only in manuscript ; secondly, they are all in verse ; thirdly, Ashmole has prefixed an introduction and added notes full of interesting matter, though rather discursive. The intro- duction, if somewhat verbose, contains a review of the early state of learning in England, and Ashmole’s justifiable lament over the destruction of the libraries at the dissolution of the monasteries.
Ashmole’s book contains Ripley’s Compound of Al~ chymie already printed in 1591, and the Chanon Yeoman's Tale from Chaucer. His defence of the reprinting of this, which is such a heavy indictment of the fraudulent ways of the alchemists of the time, is that it is a warning how to avoid all such impostors and a vindication of the true sons of art, which position he supports by the authority of Norton, Ripley and Bloomefield.
Norton’s Ordinall was here printed for the first time in English, but it had already appeared in 1618, translated into Latin by Michael Maier.
There was only one volume of this collection printed, for although Ashmole had apparently gathered a number of prose works sufficient to form a companion volume, he could not be induced to put it to the press. This is to be regretted, for he had not only the material, but he was himself a believer in transmutation, and into his preface and notes he would have infused the spirit and beliefs of the time, in a way utterly impossible for anyone making such a collection to do now, however enthusiastic he might be.
In the same year there was another gathering : Five
Treatises of the Philosopher's Stone; two were by Alphonso, King of Portugal; one by John Sawtre, a monk; one by Florianus RaudorfT, on the Mercury of the Philosophers ; and lastly the names of the Stone collected by William Gratarolo. This last tract is instructive, for in the multitude of synonyms and analogies the careless or ignorant reader may easily go astray, and lose his time and labour, not to speak of his temper. William Johnston, too, published his Dictionary which, however, was in Latin, and does not there- fore come into this list.
It would be tedious to enumerate individually, outside a professed bibliography, all the books wdiich literally poured from the press during these five and twenty or thirty years, but there are some half-dozen groups of books, which were not only conspicuous then, but have remained to this day landmarks of the literature of the subject, eagerly sought after by the students of the present time. They have even
8
Prof. John Ferguson, LL.D.
been reprinted to supply the demand for them, for owine to
various causes, the original editions have become unattain- able.
Foremost among them are those books of Paracelsus which were translated Into English. They are but a meagre representation of the three volumes folio in Latin, or the ten quarto volumes in which Huser collected the writings of the heterodox physician. Some, which pass under his name, as ^ j Philosophic, called also the Secrets of Physick
and Philosophy are not really by him, but there are Nine Books of the Nature of Things, 1650, 1674, published along with Sendivogius New Light, already quoted; his Dispensa- tory and Chirurgery, 1656; The Supreme Mysteries of Na- ture, 1656; The Chymical Transmutation, genealogy and generation of Metals and Minerals, along with Chymical Ex- periments by Lully, 1657; Philosophy to the Athenians, Dis- covering the wonderful Mysteries of the Creation, In Philo- sophy reformed and Improved, 1657; Aurora and Treasure of the 1 hilosophers, 1659; Archidoxes, comprised in Ten Books, containing tracts about transmutation, 1660, 1661 and 1663. There are two or three medical works, besides and that is all. When Richard Russell tells us in 1678 that he bad Englished two of the three volumes of the works of aracelsus, and about half of the third, which he intended to finish “as time, opportunity, or encouragement shall be ottered, and when we know that that translation whether finished or not was never published, we can but lament our loss at the present day, now that Paracelsus is recognised as one of the great leaders of the sixteenth century in the ad- vancing of medicine and the sciences on which it is based. Paracelsus, however, was more of an experimental chemist and pharmacist, than an alchemist ; in fact he rather repu- diates transmutation as part of chemistry, and the subject interested him more as a theory of matter, perhaps, than for either the material or spiritual and moral gain that was supposed to follow the acquisition of the great elixir.
At the beginning of the 17th century, appeared in Ger- man the works of Basil Valentine, most of which were turned into English. Held in greatest esteem were the Triumphant Chariot of Antimony, 1656, and a different edition by Russell, 1678; the Last Will and Testament, 1651 and 1670; and 0/
N aural and Supernatural Things along with other tracts 1671.
Over this reputed monk of Erfurt, or, as some say, of AValkenrIed, there has been no end of controversy. Some, with apparent good documentary evidence, maintain that he really existed and was the author of the works ascribed to him. Others, with apparent equal reasons, assert that no such person ever lived and that the books were written by Tholden, under the fictitious name. It seems an almost hope- less task to adjust the facts and inferences, but the subject IS still an open one and affords opportunity for research.
But whatever be the result, it seems fairlv certain that the author had worked practically with antimonv, and, dis-
Some English Alchemical Books.
9
counting his hyperbolic and figurative language, that he had made most of the compounds which were in use until com- paratively recent times.
A third author whose works attracted a good deal of attention, both in his own life time and since, was Thomas Vaughan, better known perhaps under the name “Eu- genius Philalethes. ” He wrote some half-dozen of little books, not very much in bulk, but weighty in their contents, 'fihere may be mentioned : Anima Magica A±bscondita, 1650; Anthroposophui Theomagica, 1650; Magia Adamica, 1650; Lumen de Lumine, 1651 ; A ula Lucis, 1652 ; Euphrates, or the Waters of the East, 1655, 1671; and some controversial tracts with Henry More, the language of which is in striking contrast to what he employs in some of his other writings. Vaughan was a mystic, and though he seems to have had some practice in alchemical work, his proclivities were mainly in the direction of mystical rather than of physical Alchemy. He was a devoted admirer and follower of Cornelius Agrippa, which is somewhat singular, for the Occidt Philosophy of that writer can hardly be con- sidered a mystical book. For an estimate of Vaughan’s views and an exposition of the general character of mystical science, I must refer you to the excellent reprint of Vaughan’s Magical JVritings by Mr. Waite.
Bv another of his books V^augfhan links on to a fourth section of the literature of this singular epoch, that, namely, which emanated from or was concerned with the Rosi- crucians. Vaughan’s book in question was a translation of the Famci ct Conjessio — the Fame and Confession of the Fraternity of the Rosie Cross, 1652. d'lie early literature in English is meagre, for besides the book just mentioned there are only h'oxcroft’s version of the Hermetic Wedding, 1690; Michael Maier’s Themis Aurca, 1656; and Rie works of John Heydon : The Rosiecnician infallible axiomata,
1660; The English Physicians Guide, 1662; The JVise Man's Cro7vn, or the Glory of the Rosie Cross, 1664; Thcomagia, or the Temple of JVisdom, 1664; and Psonthonphai2chia, 1664.
The German literature was a little more extensive, and the controversial literature most of all. For the Rosicrucian mystery has been a bone of contention ever since the first manifesto concerned with the fraternit}^ was issued, and if the questions no longer provoke discussion, it is not because the problems have been solved, but because they no longer excite any curiosity. ^Vhether there ever was such a fraternity, and if so who originated it and when and where, are points which have been discussed again and again, but here, once more, I must refer you to Mr. Waite’s reprints of the main tracts, and the historical introduction in which he discusses fairly the question of origin and the theories advanced by various advocates.
Another writer about this time concerning whom there have been many questions, and who is connected with one of the most mysterious personages in the whole history of
lO
Prof. John Ferguson, LL.D.
the pursuit, was George Starkey. He is said to have been bom ,n I he Burniudas, was educated in America, became an apotheairy and made the acquaintance of “Eirenteus Phila- lethcs (to be referred to later) there. From him he obtained some transmuting powder and MSS. which he afterwards
noM e ’n "‘Pe Seton, the Co.smo'-
poli t, and SendivogiLis over again. Starkey’s own works
relate t'h>ctlv to medicine and pharmacy, but one, the Mar- roai o/ Alchemy, was edited by him and published in 1664 His introductions are not signed with his own name but with an anagram: E^regius Christo, and Vir gregis Gustos
which with some wrenching will stand for Georgius Stirk' which seems to have been his true name. From the con- tents of the Introduction it is not quite clear whether Starkey obtained the M.S. direct from the author or not. ^
I he work is in two parts and is in verse, the first book containing the theory, the second the practice. It is a tan- talizing book, which doubtless it was intended to be but anyhow, when one reads it, it seems fairly intelligible, till one runs up against a phrase or stanza which may contradict what went before or give a totally different significance from what was expected. Even with the help of a commentary the meaning is no clearer. This, however, may be said : that It IS apparently of transmutation that the poem treats, though one Ccin ne\ er be Cjuite positive on that point.
“Eirenasus Philalethes ” or “ Philalelha’,” as .seems to be Ihe more correct form, a very obscure person, became an adept at the age of 23, wrote several works, which had a \ ery qreat reputation and of which some were turned into "Oj.,hsh. These are . Secrets Pez'ecil d, or on Open Fntronce to the Shut Palace of the King, 1669; Kipiey Reviv'd, 1678; and Three Tracts of the Great Medicine of Philosophers] 1694. These last are entitled respectively, The Transmuta- tion of Medals, A short Mannduction to the Celestial Ruby, T/ze F ountain of Chymical Philosophy . Tt is unnecessary to attempt the analysis of these books, it' would take a whole lecture to itself.
T cannot, however, pass from them without some refer- ence to Will. Cooper of the Pelican, in. Little Britain, Pub- lisher and Bookseller. LTnfortunately there is no record of his life, and we only know that he was in Little St. Bartholo- mew’s, near Little Britain, before he moved to the siq-n of the Pelican. But when one conjures up the nest of" that rniqhty bird, it produces upon us nearlv as stirrinq sensa- tions as the little shop full of black letter and maqic and astroloqy and alchemy — was it Bumstead’s? — so effectivelv pourt rayed by Buhver Lytton. Cooper, indeed, was a book- seller; his lists demonstrate that; but he was somethinq more — he was a publisher, an author, and above all a collec"^ tor. Of what his qeneral stock may have been no trace is left, but he specialized in chemistrv, in Alchemy, in chemical medicine, and to some extent in natural historv. Amonq the books he published, some have been already mentioned. Secrets Rez'eal d : Ripley Reviv'd; Collectanea Chymica,
Sofue English Alchemical Books.
1 1
1684; Aurijontina Chymica, 1680; Simpson’s Discourse of Fermentation; Geber’s Works, 1686; The Philosophical Epitaph, A Brief of the Golden Calf from Helvetius, The Day Daivning or Light of Wisdom, which last three ap- peared in a volume in. 1673. But it should be especially re- membered that in this year he published his Catalogue of Chymical Books, which was the first of its kind that appeared in English, and the second in Europe. The first of all was the Bibliotheca Chimica of Borellius, 1654, and as it con- tained all the foreign literature, Cooper confined himself to books in English. As first issued it had been compiled in haste, but by 1673 he had revised it, added many new titles, improved the descriptions and the cross-references, and added a third part, being a catalogue of all the communications on chemistry, mineralogy, mineral waters and such like topics, made to the Royal Society and published in their Transac- tions to date. This was a great noveltv, and was the fore- runner of similar indexes, since drawn up. I question if Cooper’s list is known, or if he has ever got any credit for his foresight. I'his catalogue contains many of the books which I have alluded to, and enumerates others of great rarity now, which, however, lie beyond the present subject. But interesting though the catalogue be, it is not complete, and requires to be supplemented by the lists which he ap- pended to several of his other publications.
Contemporary with Cooper lived Richard Russell, already quoted, who deserves well of students of chemi- cal and alchemical literature. He it was who translated Beguinus’ Tyrocinium in 1669, one of the first student’s manuals of chemistry in Europe; Helvetius’ Golden Calf, which the world adores and desires, in 1670; the Royal Chemistry of Oswald Crollius, also in 1670; and in 1678, the works of Geber, reissued eight years later. The transla- tions of Paracelsus and of Raymond Lully on which he was at work were never published, unfortunately, as has been already mentioned. From the books he selected it would appear that he too was of the physical school, for these now enumerated have all a practical character, with a lean- ing towards medicine.
I can do no more than mention other books in English of the period : Fascicidus chemicus or Chymical Collections ,
1650, by Ashmole, v/ho calls himself James Hasolle; Espag- net’s Enchyridion Physicce Restitutee, or the Summary of Phy sicks Recovered ^ 1651 ; Michael Maier’s Lusus Serins, 1654, one of the very few of his queer books in English; anl a collection of chemical and other addresses to Samuel Harthb, a well known agriculturist of the time, containing among other things. Sir George Ripley’s Epistle l.^nfolded , Gabriel Plattes’ Caveat for Alchymists , and /I Discourse about the Essence or Existence of Metals, 1653 ; Henry Nollius’ Hermetical Physick, 1655 ; Ludovicus Combachius’ Sal. Lumen, et Spiritus Mundi Philosophici, or the Dawning of the Day, discovered by the Beams of Light : Shewing the True Salt and Secret of the Philosophers , 1^57, translated
12
Pn)f. John Ferguson, LL.D,
probably by Robert Turner, another of the Hermetlr students of that time. The last book subsequently appeared with an ahered title-pa-e in 1658: Fundamenta Chjmica ■
by t * Mysteries of Alchymie.
,r s third book, The Way to Bliss, came out in
1638, but this US a more general treatise and only a chapter
or so dea s with that portion of bliss that comes by the
melal.s and by transformation of them to the highest deo-ree of perfection. uc„ice
George I'hornley’s Cheiragogia Heliana, a Manuduc-
Z' a J '" Magical Gold, ... to which is
added Zoroaster s Cave, or an Intellectual Eccho, etc.,
Jogether wM the famous Catholic Epistle of John Pontanus upon the ulmeral hire, was issued in 1659, and again in
In the next ten years only a few books on the subject were pub.ishcd : Heydon’s Rosicrucian books have been
already referred to; Joachim Poleman’s Novim Lumen 1 edteum and the Phtlnsopher's .Sulphur came out in 1668 and m the same year Lancelot Colson’s Philosophia Matu- rata to whicli was added .St. Dunstan’s work on The Philoso- pner s Stone. One or two reprints also were made.
I here was more activity in the seventies, thoup-h ap-ain there were several reprints: Van Suchten’s little tract^ on Antimony, ihyo; Helvetius’ Golden Calf; WebsterT History of Metals, i6yi ; Will Cooper’s Catalogue and other works, 1673 ; Light of AJehemy, 1674; Starkey’s Treatise
on the Alkahest, 1675. Kelly’s two tracts in Latin, 1676 must be excluded. Then came the three most notable books! published in 1678, already mentioned, Philalethes’ Ripley Revived; Basil Valentine’s Triumphant Chariot; and Geber’s Works; lho.se last two edited by Richard Russell.
After this the production of new works and the reprint- ing of old begin to slacken ; thus in the next ten years I can refer to only four books. One is by Becher, Magnalia Latura, or the Philosopher's Stone lately exposed to Public Sight arid Sale. It contains an account of how one Wences- laus Seilerus made a successful projection before the Em- peror at Vienna. It is a curious story which hardly bears repetition, but Becher, who was on the Commission to in- vestigate the matter, seems to have had no doubt about the virtue and reality of the powder.
Other two of the books are attractive because of their contents and rarity, and both were printed for Cooper. One ^ the Collectanea Chymica, 1684, the other Aurifontina Chemica, 1680. The last of the number is a tiny pamphlet of date t688, and is a translation by Christopher Packe of ^53 Chyrmcal A phorismes with one or two additional tracts.
published Glauber’s Complete n orks in a large folio volume. In t6qo appeared the Ap- horismi Urhigerani or Certain Rules clearly demonstrating the Three rnfallihle vmvs of preparins; the 'Crand Elixir or Circulatum majus. This is bv Baro Urbiger, and he makes
Some English Alchemical Books. 13
no mystery of his material, provided always that he attaches the same meaning to the names he uses, as we do. Of this I am not quite certain, and I have not had time to verify the good old motto on his title-page : Experto Crede. In
1691 appeared a rather interesting volume by the notorious William Salmon, Medicina Practica. To this he added trans- lations of Hermes, Kalid, Flamel, Geber, Artefius, Roger Bacon and George Ripley, and arranged them in chapters and clauses for facility of study. Salmon was something more than an alchemist. He practised medicine and phar- macy and wrote books on art and technical subjects, and had a good reputation as a scholar.
Bernardus Penotus was a chemist and physician. Cer- tain tracts by him were published as early as 1593, but in
1692 an English translation was made of his book, The Alchy mists Enchiridion, in which he treats both of receipts for curing diseases in man and the practice of the red and white elixir for the betterment of the metals. The volume contains also the dialogue of Arislaeus and a repl)? to Nicholas Guibertus, who denied the possibility of transmu- tation. Philaletha’s three tracts were printed in 1694, and in 1696 an anonymous author wrote Sanguis Naturce, or a Manifest Declaration of the Sanguine and Solar Congealed Liquor of Nature. In these books there seems to be a greater tendency to emphasise the material side of Alchemy. It was becoming infected more or less by the progress of chemistry in the hands of the metallurgists and such experi- menters as Boyle, Stahl, Lemery, Becher and many others.
In the i8th century, the publication of alchemical books in English fell off in a marked degree, and of those which I have noted I have not seen more than nine or ten spread over the century. The pursuit of the subject had dwindled almost to nothing, or else it was pursued in private and its devotees studied the old literature. That may ac- count for the scarcity of that literature now — it may have been destroyed by hard usage.
In 1702, and then in 1704, a certain Cleidophorus Mystagogus published a pamphlet called Mercury's Cadu- cean Rod : or the great and wonderful Office of the Universal Mercury, or God’s Vicegerent, displayed. This is an exposi- tion of the whole art, and the author who was well read in the ancients, after discussing the subject in its theoretical and practical aspects, quotes historical evidence of transmu- tations actually performed. Careful perusal of it might throw some light on the bodies employed and what they were supposed to be able to do.
In 1714 a little volume appeared ‘‘by a Lover of Philalethes, ” containing A short enquiry concerning the Hermetick Arty to which was annexed a Collection from Kahhala Denudata and a translation of AEsch Mezareph or Purifying Fire. The first part is an exposition of the mvstery by a collation of parallel passages, but the fundamental diffi- culty is not thereby much lessened without a fuller explana- tion of the terms employed, than is given. For the writers
Proj. John Ferguson, LL.D.
had a way of juggling with their terms and names which, however ingenious it might be and suggestive to the initiate, is bewildering to the man outside. That, however, is part of the hunt for the Green Lion. About 1732 there was another pamphlet published, called Wisdom Reputed Folly, or the Composition and Reality of the Philosopher’s Stone, This is dedicated to the Royal Society. Like the preceding tracts, it is an analysis of parallel passages from which is deduced the constitution of the Stone, and as in very many others, the conclusion is that it is fruitless to seek for the generative principle of gold outside of gold itself. The diffi- culty lies in getting this princple and using it.
7'he Hermetical Triumph or Victorious Philosopher’s Stone, which was an early production, a commentary on the ‘ Ancient War of the Knights was published in English in 1723, and reprinted in 1740. This is an allegory capable of various interpretations.
Thirty years later, in 1770, there was published a pamph- let entitled .4 Guide to Alchemy, or the grand secret laid open. It professes to declare clearly the first matter, and the method of operation, and to explain the figurative terms in which the secret has been concealed for ages. But one can- not say that the illumination in this brief abstract throws any more light into the dark recesses of the subject than other works that have been enumerated already.
But the notable thing is that the literature fizzled out — I can use no other term — in the i8th century, that sceptical century of credulity and superstition — and the art itself landed finally in the hands of Cagllostro and such persons.
It was pushed to one side by the chemists who were making discovery after discovery, while the alchemists could only reiterate the old formulae and phrases about the genera- tion of metals from an ideal sulphur and mercury, which could never be obtained.
So in the nineteenth century there is no new in- vestigation on the old lines, and the only work in English which I remember at the moment that may be called original, is the Suggestive Inquiry into the Hermetic Mystery and Alchemy published in 1850, and which I believe, was with- drawn from circulation.* That too is a work which would occupy a whole discourse, and I am unable to consider It here.
A collection printed nearly a hundred years ago, in 1815, was The Lives of the Alchemy stical Philosophers, said to be by Barrett, the author of The Magus. Besides the lives, the book contains reprints or original translations of a number of tracts, but the lives are not very well done. It was revised and remodelled by Mr. Waite, but I doubt If it deserved the trouble bestowed on It.
* I understand that a new edition, edited with an Introduction by Mme. Isabelle de Steiger, will shortly be issued by Mr. Tait of Belfast. — Editor.
Some English Alchemical Books. 15
Somewhere about twenty years ago the nineteenth century made its contribution to Alchemical Literature in a series of reprints and translations which brought the old and difficultly attainable literature within reach of the modern student of Hermetic lore.
I may add a note here of those that I have seen : — Dr. Westcott’s reprint of the translation of Flamel’s Exposition of the Hieroglyphical Figures . . 1889; a reprint of the
Collectanea Chymica (Will. Cooper?), 1893; a reprint of John Lilly and Meric Casaubon’s edition of tne works of Edward Kelly, with an introduction by Mr. Waite; and the following new translations, all edited with useful introduc- tions by Mr. Waite : — Basil Valentine’s The Triumphant Chariot of Antimony, 1893 ; Benedictus Figulus’ The Golden and Blessed Casket of Nature's Marvels, 1893; The Hermetic Museum^ 2 vols., 1893; The New Pearl of Great Price, attributed to Peter Bonus, 1894; The Turba Philoso- phorum, 1896. Besides these there was a series of reprints, and new works entitled Collectanea Hermetica, edited by Dr. Westcott, some of which are of alchemical interest : — Espagnet’s The Hermetic Arcanum, 1893; A Short Enquiry concerning the Hermetic Art by a Lover of Philalethes, 1894; /Esch Mezareph, or Purifying Fire, 1894; Vaughan’s Euphrates, or the Waters of the East, 1896. The original editions of these have been quoted in preceding paragraphs.
I had nearly said that these were all, when I remem- bered that a collection had been made of Paracelsus’ Chemical and Hermetical Writings, translated and published in two volumes, and edited by Mr. Waite, in 1894. This brings together all the works of Paracelsus, which are of particulai interest to this Society, as distinguished from his medical writings.
I have put now before you a very brief enumera- tion of the English literature of Alchemy, during three hun- dred years. It is not complete, for I have omitted books that I know, and have no doubt that there are many that I do not know. If I were to scrutinize the catalogues of the British Museum or the Bodleian Library, I am certain that I should find numerous works to add to the present sketch. But I may say that, except from the bibliographer’s point of view, there is ample material in the books now quoted for the most devoted disciple of Hermes to study and digest, and if from these books he cannot get an answer to his ques- tions, or a clearing up of his doubts and difficulties, I can hardly think that the addition of any more books, equally obscure, would help him. But what has now been said may put some of my hearers on the hunt, and they may be re- warded by the discovery of something hitherto unknown which they may be able to communicate to this Societv. I hope so, and wish them all success.
What little I have read of these books and of comments upon them seems to me to refer plainly to a metallic transmu- tation. I have seen in the whole of them, except in a very few, nothing that suggests a mystical or religious signifi-
i6 Some English Alchemical Books.
cance, without a transfig-uration of the apparent meaning of the words, which would be much more difficult for me— I speak only lor myself— to understand and interpret than the metallic transmutation itself. If such a meaning can be taken out of the words, it is hidden in them more profoundly than the seed in the philosopher’s gold, and that is recondite enough for most students.
But when one sees the fuss that Starkey made about the Alkahest, which seems to be ammonia gas or perhaps ammonium carbonate, it is not at all surprising that the ob- scurei phenomena to them of, say, oxidation and reduction, or the action of sulphur on other bodies, were not only un- intelligible, but came to be endowed by them with mystical
or transcendental properties, because they could not be other- wise explained.
It is very difficult to sift out the actual facts from their defective or misunderstood and confused descriptions, and when to that is added their effort to conceal what they sup- posed took place, shifting their terms from one thing to another, the task of interpretation becomes in many cases quite futile. So at least it has appeared to me.
One of the books which was not mentioned under 16^2 IS entitled in the fanciful manner of the time : A Hermetic
Banquet drest by a Spagirick Cook for the better preserva^ tion of the Microcosm. Personally I feel the sort of spa- girick cook toiling in Geber’s kitchen,” to quote an old phrase, who might be employed by Hermetical Barmecides. For after you have come to what should have been a feast, I have put before you nothing but an array of dishes, not altogether empty perhaps, but with their contents raw and unprepared.
I am aware of that, but to tell the truth I have been endeavouring to ^ bring together in some sort of order — chronological as it happens on this occasion — material which has not been dealt with in this way as a whole, and you must accept this as a mere preliminary sketch map of "the ground, which may be and ought to be surveyed more ex- actly, and a critical review of the Literature of English Alchemy prepared.
Even as a preliminary it is defective, as I have said, for I have dropped a number of things of which I have some record, just because I was afraid that a prolonged enumera- tion of authors and titles might prove tedious. I hope it has not been so, and that what has been said will help to- wards the elucidation of those parts of the subject which have not been examined, and will suggest themes which may be brought up and discussed at the meetings of this Society during the coming or some future winter.
Printed by Kenneth Taylor & Co.. 62 Carter Lane, Ludgate Hill. London, E.C.