(2a) From the "Smaragdine Table," attributed to HERMES TRISMEGISTOS (_ie_. MERCURY or THOTH).
(1b) _The Book of the Revelation of_ HERMES, _interpreted by_ THEOPHRASTUS PARACELSUS, _concerning the Supreme Secret of the World_.
(See BENEDICTUS FIGULUS, _A Golden and Blessed Casket of Nature"s Marvels_, trans. by A. E. WAITE, 1893, pp. 36, 37, and 41.)
(1c) EIRENAEUS PHILALETHES: _A Brief Guide to the Celestial Ruby_. (See _The Hermetic Museum_, vol. ii. pp. 246 and 249.)
In other accounts the Philosopher"s Stone, or at least the _materia prima_ of which it is compounded, is spoken of as a despised substance, reckoned to be of no value. Thus, according to one curious alchemistic work, "This matter, so precious by the excellent Gifts, wherewith Nature has enriched it, is truly mean, with regard to the Substances from whence it derives its Original. Their price is not above the Ability of the Poor. Ten Pence is more than sufficient to purchase the Matter of the Stone.... The matter therefore is mean, considering the Foundation of the Art because it costs very little; it is no less mean, if one considers exteriourly that which gives it Perfection, since in that regard it costs nothing at all, in as much as _all the World has it in its Power_... so that... it is a constant Truth, that the Stone is a Thing mean in one Sense, but that in another it is most precious, and that there are none but Fools that despise it, by a just Judgment of G.o.d."(1) And JACOB BOEHME (1575--1624) writes: "The _philosopher"s stone_ is a very dark, disesteemed stone, of a grey colour, but therein lieth the highest tincture."(2) In these pa.s.sages there is probably some reference to the ubiquity of the Spirit of the World, already referred to in a former quotation. But this fact is not, in itself, sufficient to account for them. I suggest that their origin is to be found in the religious doctrine that G.o.d"s Grace, the Spirit of CHRIST that is the means of the trans.m.u.tation of man"s soul into spiritual gold, is free to all; that it is, at once, the meanest and the most precious thing in the whole Universe. Indeed, I think it quite probable that the alchemists who penned the above-quoted pa.s.sages had in mind the words of ISAIAH, "He was despised and we esteemed him not." And if further evidence is required that the alchemists believed in a correspondence between CHRIST--"the Stone which the builders rejected"--and the Philosopher"s Stone, reference may be made to the alchemical work called _The Sophic Hydrolith: or Water Stone of the Wise_, a tract included in _The Hermetic Museum_, in which this supposed correspondence is explicitly a.s.serted and dealt with in some detail.
(1) _A Discourse between Eudoxus and Pyrophilus, upon the Ancient War of the Knights_. See _The Hermetical Triumph: or, the Victorious Philosophical Stone_ (1723), pp. 101 and 102.
(2) JACOB BOEHME: _Epistles_ (trans. by J. E., 1649, reprinted 1886), Ep. iv., SE III.
Apart from the alchemists" belief in the a.n.a.logy between natural and spiritual things, it is, I think, incredible that any such theories of the metals and the possibility of their trans.m.u.tation or "regeneration"
by such an extraordinary agent as the Philosopher"s Stone would have occurred to the ancient investigators of Nature"s secrets. When they had started to formulate these theories, facts(1) were discovered which appeared to support them; but it is, I suggest, practically impossible to suppose that any or all of these facts would, in themselves, have been sufficient to give rise to such wonderfully fantastic theories as these: it is only from the standpoint of the theory that alchemy was a direct offspring of mysticism that its origin seems to be capable of explanation.
(1) One of those facts, amongst many others, that appeared to confirm the alchemical doctrines, was the ease with which iron could apparently be trans.m.u.ted into copper. It was early observed that iron vessels placed in contact with a solution of blue vitriol became converted (at least, so far as their surfaces were concerned) into copper. This we now know to be due to the fact that the copper originally contained in the vitriol is thrown out of solution, whilst the iron takes its place. And we know, also, that no more copper can be obtained in this way from the blue vitriol than is actually used up in preparing it; and, further, that all the iron which is apparently converted into copper can be got out of the residual solution by appropriate methods, if such be desired; so that the facts really support DALTON"S theory rather than the alchemical doctrines. But to the alchemist it looked like a real trans.m.u.tation of iron into copper, confirmation of his fond belief that iron and other base metals could be trans.m.u.ted into silver and gold by the aid of the Great Arcanum of Nature.
In all the alchemical doctrines mystical connections are evident, and mystical origins can generally be traced. I shall content myself here with giving a couple of further examples. Consider, in the first place, the alchemical doctrine of purification by putrefaction, that the metals must die before they can be resurrected and truly live, that through death alone are they purified--in the more prosaic language of modern chemistry, death becomes oxidation, and rebirth becomes reduction. In many alchemical books there are to be found pictorial symbols of the putrefaction and death of metals and their new birth in the state of silver or gold, or as the Stone itself, together with descriptions of these processes. The alchemists sought to kill or destroy the body or outward form of the metals, in the hope that they might get at and utilise the living essence they believed to be immanent within. As PARACELSUS put it: "Nothing of true value is located in the body of a substance, but in the virtue... the less there is of body, the more in proportion is the virtue." It seems to me quite obvious that in such ideas as these we have the application to metallurgy of the mystic doctrine of self-renunciation--that the soul must die to self before it can live to G.o.d; that the body must be sacrificed to the spirit, and the individual will bowed down utterly to the One Divine Will, before it can become one therewith.
In the second place, consider the directions as to the colours that must be obtained in the preparation of the Philosopher"s Stone, if a successful issue to the Great Work is desired. Such directions are frequently given in considerable detail in alchemical works; and, without a.s.serting any exact uniformity, I think that I may state that practically all the alchemists agree that three great colour-stages are necessary--(i.) an inky blackness, which is termed the "Crow"s Head" and is indicative of putrefaction; (ii.) a white colour indicating that the Stone is now capable of converting "base" metals into silver; this pa.s.ses through orange into (iii.) a red colour, which shows that the Stone is now perfect, and will trans.m.u.te "base" metals into gold. Now, what was the reason for the belief in these three colour-stages, and for their occurrence in the above order? I suggest that no alchemist actually obtained these colours in this order in his chemical experiments, and that we must look for a speculative origin for the belief in them. We have, I think, only to turn to religious mysticism for this origin. For the exponents of religious mysticism unanimously agree to a threefold division of the life of the mystic. The first stage is called "the dark night of the soul," wherein it seems as if the soul were deserted by G.o.d, although He is very near. It is the time of trial, when self is sacrificed as a duty and not as a delight. Afterwards, however, comes the morning light of a new intelligence, which marks the commencement of that stage of the soul"s upward progress that is called the "illuminative life". All the mental powers are now concentrated on G.o.d, and the struggle is transferred from without to the inner man, good works being now done, as it were, spontaneously. The disciple, in this stage, not only does unselfish deeds, but does them from unselfish motives, being guided by the light of Divine Truth. The third stage, which is the consummation of the process, is termed "the contemplative life". It is barely describable. The disciple is wrapped about with the Divine Love, and is united thereby with his Divine Source. It is the life of love, as the illuminative life is that of wisdom. I suggest that the alchemists, believing in this threefold division of the regenerative process, argued that there must be three similar stages in the preparation of the Stone, which was the pattern of all metallic perfection; and that they derived their beliefs concerning the colours, and other peculiarities of each stage in the supposed chemical process, from the characteristics of each stage in the psychological process according to mystical theology.
Moreover, in the course of the latter process many flitting thoughts and affections arise and deeds are half-wittingly done which are not of the soul"s true character; and in entire agreement with this, we read of the alchemical process, in the highly esteemed "Canons" of D"ESPAGNET: "Besides these decretory signs (_i.e_. the black, white, orange, and red colours) which firmly inhere in the matter, and shew its essential mutations, almost infinite colours appear, and shew themselves in vapours, as the Rainbow in the clouds, which quickly pa.s.s away and are expelled by those that succeed, more affecting the air than the earth: the operator must have a gentle care of them, because they are not permanent, and proceed not from the intrinsic disposition of the matter, but from the fire painting and fashioning everything after its pleasure, or casually by heat in slight moisture."(1) That D"ESPAGNET is arguing, not so much from actual chemical experiments, as from a.n.a.logy with psychological processes in man, is, I think, evident.
(1) JEAN D"ESPAGNET: _Hermetic Arcanum_, canon 65. (See _Collectanea Hermetica_, ed. by W. WYNN WESTCOTT, vol. i., 1893, pp. 28 and 29.)
As well as a metallic, the alchemists believed in a physiological, application of the fundamental doctrines of mysticism: their physiology was a.n.a.logically connected with their metallurgy, the same principles holding good in each case. PARACELSUS, as we have seen, taught that man is a microcosm, a world in miniature; his spirit, the Divine Spark within, is from G.o.d; his soul is from the Stars, extracted from the Spirit of the World; and his body is from the earth, extracted from the elements of which all things material are made. This view of man was shared by many other alchemists. The Philosopher"s Stone, therefore (or, rather, a solution of it in alcohol) was also regarded as the Elixir of Life; which, thought the alchemists, would not endow man with physical immortality, as is sometimes supposed, but restore him again to the flower of youth, "regenerating" him physiologically. Failing this, of course, they regarded gold in a potable form as the next most powerful medicine--a belief which probably led to injurious effects in some cases.
Such are the facts from which I think we are justified in concluding, as I have said, "that the alchemists constructed their chemical theories for the main part by means of _a priori_ reasoning, and that the premises from which they started were (i.) the truth of mystical theology, especially the doctrine of the soul"s regeneration, and (ii.) the truth of mystical philosophy, which a.s.serts that the objects of nature are symbols of spiritual verities."(1)
(1) In the following excursion we will wander again in the alchemical bypaths of thought, and certain objections to this view of the origin and nature of alchemy will be dealt with and, I hope, satisfactorily answered.
It seems to follow, _ex hypothesi_, that every alchemical work ought to permit of two interpretations, one physical, the other transcendental.
But I would not venture to a.s.sert this, because, as I think, many of the lesser alchemists knew little of the origin of their theories, nor realised their significance. They were concerned merely with these theories in their strictly metallurgical applications, and any transcendental meaning we can extract from their works was not intended by the writers themselves. However, many alchemists, I conceive, especially the better sort, realised more or less clearly the dual nature of their subject, and their books are to some extent intended to permit of a double interpretation, although the emphasis is laid upon the physical and chemical application of mystical doctrine. And there are a few writers who adopted alchemical terminology on the principle that, if the language of theology is competent to describe chemical processes, then, conversely, the language of alchemy must be competent to describe psychological processes: this is certainly and entirely true of JACOB BOEHME, and, to some extent also, I think, of HENRY KHUNRATH (1560-1605) and THOMAS VAUGHAN (1622-1666).
As may be easily understood, many of the alchemists led most romantic lives, often running the risk of torture and death at the hands of avaricious princes who believed them to be in possession of the Philosopher"s Stone, and adopted such pleasant methods of extorting (or, at least, of trying to extort) their secrets. A brief sketch, which I quote from my _Alchemy: Ancient and Modern_ (1911), SE 54, of the lives of ALEXANDER SETHON and MICHAEL SENDIVOGIUS, will serve as an example:--
"The date and birthplace of ALEXANDER SETHON, a Scottish alchemist, do not appear to have been recorded, but MICHAEL SENDIVOGIUS was probably born in Moravia about 1566. Sethon, we are told, was in possession of the arch-secrets of Alchemy. He visited Holland in 1602, proceeded after a time to Italy, and pa.s.sed through Basle to Germany; meanwhile he is said to have performed many trans.m.u.tations. Ultimately arriving at Dresden, however, he fell into the clutches of the young Elector, Christian II., who, in order to extort his secret, cast him into prison and put him to the torture, but without avail. Now it so happened that Sendivogius, who was in quest of the Philosopher"s Stone, was staying at Dresden, and hearing of Sethon"s imprisonment obtained permission to visit him. Sendivogius offered to effect Sethon"s escape in return for a.s.sistance in his alchemistic pursuits, to which arrangement the Scottish alchemist willingly agreed. After some considerable outlay of money in bribery, Sendivogius"s plan of escape was successfully carried out, and Sethon found himself a free man; but he refused to betray the high secrets of Hermetic philosophy to his rescuer. However, before his death, which occurred shortly afterwards, he presented him with an ounce of the trans.m.u.tative powder. Sendivogius soon used up this powder, we are told, in effecting trans.m.u.tations and cures, and, being fond of expensive living, he married Sethon"s widow, in the hope that she was in the possession of the trans.m.u.tative secret. In this, however, he was disappointed; she knew nothing of the matter, but she had the ma.n.u.script of an alchemistic work written by her late husband. Shortly afterwards Sendivogius printed at Prague a book ent.i.tled _The New Chemical Light_ under the name of "Cosmopolita," which is said to have been this work of Sethon"s, but which Sendivogius claimed for his own by the insertion of his name on the t.i.tle page, in the form of an anagram. The tract _On Sulphur_ which was printed at the end of the book in later editions, however, is said to have been the genuine work of the Moravian. Whilst his powder lasted, Sendivogius travelled about, performing, we are told, many trans.m.u.tations. He was twice imprisoned in order to extort the secrets of alchemy from him, on one occasion escaping, and on the other occasion obtaining his release from the Emperor Rudolph. Afterwards, he appears to have degenerated into an impostor, but this is said to have been a _finesse_ to hide his true character as an alchemistic adept. He died in 1646."
However, all the alchemists were not of the apparent character of SENDIVOGIUS--many of them leading holy and serviceable lives. The alchemist-physician J. B. VAN HELMONT (1577-1644), who was a man of extraordinary benevolence, going about treating the sick poor freely, may be particularly mentioned. He, too, claimed to have performed the trans.m.u.tation of "base" metal into gold, as did also HELVETIUS (whom we have already met), physician to the Prince of Orange, with a wonderful preparation given to him by a stranger. The testimony of these two latter men is very difficult either to explain or to explain away, but I cannot deal with this question here, but must refer the reader to a paper on the subject by Mr GASTON DE MENGEL, and the discussion thereon, published in vol. i. of _The Journal of the Alchemical Society_.
In conclusion, I will venture one remark dealing with a matter outside of the present inquiry. Alchemy ended its days in failure and fraud; charlatans and fools were attracted to it by purely mercenary objects, who knew nothing of the high aims of the genuine alchemists, and scientific men looked elsewhere for solutions of Nature"s problems.
Why did alchemy fail? Was it because its fundamental theorems were erroneous? I think not. I consider the failure of the alchemical theory of Nature to be due rather to the misapplication of these fundamental concepts, to the erroneous use of _a priori_ methods of reasoning, to a lack of a sufficiently wide knowledge of natural phenomena to which to apply these concepts, to a lack of adequate apparatus with which to investigate such phenomena experimentally, and to a lack of mathematical organons of thought with which to interpret such experimental results had they been obtained. As for the basic concepts of alchemy themselves, such as the fundamental unity of the Cosmos and the evolution of the elements, in a word, the applicability of the principles of mysticism to natural phenomena: these seem to me to contain a very valuable element of truth--a statement which, I think, modern scientific research justifies me in making,--though the alchemists distorted this truth and expressed it in a fantastic form. I think, indeed, that in the modern theories of energy and the all-pervading ether, the etheric and electrical origin and nature of matter and the evolution of the elements, we may witness the triumphs of mysticism as applied to the interpretation of Nature. Whether or not we shall ever trans.m.u.te lead into gold, I believe there is a very true sense in which we may say that alchemy, purified by its death, has been proved true, whilst the materialistic view of Nature has been proved false.
X. THE PHALLIC ELEMENT IN ALCHEMICAL DOCTRINE
THE problem of alchemy presents many aspects to our view, but, to my mind, the most fundamental of these is psychological, or, perhaps I should say, epistemological. It has been said that the proper study of mankind is man; and to study man we must study the beliefs of man. Now so long as we neglect great tracts of such beliefs, because they have been, or appear to have been, superseded, so long will our study be incomplete and ineffectual. And this, let me add, is no mere excuse for the study of alchemy, no mere afterthought put forward in justification of a predilection, but a plain statement of fact that renders this study an imperative need. There are other questions of interest--of very great interest--concerning alchemy: questions, for instance, as to the scope and validity of its doctrines; but we ought not to allow their fascination and promise to distract our attention from the fundamental problem, whose solution is essential to their elucidation.
In the preceding essay on "The Quest of the Philosopher"s Stone," which was written from the standpoint I have sketched in the foregoing words, my thesis was "that the alchemists constructed their chemical theories for the main part by means of _a priori_ reasoning, and that the premises from which they started were (i.) the truth of mystical theology, especially the doctrine of the soul"s regeneration, and (ii.) the truth of mystical philosophy, which a.s.serts that the objects of nature are symbols of spiritual verities." Now, I wish to treat my present thesis, which is concerned with a further source from which the alchemists derived certain of their views and modes of expression by means of _a priori_ reasoning, in connection with, and, in a sense, as complementary to, my former thesis. I propose in the first place, therefore, briefly to deal with certain possible objections to this view of alchemy.
It has, for instance, been maintained(1) that the a.s.similation of alchemical doctrines concerning the metals to those of mysticism concerning the soul was an event late in the history of alchemy, and was undertaken in the interests of the latter doctrines. Now we know that certain mystics of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries did borrow from the alchemists much of their terminology with which to discourse of spiritual mysteries--JACOB BOEHME, HENRY KHUNRATH, and perhaps THOMAS VAUGHAN, may be mentioned as the most prominent cases in point. But how was this possible if it were not, as I have suggested, the repayment, in a sense, of a sort of philological debt? Trans.m.u.tation was an admirable vehicle of language for describing the soul"s regeneration, just because the doctrine of trans.m.u.tation was the result of an attempt to apply the doctrine of regeneration in the sphere of metallurgy; and similar remarks hold of the other prominent doctrines of alchemy.
(1) See, for example, Mr A. E. WAITE"S paper, "The Canon of Criticism in respect of Alchemical Literature," _The Journal of the Alchemical Society_, vol. i. (1913), pp. 17-30.
The wonderful fabric of alchemical doctrine was not woven in a day, and as it pa.s.sed from loom to loom, from Byzantium to Syria, from Syria to Arabia, from Arabia to Spain and Latin Europe, so its pattern changed; but it was always woven _a priori_, in the belief that that which is below is as that which is above. In its final form, I think, it is distinctly Christian.
In the _Turba Philosophorum_, the oldest known work of Latin alchemy--a work which, claiming to be of Greek origin, whilst not that, is certainly Greek in spirit,--we frequently come across statements of a decidedly mystical character. "The regimen," we read, "is greater than is perceived by reason, except through divine inspiration."(1) Copper, it is insisted upon again and again, has a soul as well as a body; and the Art, we are told, is to be defined as "the liquefaction of the body and the separation of the soul from the body, seeing that copper, like a man, has a soul and a body."(2) Moreover, other doctrines are here propounded which, although not so obviously of a mystical character, have been traced to mystical sources in the preceding excursion. There is, for instance, the doctrine of purification by means of putrefaction, this process being likened to that of the resurrection of man. "These things being done," we read, "G.o.d will restore unto it (the matter operated on) both the soul and the spirit thereof, and the weakness being taken away, that matter will be made strong, and after corruption will be improved, even as a man becomes stronger after resurrection and younger than he was in this world."(1b) The three stages in the alchemical work--black, white, and red--corresponding to, and, as I maintain, based on the three stages in the life of the mystic, are also more than once mentioned. "Cook them (the king and his wife), therefore, until they become black, then white, afterwards red, and finally until a tingeing venom is produced."(2b)
(1) _The Turba Philosophorum, or a.s.sembly of the Sages_ (trans. by A. E.
WAITE, 1896), p. 128.
(2) _Ibid_., p. 193, _cf_. pp. 102 and 152.
(1b) _The Turba Philosophorum, or a.s.sembly of the Sages_ (trans. by A.
E. WAITE), p. 101, _cf_. pp. 27 and 197.
(2b) _Ibid_., p. 98, _cf_. p. 29.
In view of these quotations, the alliance (shall I say?) between alchemy and mysticism cannot be a.s.serted to be of late origin. And we shall find similar statements if we go further back in time. To give but one example: "Among the earliest authorities," writes Mr WAITE, "the _Book of Crates_ says that copper, like man, has a spirit, soul, and body,"
the term "copper" being symbolical and applying to a stage in the alchemical work. But nowhere in the _Turba_ do we meet with the concept of the Philosopher"s Stone as the medicine of the metals, a concept characteristic of Latin alchemy, and, to quote Mr WAITE again, "it does not appear that the conception of the Philosopher"s Stone as a medicine of metals and of men was familiar to Greek alchemy;"(3)
(3) _Ibid_., p. 71.
All this seems to me very strongly to support my view of the origin of alchemy, which requires a specifically Christian mysticism only for this specific concept of the Philosopher"s Stone in its fully-fledged form.
At any rate, the development of alchemical doctrine can be seen to have proceeded concomitantly with the development of mystical philosophy and theology. Those who are not prepared here to see effect and cause may be asked not only to formulate some other hypothesis in explanation of the origin of alchemy, but also to explain this fact of concomitant development.
From the standpoint of the transcendental theory of alchemy it has been urged "that the language of mystical theology seemed to be hardly so suitable to the exposition (as I maintain) or concealment of chemical theories, as the language of a definite and generally credited branch of science was suited to the expression of a veiled and symbolical process such as the regeneration of man."(1) But such a statement is only possible with respect to the latest days of alchemy, when there WAS a science of chemistry, definite and generally credited. The science of chemistry, it must be remembered, had no growth separate from alchemy, but evolved therefrom. Of the days before this evolution had been accomplished, it would be in closer accord with the facts to say that theology, including the doctrine of man"s regeneration, was in the position of "a definite and generally credited branch of science,"
whereas chemical phenomena were veiled in deepest mystery and tinged with the dangers appertaining to magic. As concerns the origin of alchemy, therefore, the argument as to suitability of language appears to support my own theory; it being open to a.s.sume that after formulation--that is, in alchemy"s latter days--chemical nomenclature and theories were employed by certain writers to veil heterodox religious doctrine.
(1) PHILIP S. WELLBY, M.A., in _The Journal of the Alchemical Society_, vol. ii. (1914), p. 104.