Alchemy vs. Chemistry: The etymological origins of a historiographic mistake

Early Science and Medicine

Volumn 3, Issue 1, 1998, Pages 32-65

  Newman, William R ^a   Principe, Lawrence M ^b  

^a INDIANA UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CHEMISTRY; HISTORY; NOMENCLATURE;

ALCHEMY; CHEMISTRY; HISTORY, 17TH CENTURY; TERMINOLOGY;

EID: 0031993355     PISSN: 13837427     EISSN: 15733823     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1163/157338298X00022     Document Type: Article

References (105)

1. Although it is true that Paracelsus von Hohenheim (1493-1541) "reformed" alchemy by emphasizing its role in preparing medicines, he did not establish a clear demarcation between alchemy and medical chemistry (called chemiatria or iatrochemia by his followers, and treated as a species of chemia). As Alan Rocke has pointed out, Paracelsus continued to use the German term Alchimey or Alchimei for all chemical concerns and Alchimist for the practitioner thereof ("Agricola, Paracelsus, and Chymia," Ambix 32 (1985), 38-45).
2. The point can be confirmed by reference to Massimo Luigi Bianchi, Lessico del "Paragranum" di Theophrast von Hohenheim detto Paracelsus (Rome, 1983) vol. 1, sub vocibus.
3. Hélène Metzger, "L'évolution du règne métallique d'après les alchimistes du XVIIe siècle," Isis 4 (1922), 466-482.
4. Metzger, Les doctrines chimiques en France du début du XVIIe à la fin du XVIlIe siècle, (Paris, 1923), 94, 133-138.
5. William R. Newman, Gehennical Fire: The Lives of George Starkey, an American Alchemist in the Scientific Revolution (Cambridge, MA, 1994), 92-114; 141-169;
6. "The Corpuscular Transmutational Theory of Eirenaeus Philalethes," in Alchemy and Chemistry in the XVI and XVII Centuries, ed. by Piyo Rattansi and Antonio Clericuzio, (Dordrecht, 1994), 161-82;
7. "The Corpuscular Theory of J. B. van Helmont and its Medieval Sources," Vivarium 31 (1993), 161-191;
8. "Boyle's Debt to Corpuscular Alchemy," in Robert Boyle Reconsidered, ed. by Michael Hunter, (Cambridge, 1994), 107-118;
9. "The Alchemical Sources of Robert Boyle's Corpuscular Philosophy," Annals of Science 53 (1996), 567-585.
10. For the problem of distinguishing vitalism and mechanism in the seventeenth century, see Antonio Clericuzio, "A Redefinition of Boyle's Chemistry and Corpuscular Philosophy," Annals of Science 47 (1990), 561-589.
11. We critique the anachronistic connection of vitalism and alchemy in our next joint article "The Historiography of Alchemy," forthcoming in Archimedes.
12. Marie Boas [Hall], Robert Boyle and Seventeenth-century Chemistry, (Cambridge, 1958), 48.
13. Lawrence M. Principe, The Aspiring Adept: Robert Boyle and his Alchemical Quest, (Princeton, 1998);
14. "Boyle's Alchemical Pursuits," in Boyle Reconsidered, 91-105;
15. "Robert Boyle's Alchemical Secrecy: Codes, Ciphers, and Concealments," Ambix 39 (1992), 63-74;
16. Hunter, "Alchemy, Magic and Moralism in the Thought of Robert Boyle," British Journal for the History of Science 23 (1990), 387-410.
17. Newman, review of Betty Jo Teeter Dobbs, The Janus Faces of Genius, in Isis 84 (1993), 578-9.
18. B. J. T. Dobbs, The Foundations of Newton's Alchemy, or The Hunting of the Greene Lyon (Cambridge, 1975), esp. 44, 176-77.
19. For Starkey's authorship, see Newman, "Newton's Clavis as Starkey's Key," Isis 78 (1987), 564-74.
20. Dobbs, Foundations, 52.
21. Marco Beretta, The Enlightenment of Matter: The Definition of Chemistry from Agricola to Lavoisier, (Canton, MA, 1993), see 77, 329-362. While Beretta rightly criticizes the reductionist errors of positivist approaches to alchemy, his own portrayal of alchemy is little more than a parody. He takes Enlightenment polemic at face value, confounds different traditions within alchemy, and makes no distinction among symbols (as abbreviations), emblems, allegories, and metaphors, categorizing them as "chemical" or "alchemical" according to preconceived notions of the division between alchemy and chemistry. Perhaps more gravely, he shows little understanding of the sources. For example, in treating Becher's 1689 Tripus hermeticus fatidicus (which he seems to think a single work rather than three diverse treatises) he reproduces an engraving of "alchemical and chemical apparatus" (how do we decide which is which?). There he calls the ovum philosophicum "a furnace to engender the transmutation of metals" when it is really (and is depicted as) a glass vessel for digestions; then, apparently to heap scorn upon alchemical pretensions, he cites "a set of needles that were thought to be capable of detecting the presence of silver and gold," implying a magical operation (346-7). But Becher himself describes these needles as "acus probatoria," that is, the standard alloys used for assaying with a touchstone (a streak is made on the stone with the sample, and its color compared with streaks made by the standards.) While Beretta makes much of the metallurgical tradition throughout his book, he does not seem to recognize its common implements. It may be wise to postpone judgments on experimental content until one learns to recognize it accurately. Similarly, when Biringuccio gives woodcuts of implements, Beretta cites them as related to metallurgical chemistry as opposed to alchemy (83), but when Becher shows the implements to be used with his ingenious "portable furnace," Beretta labels them as alchemical. It is such inconsistency and the misguided historiography which informs it that we assail.
22. Goltz argues that "Alchemie ist unabdingbar mit irgendeiner Art von Weltanschauung verknuepft und stellt eine Naturphilosophie dar." When she fails to find the Weltanschauung of the alchemists in the highly mineralogical work of "Geber," Goltz concludes that he writes in a fashion that is "nicht alchemistisch." See Dietlinde Goltz, "Versuch einer Grenzziehung zwischen Chemie und Alchemie," in Sudhoffs Archiv 52 (1968), 30-47; cf. 34, 39-40.
23. For Geber, see Newman, The Summa perfections of pseudo-Geber (Leiden, 1991).
24. Kenelm Digby, Two Treatises: In the One of Which, the Nature of Bodies; in the Other, the Nature of Mans Soule, is looked into (London, 1645), 42521.
25. Robert Halleux, Les textes alchimiques (Turnhout, 1979), 47;
26. See also Newman, Gehennical Fire, xi-xiv, 85-87.
27. Rocke, "Agricola, Paracelsus, and Chymia," 38-45.
28. On Boyle's indiscriminate use of the words see Principe, The Aspiring Adept, 30-31.
29. See also, for example, Jean-Marc Mandosio, "La place de l'alchimie dans les classifications des arts et des sciences à la Renaissance," Chrysopoeia 4 (1990-91), 199-282. Mandosio finds only a single example of a distinction made between alchemy and chemistry in the Renaissance, and that relates alchimia to the purification of metals and chymia to the "extraction of juices and liquors," (199, n. 2, and 257). This distinction, we expect, arises from the carry-over of the medieval alchimia (which was largely mineralogical) plus the "re-derivation" of chymia from the Greek chymos, or juice.
30. Importandy, however, the fit is still not exact, for " chemistry" in the early eighteenth century tends to mean exclusively medical chemistry, the descendant of chemiatria. This usage is still evident in Britain, where the popular sense of "chemist" remains that of "pharmacist." For the negative effects that this pro-crustean view of chemistry had on the discipline in the eighteenth century, see Christoph Meinel, "Artibus Academicis Inserenda: Chemistry's Place in Eighteenth and Early Nineteenth Century Universities," History of Universities 7 (1988), 89-115.
31. Mémoires de l'académie royale des sciences, année MDCCXXIL, 1:68-72.
32. E. F. Geoffroy l'ainé, "Des supercheries concernant la pierre philosophale," Mémoires de l'académie royale des sciences, 1 (1722; Paris ed. of 1778), 372-388.
33. For Fontenelle, cf. 69: "L'art n'a jamais fait un grain d'aucun des metaux imparfaits, qui selon les Alchimistes sont de l'or que la nature a manque, il n'a seulement jamais fait un caillou." Cf. Halleux, Les textes alchimiques, 48.
34. Georg Ernst Stahl, Bedencken von der Gold-Macherey, in J. J. Becher, Clymischer Glückshafen (Leipzig, 1755), sigs. blv-2: "Die recht gruendlich vorzunehmende Untersuchung solcherley Dinge, hat fast nunmehro, obschon eben nicht von so gar langen Jahren, den Nahmen der Chymie behauptet: Die andere aber, nicht allein verwirrende, sondern an unzaehligen Exempeln vergeblich, ja verderbliche, Bemuehung, behaelt meistenteils den Nahmen der Alchymie. Umsonst waere es, von dem blossen Wort und Nahm-Kuenstlern anzuhoeren, dass die Nahme Chymie und Alchymie gantz einerley achten sey. Dann gleichwie die blosse Nahmen, nicht allein zur Bedeutung dessen, was man darunter verstehen will; sondern zu noethiger Unterscheidung, gemeynet ist: Also soll auch billig in diesem stueck es dazu dienen, dass man durch die Alchymie-Benennung hauptsaechlich, nicht allein die am meisten verwirrete, sondern auch groesten-theils unerfindliche und vergebliche Unternehmen, kurtz zu sagen, die GoldMacherey, und was denen anhaengig ist, nach dem allgemeinesten Lauf, und gewiss unzaehligen Exempeln solcher Unterwindungen, verstehen koenne, wolle und solle. Hingegen durch die Nahmen der Chymie, vernuenftige, wohlbedaechliche, wohl verstandene, und zu gruendlicher Erkaenntniss fuehrende, Untersuchung und Bearbeitung."
35. Hermann Boerhaave, A New Method of Chemistry, trans. by Peter Shaw, (London, 1727), 215-8, see also 42-8.
36. The validity of this translation as a legitimate indication of Boerhaave's views is denied by James P. Scopa, "Boerhaave on Alchemy," Synthesis 4(4) (1979), 24-37; nonetheless, we are interested here not so much in the specific views of Boerhaave himself, but rather in the linguistic usages of the 1720s.
37. Stahl, Philosophical Principles of Universal Chemistry, trans, by Peter Shaw, (London, 1730), 393-424;
38. Hermann Kopp, Die Alchemie in älterer und neuerer Zeit (Heidelberg, 1886), part 1, gives a good description of Stahl's evolving beliefs on 69-75.
39. On Boerhaave, see G. A. Lindeboom, Herman Boerhaave: The Man and His Work (London, 1968), 348-52.
40. Encyclopédie ou Dictionnaire Raisonné des Sciences des Arts et des Métiers. Nouvelle impression en facsimile de la première édition de 1751-1780, vol. 3 (Stuttgart-Bad Cannstatt, 1966): (425A) "Quant à l'art de transmuer les metaux, ou à l'Alchimie⋯," (417A) "La Chimie est une science qui s'occupe des séparations & des unions des principes constituans des corps⋯."
41. On the two words see Wolfgang Schneider, "Chemiatry and Iatrochemistry," 141-50 in Science, Medicine, and Society in the Renaissance, ed. Allen G. Debus, (New York, 1972).
42. Venel's entry pays prominent laud to Stahl, as on p. 436B, where he refers to the German's "Génie vaste." On 434B, Venel cites Stahl's Specimen Becherianum as "le code de la Chimie, l'Euclide des Chimistes, &c." Venel also knew Stahl's mature critique of transmutational alchemy, for he refers on 434A to Stahl's criticism of Glauber's experiments for having been distorted by "la manie des les diriger aux vues chimériques de l'Alchimie ⋯" For d'Holbach's use of Stahl, see Thomas L. Hankins, Science and the Enlightenment (Cambridge, 1985), 95.
43. For example, Johann Chrysippus Fanianus, De arte metaUicae metamorphoseos (written 1559), in Theatrum chemicum, ed. Lazarus Zetzner, 6 vols., (Strasbourg, 165961; reprint ed., Turin: Bottega d'Erasmo, 1981), 1:30-47, on 33, 44-45;
44. Gaston DuClo (Claveus), De ratione progignendi lapidis philosophici (written early 1590s), in Theatrum chemicum, 4:388-413, on 390;
45. George Starkey, Pyrotechny Asserted (London, 1658), 4.
46. Theatrum chemicum, 4:163-94, on 166. The anonymous work is probably early seventeenth century.
47. Johann Joachim Becher, Chymischer Glückshafen, (Frankfurt, 1682), 108.
48. Metzger, Doctrines chimiques, 30.
49. Andrew Kent and Owen Hannaway, "Some New Considerations on Beguin and Libavius," Annals of Science 16 (1960), 241-250.
50. Rocke, "Agricola, Paracelsus, and Chymia." The words still did not have their modern meanings at the time of Boyle.
51. Having made a census of the words "alchemist" and "alchemy" in Boyle's writings, we find that although these words are used much less frequently than their more modern counterparts, we find no coherent and consistent discrimination whatsoever in their use; see Principe, Aspiring Adept, 30-31.
52. Andreas Libavius, Akhemia, (Frankfurt a. M., 1597), sigs. B2v-B3, and 1-2, and 85;
53. Commentariorum alchymiae, in Alchymia (Frankfurt a. M., 1606), 71-78;
54. and Syntagmatis arcanorum, (Frankfurt a. M., 1612), part 3, 1-8.
55. Jean Riolan, Ad Libavi maniam loan. Riolani responsio, (Paris, 1606), 6-7; "Omne enim homonymum priùs dividendum est, quam definiatur, aut propriae affectiones de illo demonstrentur; alioquin vagus oberrat animus, nec habet certum subiectum in quo subsistat."
56. Riolan, Ad Libavi maniam responsio, 7: "Habet autem Alchymia duo significata tarn differentia, ut utrique solum notnen sit commune, ratio planè differens. Quid enim habet commune Alchimia metallorum in aurum transmutatrix cum medicatrice praeter nomen? Huic sanitas est pro fine, illi auri ex caeteris metallis confectio; est homonymum apo tēs tuchēs: Alchimiae enim nomen utrique significato temerè impositum est, ut nomen canis sidereo, domestico, & marino." We thank Prof. Bruce Moran for this reference.
57. Nicolas Guibert, Alchymia ratione et experientia ⋯ impugnata (Strasbourg, 1603), 1-4.
58. Lynn Thorndike, History of Magic and Experimental Science, 8 vols. (New York, 1941), 6:245.
59. Guibert, De interitu alchymiae metallorum transmutatoriae, (Toul, 1614), 77-78: Ibi enim conviciandi temeritate accusat me quod vocem Alchymiae usurpem de transmutatoria metallorum scientia, quasi Alchymiam ad nimias angustias revocem: ut quae versatur circa metallorum transmutationem, vix aliqua sit Alchymiae particula⋯ Nam & vulgo Alchymistae dicuntur ij duntaxat, qui circa metallorum transmutationem versantur, & Alchymia Antonomastice & proprie apud omnes fere Alchymiae scriptores praedicatur de ea vanitate quae circa metallificium versatur.
60. Vernacular variants of the Latin alchimia are well-attested in German, Italian, French, and English, by the fourteenth century. See Deutsches Woerterbuch von Jacob Grimm und Wilhelm Grimm (Leipzig, 1988), Gran dizionario delta lingua italiana (Turin, s.d.)
61. Emile Littre, Dictionnaire de la langue francaise (Paris, 1956)
62. and The Oxford English Dictionary (Oxford, 1989), all sub voce.
63. Guibert, De interitu, 80-81.
64. Martin Ruland, Lexicon alchemiae, (Frankfurt, 1612; reprint ed. Hildesheim: Georg Olms Verlag, 1964): the book bears an Imperial privilege dated "Prague, 1607."
65. Ruland, Lexicon, 26: "Akhimia est impuri separatio a substantia puriore."
66. We owe confirmation of this point to oral communications from Professors Wolfhart Heinrichs, A. I. Sabra, Gerald Toomer, and Salman Al-Ani. Nor does Maneh Hammad Al-Johani, English and Arabic Articles: A Contrastive Analysis in Definiteness and Indefiniteness, (Ph. D. diss, Indiana University, 1982) attest to this use, although he gives a comprehensive treatment of the uses of the Arabic definite article on 210-41.
67. It is true, as Edward Lane points out in his Arabic-English Lexicon (Edinburgh, 1863), Book I, Part I, 74, that al can be used to "denote predominance of application," as when al-madina, "the city," is used to mean "the city of the Apostle," or al-kitāb, "the book," is used to mean "the book of the Seebahweyh," but this is clearly not what the Arabs had in mind with al-kimiyā'. In the former cases the al is used to single out one city or one book among many: in the latter, since there is only one kimiyā', it is used simply as a normal definite article.
68. Ruland, Lexicon, 149: "ars physica separandi purum ab impuro ad conficiendum medicamenta tarn corporibus humanis persanandis, quam metallicis ad summum perfectionem perducendis, accommodata."
69. Metzger, Doctrines chimiques, 36-37.
70. For an exhaustive bibliographical study of Beguin, see T. S. Patterson, "Jean Beguin and his Tyrocinium chymicum," in Annals of Science 2 (1937), 243-298. Beguin's Tyrocinium chymicum also exists in a pirated 1610 version, but given the lack of editorial control that the author exercised over the 1610 version, it seems better to rely on his 1612 Paris edition, whose printing he supervised.
71. We have not ruled out a common source, but the evidence for Ruland's chronological priority is as follows. First, Ruland seems to have completed his Lexicon alchemiae by 1607, to judge by the dated Imperial privilege. Second, the 1612 edition of the Lexicon contains Ruland's dedicatory letter dated "Prague, 20 April, 1611," which provides further evidence that the book had gone to press before the appearance of Béguin's 1612 Tyrocinium chymicum, by which time, moreover, Ruland was already dead. Third, Beguin's pirated 1610 Tyrocinium chymicum lacks the spurious explanation of the Arabic al, showing that it must have been added between 1610 and 1612. Fourth, when the spurious explanation of al does appear in Béguin, its inclusion is brief and without explanation, unlike Ruland's Lexicon where a lengthier explanation with illustrative examples is provided. Let us here reproduce the definition of chymistry that Beguin gives in the pirated version ([Jean Beguin], Tyrocinium chymicum (s.l., 1610), Aiir): "Alchymia est ars quae purum ab impuro separare docet. Vel ars perficiendi magisteria, & essentias puras e mistis corporibus segregandi. Alchymiae duae sunt species, Altera quae Pyrotechnia sive igniaria ars resolutoria, purificatoria & transmutatoria metallorum, quam hic silentio praetermitto. Alia quae spiritus subtilissimos ex metallis, gemmis, plantisque educit: quo subtiliora, eo puriora, quo puriora, eo efficaciora remedia praebens: metalla depurat, segregat, perficit, aurum induratissimum dissolvit, metalla per infirmitatem vegetabilium vexat, tincturas subiectis disiungit, finitam naturam exaltat in infinitum, lapides confiat, aquam elicit, ignem vegetat, & in igne vegetato ac quasi perennato specimen edit artis & efficacitatis suae in humana vita proroganda."
72. Jean Beguin, Tirocinium chymicum recognitum et auctum (Paris: Matheus le Maistre, 1612), 1-2: "Chymiae vocabulum Graecum est: Latinis idem, quod ars liquorem faciens: aut res solidas in liquorem solvens: dicta ita kat' exochen, quod Chymia solvere (id quod difficilius) & coagulare doceat. Alchymiam si quis nun-cuparit; Arabum more praestantiam eius: si Spagyriam; praecipua officia, synkrisin nempe & diakrisin: si artem Hermeticam; autorem & antiquitatem; si Destillatoriam; functionem eius praeclaram & facile principem insinuet."
73. Beguin, Tyrocinium (1612), 3: "Unde apparet: quam graviter illi hallucinentur: qui audita Alchymistae nomine, statim sibi hominem imaginantur, qui nihil tractet aliud, quam metallorum metamorphōsas, nihilque meditetur, quam mirabile lapidis Philosophici mystērion."
74. [Michael Sendivogius,] Novum lumen chymicum (Paris, 1608): aiir-[aiiiv] consist of a laudatory letter by Beguin, in which he says of Sendivogius that "nec ullum hactenus Philosophorum clarius & brevius de artis & naturae potestate scripsisse iudicarem."
75. See also Patterson, "Jean Beguin," 245-247, 296.
76. E. R. Arnaud, Introduction à la chymie, où le lecteur treuvera la définition de toutes les Opérations de la Chymie, (Lyon, 1655), 4: "Les Arabes, pour exprimer mieux quelle est son excellence, ont adiousté à son nom cet article Emphatique, Al, qui est équivalent à l'article Grec ho, hē, to, & ils l'ont appellée, Alchimie⋯."
77. Arnaud, Introduction, p. 9: "qui puisse consumer indifferemment toutes les impuretez du corps, sans blesser aucunement sa substance⋯. "
78. Fritz Chemnitius, Die Chemie in Jena von Rolfinck bis Knorr (Jena, 1929);
79. Chymia Jenensis: Chymisten, Chemisten, und Chemiker in Jena (Jena, 1989), 4-5. In spite of Rolfinck's vehement opposition to metallic transmutation, two of his students, Gabriel Clauder (1633-1691) and Georg Wolfgang Wedel (1645-1721), became apologists for it.
80. Rolfinck, Chimia, 21: "Verùm inter chimiam & alchimiam nullum discrimen. Utroque vocabulo eadem ars denotatur. Neque etiam rectam insistunt viam, qui alchimiam & chimiam sic distinguunt, ut haec solùm in artificiosâ medica-mentorum praeparatione, illa verò in metallorum transmutatione saltern occupata sit. Eadem est ejusdem rei appellatio, nisi quod altera praefixum habeat Arabicus Al aequipollens Graecorum articulo ho, hē, to."
81. Rolfinck, Chimia, 28; "medicinae potiùs esse videtur pars, ad Pharmakoitikēn pertinens, & ab eâ nomine solùm differens." The attrition of chymistry down to mere pharmacy by a method like Rolfinck's may shed light on the origins of the definition of "chemist" preserved in Britain, namely, a pharmacist.
82. Principe, Aspiring Adept, 54-56.
83. Rolfinck, Chimia, 436; "Caveat sibi ab hac opum depraedatrice arte, cui salus sua cordi. Qui alicui malè vult, eum autem aperto marte aggredi non audet, saltern autor ipsi sit, ut huic studio se tradat. Hoc Bernhardt Penoti⋯"
84. Joseph Hall, Mundus alter et idem, (London, 1605), book 3, ch. 6, sect. 2: "Alchymia est ars sine arte/Cuius scire est pars cum parte/Medium est strenue mentiri/Finis mendicatum iri." The phrase about the gallows is Rolfinck's addition.
85. Libavius, Singularium, (Frankfurt, 1599), 125-6; "Sed Moresinus iterum: Chymia non est scientia ⋯ est obsoleta nequitia quam subinde interpolant." Libavius is quoting from Thomas Moresinus, Liber novus de metallorum causis et transsubstantiatione, (Frankfurt, 1593), 116 and 127.
86. Libavius, Singularium, 125-6; "Parum hoc abest a faceto illo & ludicro carmine quod memini me in impostores fabrefactum alicubi legere: Alchymia est scientia sine arte/Cuius scire est pars cum parte,/Medium est strenue mentiri,/Finis mendicatum ire." We owe the discovery of the location of the verse in Libavius' interminable corpus to the expertise of Prof. Bruce Moran.
87. Libavius, "De igne naturae," 33, in Syntagmatis Arcanorum, vol. 2, (Frankfurt, 1613). "Libavius non vult dici Spagyrus eo usu vocis, quo Ambaldus & alii improbi Paracelsici delectantur. Alias saniore sensu non negat extractoriam, & coagulatoriam artem isto vocabulo comprehendi, de quo nos inferius. Notabit lector Spagirus, & Spagyrus. Illud componunt ex span kai agtirein, quod est solvere, & coagulare, quae duo sunt praecipua in magisterio lapidis: hoc mali ominis est.
88. Nam agyrmō turbae, & mendicitati cognatum, agyrismos enim aut agyrmos strepitus est, & mendicitas: spaō, traho: iuxta illud: Paracelsica alchymia est ars sine arte, cuius finis mendicatum ire" On Libavius see Bruce Moran, "Libavius the Paracelsian? Monstruous Novelities, Institutions, and the Norms of Social Virtue," in Reading the Book of Nature: The Other Side of the Scientific Revolution, ed. Allen G. Debus and Michael Walton, (Kirksville, MO, 1998);
89. "Medicine, Alchemy, and the Control of Language: Andreas Libavius vs. the Neoparacelsians," in Paracelsus: The Man and His Reputation, His Ideas and Their Transformation, ed. Ole Peter Grell, forthcoming.
90. Nicaise Le Febvre, Traicté de la chymie, (Paris, 1660), 5-6; "Cette science, comme aussi beaucoup d'autres, a receu plusieurs noms selon ses divers effets. Le plus ordinaire, est celuy de Chymie, qui tire son étymologie, à ce qu'on dit, d'un mot Grec, qui signifie suc, humeur ou liqueur; parce qu'on apprend à réduire en liqueur les corps les plus solides, par les opérations Chymiques. On luy donne aussi le nom d'Alchymie, à l'imitation des Arabes qui ajoutent la particule, Al, qui signifie Dieu & grand, lors qu'ils veulent exprimer l'excellence de quelque chose⋯ De ⋯ ces noms, nous ne nous servirons que de celuy de Chymie, comme estant le plus commun."
91. Ernest Klein, A Comprehensive Etymological Dictionary of the Hebrew Language for Readers of English (Jerusalem, 1987), 28.
92. On Glaser see Roy G. Neville, "Christophle Glaser and the Traité de la chymie, 1663," Chymia 10 (1965), 25-52.
93. Christophle Glaser, Traité de la Chymie, (Paris, 1663), sigs. ai-aii: "[1.] Ceux qui se sont appliquez à la haute Chymie, & qui ont penetré dans ses plus grands mystères, se sont contentez d'en avoir la connoissance; Et quoy qu'ils ayent voulu paroistre communicatifs, ils ont pourtant escrits si obscurement, que l'on a sujet de douter s'ils ont debité des realitez, & s'ils n'ont pas donné des fantosmes pour des corps, & des espines pour des fruicts. [2.] D'autres qui n'ont pas volé si haut, ont eu pourtant des belles connoissances, & mesmes ont descouvert des préparations, lesquelles les rendent considerables à la posterité; mais ils ont aussi cerché [I] de se satisfaire eux-mesmes, & ont pris plaisir d'embarrasser les esprits, & les jetter dans les labyrinthes, sans leur donner des moyens pour s'en tirer. [3.] D'autres bien moins capables, ont eu pourtant quelques petites lumières; mais n'ayans pas tout sceu, ou essayé eux-mesme tout ce qu'ils ont dit, & desirants pourtant passer pour habiles dans un Art, qu'ils ne possedoient qu'à-demy, ont fait passer leurs imaginations pour des veritez constantes, dont la pratique a souuent descouuert la fausseté & leur insuffisance. [4.] D'autres en fin, qui ne meritent pas d'avoir le nom de Chymistes; mais plutost de souffleurs ignorants, travaillant sur des receptes copiées ou desrobées, lesquelles ils prennent souvent à contresens, & ayans consumé lew temps & leur argent, ou celuy des autres, dans un travail ridicule, ont fait plusieurs compagnons de fortune, en engageants le vulgaire, sous des promesses de les enrichir, dans la practique de choses, qui font passer le meilleur metal en fumee; à moins qu'ils n'en fassent passer quelque partie dans leurs mains, ce qui n'est pas la moindre de leurs opérations."
94. See Principe, Aspiring Adept, 31-35;
95. Robert Boyle, The Sceptical Chymist, (London, 1661), preface;
96. The Producibleness of Chymical Principles, (appendix to the second edition of the Sceptical Chymist), (London, 1680), preface.
97. Glaser, Traité de la chymie, 5-6; "D'autres l'ont appellee Alchimie, mais ce titre convient principalement à celle, qui enseigne la transmutation ou augmentation des metaux; à quoy nostre dessain n'est pas de nous appliquer, mais bien à la Chymiatrie, c'est à dire a la Médecine Chymique ⋯."
98. Nicolas Lemery, Cours de Chymie, (Paris, 1675), 2: "Les Chymistes ont ajousté la Particule Arabe Al, au mot de Chymie, quand ils ont voulu exprimer la plus sublime, comme celle qui enseigne la Transmutation des Metaux, quoy qu'Alchymie ne signifie autre chose que la Chymie."
99. Lemery, Cours de chymie, (Paris, 1679), 57-58.
100. Lemery, Cours, (1679), 59-60: "Penote nous servira d'exemple, entre une infinité d'autres, il mourut âgé de quatre-vingt dix-huit ans à l'Hospital d'Yverdon en Suisse, & il dit à la fin de sa vie qu'il avoit passée à la recherche du grand oeuvre, que s'il avoit quelque ennemy puissant qu'il n'osast pas ouvertement attaquer, il luy conseilleroit de s'adonner tout entier à l'estude & à la pratique de l'Alchymie."
101. Eugene Olivier, "Bernard G. Penot (Du Port), médecin et alchimiste, 1519-1617," (unpublished), 72-79. We owe this reference to the kindess of M. Didier Kahn.
102. Lemery, Cours, (1679), 60-61: "ainsi c'est proprement travailler en tenebres, que de travailler à faire de l'or, & je trouve qu'on a fort bien défini l'Alchymie, Ars sine arte, cujus principium mentiri, medium laborari & finis mendicare."
103. Lemery, A Course of Chymistry, trans, by Walter Harris, (London, 1686), 52-56.
104. John Harris, Lexicon Technicum: or an Universal English Dictionary of Arts and Sciences (London, 1704), sub voce.
105. Harris, Lexicon, sub voce.