PDA

View Full Version : Rare Manuscripts in BnF



Hellin Hermetist
01-04-2018, 02:07 PM
Hi guys and happy new year. Lately I made a research an online research at the site of National Bibliotheque de France and there I found many interesting manuscripts which I hadnt seen anywhere else. For example:

http://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b9062319q/f2.image.r=pierre%20philosophale
http://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b90611063/f5.image.r=pierre%20philosophale
http://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b90589698/f4.image.r=pierre%20philosophale
http://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b90589750/f4.image.r=pierre%20philosophale

Υοu will find many Arabic manuscripts there too. Unfortunately, the calligraphy or the authors, combined with the bad condition of the manuscripts, makes them almost unreadable. Has anyone here studied any of the above manuscripts. Can we find a better publication of them in some other place? Can anyone make a better transcription?

JDP
01-04-2018, 09:57 PM
That is the constant problem with manuscripts. It is always a gamble. If the scribe who copied a particular text had a good legible handwriting, then you are in luck and can read it on your own, but if not, then you are majorly screwed. It will require you to find someone who is an expert at reading very difficult examples of handwriting; in other words, a paleographer. And brace yourself, because most of them do not work for free and actually charge hefty sums for their services. The ideal thing would be to find a paleographer who also shares a passion for alchemy & chymistry and would like to transcribe such manuscript texts for free, but good luck with that. I have been involved in such things for a very long time now, and I still haven't found even a single professional paleographer who shares a passion for these subjects. All the ones I have worked with have had to be paid for their services.

Florius Frammel
01-04-2018, 10:54 PM
I have the same problem with a book called "Das Buch der heiligen Dreifaltigkeit", supposedly the very first book on alchemy in german language. Some versions are available online but I can't really read it because of the bad quality or handwriting. I know there exists a readable version or at least parts of it somewhere. If anyone knows more, I would highly appreciate to be informed. Thanks in advance!

Weidenfeld
01-05-2018, 07:45 AM
I have the same problem with a book called "Das Buch der heiligen Dreifaltigkeit", supposedly the very first book on alchemy in german language. Some versions are available online but I can't really read it because of the bad quality or handwriting. I know there exists a readable version or at least parts of it somewhere. If anyone knows more, I would highly appreciate to be informed. Thanks in advance!

Hi Florius,

did you come across the following manuscript of this text ?

https://digital.blb-karlsruhe.de/blbhs/content/titleinfo/1923248

1005

It is written in a rather legible, regular and clear script. Of course it might require some basic study in order to comprehend its character and style, but over all, a feasible task.

Florius Frammel
01-05-2018, 09:14 AM
Thank you!
But this version still is hard to read (for me). Additionally I think it is not the more interesting second version and it lacks all the interesting pictures, which are for example in here:
http://digital.slub-dresden.de/id27894552X

Weidenfeld
01-05-2018, 09:32 AM
Thank you!
But this version still is hard to read (for me). Additionally I think it is not the more interesting second version and it lacks all the interesting pictures, which are for example in here:
http://digital.slub-dresden.de/id27894552X

One difficulty is that there are several Mss of this text, however it's not quite clear which one is the original one. At least the Berlin codex should be the oldest version (1410-1419). Today evening I'll have a look into U. Junkers dissertation in order to see which Ms(s) he used for his transcription. I believe it was the Ms from Kadolzburg, but I'm not quite sure.

Florius Frammel
01-05-2018, 10:26 AM
Thanks, I'm quite sure Juncker used the second (Cadolzburg) Version of 1433 (the interesting one).

JDP
01-07-2018, 04:51 AM
Hi guys and happy new year. Lately I made a research an online research at the site of National Bibliotheque de France and there I found many interesting manuscripts which I hadnt seen anywhere else. For example:

http://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b90611063/f5.image.r=pierre%20philosophale


There is an English translation of the above text (which in the BNF manuscript is badly damaged and badly scanned) in Sloane 3632:

http://www.alchemywebsite.com/mss/mss299.htm

4. 'A plain methodicall Declaration of Geber's Three Medicines; in which is contained the true way and perfection of the Philosophers' Stone; translated out of the Latin.

I have never seen a sample of the handwriting of this manuscript, though, so I have no idea if the scribe who made it had a good legible hand. It would be a matter of taking a risk and ordering a scan of it. If it is legible, then great, but if not... we are screwed.

Note: the attribution of this treatise to "Eirenaeus Philalethes" seems erroneous. I have taken a look at the Latin original and it does not seem to be a work by this author. It does not have his style.

Hellin Hermetist
01-15-2018, 12:28 PM
I have never seen a sample of the handwriting of this manuscript, though, so I have no idea if the scribe who made it had a good legible hand. It would be a matter of taking a risk and ordering a scan of it. If it is legible, then great, but if not... we are screwed.


Ηοw can we do that? We have to pay a price to the library and ask them to sent us a scan of the manuscript we are interested in?

For now I study the first of the manuscript I posted. The one named "Apologie de la pierre philosophale, ou réfutation des objections produites contre le grand Oeuvre par un adepte"

Fortunately the scan is in good condition and almost readable with a little effort. Its an interesting reading so I will give a summary of the parts I have studied till now.

The author begins his work by saying that this book is the first of its kind, for its the first time that an adept and possessor of the Stone decided to give some answers to those who refuse the possibility of the Great Work and the existence of the Philosophers Stone. "Some adepts has given their books to the world", he says, "but only to give instructions to those who are our followers". With regard to the people who defended the Grand Work and wrote apologies before him, he says that no one of them was an adept and most of them made the matter worse, because they didnt know the science they were trying to defend.

After that he describes the structrure of the treatise. He says that it shall be divided to four books. In any one of them, he will firstly mentions the objections made by the people who rejects the Great Wοrk and regards it as something impossible, and after he will give his answers to those objections. The first book contains objections based at historical facts and their answers. The second book will be divided in two parts. The first one will contain an analysis of abstract ideas, the second one the objections based on experimental facts and their answers. The third book shall contain the objections based both at abstract ideas and in experimental facts and their answers. The fourth and last book shall give some general instructions to those who occupy their self with the Great Work without being initiates and it shall be an attempt of the author to make all those ppl who try to perform the Great Work using common distillations, sublimations and other chemical procedures, to learn some axioms of the Hermetic Philosophy and understand why all those chemical procedures are wholly incompatible with the Great Work.

Unfortunately, the link I gave above contains only the first two books. All the other sites I have found, also have only the two first books, which are contained in the above manuscript. Does any one know if there exists a manuscripts with the two last books or if the author never gave them to the public?

Later I shall a summary of the first two books. I still study them.

JDP
01-15-2018, 01:37 PM
Ηοw can we do that? We have to pay a price to the library and ask them to sent us a scan of the manuscript we are interested in?

Unfortunately, unless we can find someone who already has a copy of the whole manuscript or samples from it, there is no other way but to take a gamble and purchase a copy from the library.


For now I study the first of the manuscript I posted. The one named "Apologie de la pierre philosophale, ou réfutation des objections produites contre le grand Oeuvre par un adepte"

Fortunately the scan is in good condition and almost readable with a little effort. Its an interesting reading so I will give a summary of the parts I have studied till now.

Cool, let us know about the contents.


The author begins his work by saying that this book is the first of its kind, for its the first time that an adept and possessor of the Stone decided to give some answers to those who refuse the possibility of the Great Work and the existence of the Philosophers Stone. "Some adepts has given their books to the world", he says, "but only to give instructions to those who are our followers". With regard to the people who defended the Grand Work and wrote apologies before him, he says that no one of them was an adept and most of them made the matter worse, because they didnt know the science they were trying to defend.

Sounds suspiciously self-aggrandizing. Not a good sign.


After that he describes the structrure of the treatise. He says that it shall be divided to four books. In any one of them, he will firstly mentions the objections made by the people who rejects the Great Wοrk and regards it as something impossible, and after he will give his answers to those objections. The first book contains objections based at historical facts and their answers. The second book will be divided in two parts. The first one will contain an analysis of abstract ideas, the second one the objections based on experimental facts and their answers. The third book shall contain the objections based both at abstract ideas and in experimental facts and their answers.The fourth and last book shall give some general instructions to those who occupy their self with the Great Work without being initiates and it shall be an attempt of the author to make all those ppl who try to perform the Great Work using common distillations, sublimations and other chemical procedures, to learn some axioms of the Hermetic Philosophy and understand why all those chemical procedures are wholly incompatible with the Great Work.

Oh-oh... sounds more suspicious yet. Let me guess: another "one matter, one vessel, one furnace, one regimen/fire" boaster/deceiver/dreamer? Those who usually engage in tirades against the elemental laboratory procedures fundamental and necessary (like distillation) to alchemy are most often these types of either self-deceived or purposefully deceiving fellows.


Unfortunately, the link I gave above contains only the first two books. All the other sites I have found, also have only the two first books, which are contained in the above manuscript. Does any one know if there exists a manuscripts with the two last books or if the author never gave them to the public?

Either that or the author did not have time to finish it, or if he was a "one matter only" dreamer he might actually eventually have woken up and smelled the ("philosophical") coffee and finally realized the utter unlikeliness of such a claim, so he did not bother to continue his tirade against what he saw as "chemical procedures".

Hellin Hermetist
01-15-2018, 01:51 PM
Oh-oh... sounds more suspicious yet. Let me guess: another "one matter, one vessel, one furnace, one regimen/fire" boaster/deceiver/dreamer? Those who usually engage in tirades against the elemental laboratory procedures fundamental and necessary (like distillation) to alchemy are most often these types of either self-deceived or purposefully deceiving fellows.


No, its not like that. From what I have seen till now, at the experimental part (second book), he describes experiments and observations which he made at his younger years with the cadavres of recently dead people, when he was working as an assistant in an anatomy lab. Based on those observation, he tries to give an analytical description of the digestive process and the method by which is made the assimilation of food. Another interesting point is that the work must not be very old. Maybe 18th centuery. In one point the author rejects the spontaneous generation theories and mentions the experiments made by the help of the vacuum pump. He even mentions electricity at some point.

More to come...

JDP
01-15-2018, 02:53 PM
No, its not like that. From what I have seen till now, at the experimental part (second book), he describes experiments and observations which he made at his younger years with the cadavres of recently dead people, when he was working as an assistant in an anatomy lab. Based on those observation, he tries to give an analytical description of the digestive process and the method by which is made the assimilation of food. Another interesting point is that the work must not be very old. Maybe 18th centuery. In one point the author rejects the spontaneous generation theories and mentions the experiments made by the help of the vacuum pump. He even mentions electricity at some point.

More to come...

Yes, obviously an 18th century work.

Hellin Hermetist
01-16-2018, 09:18 PM
Ok. Time to give a summary of the first book. The one which refers to the historical facts.

- Egyptians was initiated to Hermetic science and knew perfectly how to perform the Great Work. The immense riches of Egypts were made that way. They left the practice of the Great Work in the hieroglyphics writings. The sages of Greece who travelled to Egypt to learn the Hermetic Science were not duped. The Hermetic Science is a mystical science, and its for that reason that we dont find any Academy for the propagation of that science in ancient Greece.
- The generation, the exploits and the tranformations of Gods at the ancient fables are references to different stages of the Great Work. The ancient fables has teached that which none of the Hermetic authors has ever teached Cause the Hermetic philosophers have never named their matter. The fables have done that. Hermetic philosophers have never described the real natura of their secret fire. The fables have done that. The fable of Atlas and Hercules is a perfect example and describes the practice of the Great Work perfectly.
- Any who says that you we need furnaces, retorts, distillation and sublimation apparatus to perform the Great Work, isnt an adept. By using retorts, distillation and sublimations we can only accomplish some particulars transmutations, which require great expenses and their result isnt guaranteed.
- In accordance with the above, all the experiments of the chemist, their procedures and their apparatus is wholly incompatible with the Hermetic science. Thats the reason that none of them have never discovered even the least trace of the Stone.
- Some of the olders Electors of Saxony had the Stone and had performed tranmutations. One day, a the year 1584, a certain man, named Sehiventzer, presented itself to August I, Elector of Saxony, and gave him a manuscript which contained the universal and some particulars. At the May of the year 1585, the Elector performed the transmutation with its own hands. This tincture was able to transform 1024 pieces of mercury into gold. The Elector continued to perform transmutations one more year, as the next year he died. His son and new Elector, Christain I, performed transmutations for five more years, when he also lost his life. The sons of that last Elector werent not interested in sciences and arts, so they lost the secret of the Stone and made the alchemist Sehiventtzer to retire and leave the royal court. By the help of transmutation the two Electors, August the I and Christian his son, acquired immense riches which let them to collect the finest collection of weapons and arms and the whole Europe, for which they are still famous, and also to erect two majestic royal castles.
- In accordance with the above, the story of Cosmopolite, as given by abbe Langloit, is false from the beginning to the end. Cosmopolite was a real adept, but the Elector of Saxony never prisoned or tortured him. By the time the Cosmopolite was in the territory of Saxon, elector was the son of Christian, who was indifferent for arts and sciences, so he lost the secret of the Stone and made the alchemist Sehiventzer to leave the royal castle. If he was interested in the Stone and transmutations, the manuscript which Sehivenzet had left to his grandfather was still in his possession. Also, Sehivenzter had left the castle but was still living in Saxony, in a near by area. So he could anytime call him back, and he need not torture Cosmopolite for something which he could acquire so easily.

Those are the most interesting parts. A summary of the second book (objections of sciences and experimeters and their answers) will come soon.

Kiorionis
01-16-2018, 09:34 PM
Thanks very much for this review, HH.

Weidenfeld
01-16-2018, 09:41 PM
Obviously there is meant the lesser known alchemist Sebald Schwärtzer (or Schwertzer) and not Sehiventzer which seem to be the mutilated version of Schwärtzer. About his alchemy, above all his particulars, was written the „Chrysopeia Schwaertzeriana“, however more than one hundred years later as a kind of compilation of Mss. supposedly originating from Schwärtzer‘s hand.

Hellin Hermetist
01-16-2018, 10:15 PM
Yes you are right. The manuscript was in bad condition so I may read the name wrongly. Maybe the author have written it wrongly too. Have you studied this complitation of particulars, supposedly written by Schwartzer?

Schmuldvich
01-16-2018, 10:54 PM
Nice summary, HH!

Looking forward to reading the second part!

Andro
01-17-2018, 05:16 AM
- Any who says that you we need furnaces, retorts, distillation and sublimation apparatus to perform the Great Work, isn't an adept. By using retorts, distillation and sublimations we can only accomplish some particulars transmutations, which require great expenses and their result isn't guaranteed.
- In accordance with the above, all the experiments of the chemist, their procedures and their apparatus is wholly incompatible with the Hermetic science. That's the reason that none of them have never discovered even the least trace of the Stone.

Naked truth? Or malicious, ill-intended deception?

Of all the glassware I used to have in the past, I only have one distillation setup left, which is mostly good for nothing, except if I occasionally have to distill some waters*.

*Those waters are used for rendering the "Earth" (-), the companion of "Heaven" (|).
____________________

Hellin Hermetist - Thanks a LOT for the summary! Much appreciated!

Weidenfeld
01-17-2018, 06:29 AM
Yes you are right. The manuscript was in bad condition so I may read the name wrongly. Maybe the author have written it wrongly too. Have you studied this complitation of particulars, supposedly written by Schwartzer?

It's many years ago when I had the chance to get a well done reprint of the "Chrysopoeia Schwärtzerina", but as often, I've forgotten what he has written about these things. Only one thing appears again and again in Schwärtzer's texts and that is he's speaking of a "key" (his key) without it nothing can be achieved. You see, it's always the same :-)

JDP
01-17-2018, 09:51 AM
Naked truth? Or malicious, ill-intended deception?

I would say most definitely the second one. Either that or this guy was just plain delusional. Anyone who denies that alchemy uses such things as furnaces and distillation apparatuses knows absolutely nothing about the subject or is a total liar.

JDP
01-17-2018, 09:55 AM
Obviously there is meant the lesser known alchemist Sebald Schwärtzer (or Schwertzer) and not Sehiventzer which seem to be the mutilated version of Schwärtzer. About his alchemy, above all his particulars, was written the „Chrysopeia Schwaertzeriana“, however more than one hundred years later as a kind of compilation of Mss. supposedly originating from Schwärtzer‘s hand.

Indeed, the author was likely drawing that information from Kunckel, who was one of the last people to still have access to those "Saxon manuscripts". Kunckel and the author of "Alchymia Denudata" in fact derived a lot of their "particular" processes from those manuscripts of Schwärtzer and the Elector of Saxony.

Hellin Hermetist
01-18-2018, 12:11 PM
Indeed, the author was likely drawing that information from Kunckel, who was one of the last people to still have access to those "Saxon manuscripts". Kunckel and the author of "Alchymia Denudata" in fact derived a lot of their "particular" processes from those manuscripts of Schwärtzer and the Elector of Saxony.

Indeed. His source was Kunckel and the author doesnt hide it.

Hellin Hermetist
01-18-2018, 01:54 PM
Ok. Here comes the summary of the second part. Objections of the experimenters and author's answers to them. As you can easily understand, thats one is the most interesting part of the book. This time the summary shall be a big one so be ready. I am sure that many will find it much interesting.

Objection I: We have made many experiments with every substance of the vegetable kingdom, but we werent able to find the least trace of the Stone. Same goes for the animal kingdom.

Author's Answer: Εvery step which Nature takes at the vegetable and animal kingdom, not only reveals to the careful observer the possibility of the existence of the Stone, but it offers him a perfect idea of our Stone and a certainty of its existence. A spore fell in the earth, rots, sprouts, and produces a plant thousand times bigger and absolutely dissimilar from the spore which gave birth to it. This plant gives rise to ten new spores and every one of them to a new plant. Same goes for the animal kingdom. But in order for the spore to be able to sprout and produce a plant, nature has to make it rot and destroy its premier form. This is a simple and well known experience, capable to reveal the traces of the Stone to every sane man.

All those who research our science, must admire the work of that gardener, who was able to keep in its full vigour, under the most severe winter, those plants and trees which under normal conditions wither at the end of autumn. We have seen him grow and preserve orange trees and other plants from the hotter countries in the cold climate of the Northern countries. We have also seen him grow plants and trees in the 1/10 of the time which Nature should have required to grow them in the same size without his help. Now that was a man who knew how to work in accordance with nature and to amend nature by nature, in opposition to all those chemists, who spend their times distilling and subliming every substance who fell at their hands. If he could push his experience and knowledge one step further, he should be able to make grow in a time of only few hours, plants which Nature, when have received the biggest possible help from the husbandman, cannot grow at a time shorter than three whole months.

Objection II: From the beginning of our research, we hadnt high expectations from the plant and animal kingdom. The kingdoms of Nature do not transmute one into the other. In accordance to that, man begets a man and a lion begets a lion. We search for an agent capable to transmute baser metals into gold and silver, so it must be of mineral or metallic origin. (Νote by me: Quite interestingly thats an argument made mainly by those who defend the existence of the Stone, but the author seems to reject it).

Authors Answer: The authors goes into an in depth analysis of the process of human digestion. He describes many experiments and observations he made at the cadavres of freshly dead people, using microscopes and other apparatus, when he worked as an assistant at a lab of anatomy. Those chapters make a really interesting reading. After that he makes some references to agriculture and mentions that we can use as fertilizers human or animal manure, mineral salts or the whole carcasses of dead animals and people. Through this analysis, he is trying to prove that the substance of one kingdom is really transmuted to the substance of the other, as we see that animals preserve their existence and grow by transmuting the substance of plants and plants in their order the substance of minerals. Αt last the author affirms that the Stone doesnt only transmute base metals into gold, but is an agent able to repair any disorder in all three kingdoms of Nature, so we arent allowed to conclude that its origin has to be mineral or metallic.

Objection III: All our experiments with the mineral and metallic substances doesnt reveal to us the least trace of the Stone.

Authors answer: Nature works in the mineral kingdom in the slowest, softest and least comprehensible manner, so no one but a fool would look for the Stone, which is the most active agent in all Nature, in that kingdom. Thats an answer to those who make experiments in the mineral kingdom and wholeheartedly reject the existence of the Stone. For those who believe in the existence of the Stone and make experiments with mineral substances in order to find it, we shall give a more ample answer and put them in the right track in some other point. (Note by me: Μention to the 4th book which is not contained in that manuscript and I havent able to find it anywhere else. Its of the highest interest, if someone can inform us, if the author finished his promised 3rd and 4th book and if we can find them in any European library).
In spite of the above, we dont deny that some of the most capable chemists of our era are able to make tinctures from metallic or mineral substances, which tinctures are able to amend and perfect the nature of the base metals. But they dont have to conclude from that fact that they will be able to produce the Stone by working on those mineral substances.

Objection ΙV: What the hermetic authors have mentioned about the generation of the metals has been proved that its not true. Example the treatise of Cosmopolite.

Authors Answer: Cosmopolite was an adept and possessor of the Stone. Same goes for Morienus Romanus. The Paracelsians are chemists and not Hermetic philosophers. The Rosicrucians were impostors for the most part. Cosmopolite hadnt travelled to the center of the earth to give his description of the genetation of the metals, but through the Philosophical work he performed with his own hands, he was able to recognize the ways and the methods which Nature follows, as he was able to produce in very short time thats which Nature need many years to produce without his help. So Cosmopolite, and all the other adepts as well, were able to see through their Work the method which Nature follow in order to give birth to the metals. That means that the chapters in which Cosmopolite describes the generation of the metals must not be rejected, as it is there where he reveals our whole Practice and even the nature of the matter which is essential for our Work.
The scientists of our era arent able to understand the nature of our Archeus, as they are unable to understand the nature of a central fire. If they had observed more carefully their experiments with electricity, which they perform mostly to amuse themselves, they me now be able to understand better the doctrines of Cosmpolite.

Some additional points: Αt the end of that second book, author affirms that of all those author who believed in the existence of the Stone and tried to defend it without being adepts, only one was able to do that thing with success, and this one was none other than Johann Joachim Becher. With the exception of my brothers adepts, the author says, you will find not a man which I respect as much as I respect Becher. He is the only man I know, who without being initiated, was able to understand a large part of our philosophy and present it to the world in a right manner. After that, the author advises the sages of all European scientific academies, to devote six months of their lives to learn the Latin language, if not for any other reason, to be able to study the works of Becher. Its there that you will find a sane philosophy. Its there that you will recognise your current ignorance. He writes for sages of his era.

A last interesting point is a reference to the author to two particular experiments. In the first one, the author says that if we expose an amount of common sand to the air, having firstly treated that sand in a particular manner, after some time pass we shall be able to extract a big quantity of silver and gold from that sand. That quantity shall be bigger than the one we can extract from the richest ore of gold and the expenses are only 1/10 in comparison with the expenses which require the extraction from the ore. If now, after you have extracted the precious metals, you expose again the same sand to the air, under the same circumstances, you shall be able to extract a new quantity of precious metal, and this can be continued ad infinitum. (Note by me: Ιf I understand it right the author says that this particular has been described at the works of Becher with greater details. It reminds of some particulars of Glauber, Tungel and other authors. Any more infos shall be quite welcome).

The second particular is again from Becher, and concerns a way to extract gold from river sand, in a quantity bigger than from the best ore of gold. The author says that Becher negotiated with the country of Holland to carry out this procedure in a larger scale, but the negotiations didnt go well at the end. Any more infos about this incident shall be welcome too.

That is a summary of the most important parts of the second book. Any infos about the promised third and fourth book of the same author are of the highest interest.

JDP
01-18-2018, 03:34 PM
Ok. Here comes the summary of the second part. Objections of the experimenters and author's answers to them. As you can easily understand, thats one is the most interesting part of the book. This time the summary shall be a big one so be ready. I am sure that many will find it much interesting.

Objection I: We have made many experiments with every substance of the vegetable kingdom, but we werent able to find the least trace of the Stone. Same goes for the animal kingdom.

Author's Answer: Εvery step which Nature takes at the vegetable and animal kingdom, not only reveals to the careful observer the possibility of the existence of the Stone, but it offers him a perfect idea of our Stone and a certainty of its existence. A spore fell in the earth, rots, sprouts, and produces a plant thousand times bigger and absolutely dissimilar from the spore which gave birth to it. This plant gives rise to ten new spores and every one of them to a new plant. Same goes for the animal kingdom. But in order for the spore to be able to sprout and produce a plant, nature has to make it rot and destroy its premier form. This is a simple and well known experience, capable to reveal the traces of the Stone to every sane man.

All those who research our science, must admire the work of that gardener, who was able to keep in its full vigour, under the most severe winter, those plants and trees which under normal conditions wither at the end of autumn. We have seen him grow and preserve orange trees and other plants from the hotter countries in the cold climate of the Northern countries. We have also seen him grow plants and trees in the 1/10 of the time which Nature should have required to grow them in the same size without his help. Now that was a man who knew how to work in accordance with nature and to amend nature by nature, in opposition to all those chemists, who spend their times distilling and subliming every substance who fell at their hands. If he could push his experience and knowledge one step further, he should be able to make grow in a time of only few hours, plants which Nature, when have received the biggest possible help from the husbandman, cannot grow at a time shorter than three whole months.

Objection II: From the beginning of our research, we hadnt high expectations from the plant and animal kingdom. The kingdoms of Nature do not transmute one into the other. In accordance to that, man begets a man and a lion begets a lion. We search for an agent capable to transmute baser metals into gold and silver, so it must be of mineral or metallic origin. (Νote by me: Quite interestingly thats an argument made mainly by those who defend the existence of the Stone, but the author seems to reject it).

Authors Answer: The authors goes into an in depth analysis of the process of human digestion. He describes many experiments and observations he made at the cadavres of freshly dead people, using microscopes and other apparatus, when he worked as an assistant at a lab of anatomy. Those chapters make a really interesting reading. After that he makes some references to agriculture and mentions that we can use as fertilizers human or animal manure, mineral salts or the whole carcasses of dead animals and people. Through this analysis, he is trying to prove that the substance of one kingdom is really transmuted to the substance of the other, as we see that animals preserve their existence and grow by transmuting the substance of plants and plants in their order the substance of minerals. Αt last the author affirms that the Stone doesnt only transmute base metals into gold, but is an agent able to repair any disorder in all three kingdoms of Nature, so we arent allowed to conclude that its origin has to be mineral or metallic.

Objection III: All our experiments with the mineral and metallic substances doesnt reveal to us the least trace of the Stone.

Authors answer: Nature works in the mineral kingdom in the slowest, softest and least comprehensible manner, so no one but a fool would look for the Stone, which is the most active agent in all Nature, in that kingdom. Thats an answer to those who make experiments in the mineral kingdom and wholeheartedly reject the existence of the Stone. For those who believe in the existence of the Stone and make experiments with mineral substances in order to find it, we shall give a more ample answer and put them in the right track in some other point. (Note by me: Μention to the 4th book which is not contained in that manuscript and I havent able to find it anywhere else. Its of the highest interest, if someone can inform us, if the author finished his promised 3rd and 4th book and if we can find them in any European library).
In spite of the above, we dont deny that some of the most capable chemists of our era are able to make tinctures from metallic or mineral substances, which tinctures are able to amend and perfect the nature of the base metals. But they dont have to conclude from that fact that they will be able to produce the Stone by working on those mineral substances.

Objection ΙV: What the hermetic authors have mentioned about the generation of the metals has been proved that its not true. Example the treatise of Cosmopolite.

Authors Answer: Cosmopolite was an adept and possessor of the Stone. Same goes for Morienus Romanus. The Paracelsians are chemists and not Hermetic philosophers. The Rosicrucians were impostors for the most part. Cosmopolite hadnt travelled to the center of the earth to give his description of the genetation of the metals, but through the Philosophical work he performed with his own hands, he was able to recognize the ways and the methods which Nature follows, as he was able to produce in very short time thats which Nature need many years to produce without his help. So Cosmopolite, and all the other adepts as well, were able to see through their Work the method which Nature follow in order to give birth to the metals. That means that the chapters in which Cosmopolite describes the generation of the metals must not be rejected, as it is there where he reveals our whole Practice and even the nature of the matter which is essential for our Work.
The scientists of our era arent able to understand the nature of our Archeus, as they are unable to understand the nature of a central fire. If they had observed more carefully their experiments with electricity, which they perform mostly to amuse themselves, they me now be able to understand better the doctrines of Cosmpolite.

Some additional points: Αt the end of that second book, author affirms that of all those author who believed in the existence of the Stone and tried to defend it without being adepts, only one was able to do that thing with success, and this one was none other than Johann Joachim Becher. With the exception of my brothers adepts, the author says, you will find not a man which I respect as much as I respect Becher. He is the only man I know, who without being initiated, was able to understand a large part of our philosophy and present it to the world in a right manner. After that, the author advises the sages of all European scientific academies, to devote six months of their lives to learn the Latin language, if not for any other reason, to be able to study the works of Becher. Its there that you will find a sane philosophy. Its there that you will recognise your current ignorance. He writes for sages of his era.

A last interesting point is a reference to the author to two particular experiments. In the first one, the author says that if we expose an amount of common sand to the air, having firstly treated that sand in a particular manner, after some time pass we shall be able to extract a big quantity of silver and gold from that sand. That quantity shall be bigger than the one we can extract from the richest ore of gold and the expenses are only 1/10 in comparison with the expenses which require the extraction from the ore. If now, after you have extracted the precious metals, you expose again the same sand to the air, under the same circumstances, you shall be able to extract a new quantity of precious metal, and this can be continued ad infinitum. (Note by me: Ιf I understand it right the author says that this particular has been described at the works of Becher with greater details. It reminds of some particulars of Glauber, Tungel and other authors. Any more infos shall be quite welcome).

The second particular is again from Becher, and concerns a way to extract gold from river sand, in a quantity bigger than from the best ore of gold. The author says that Becher negotiated with the country of Holland to carry out this procedure in a larger scale, but the negotiations didnt go well at the end. Any more infos about this incident shall be welcome too.

That is a summary of the most important parts of the second book. Any infos about the promised third and fourth book of the same author are of the highest interest.

In at least one case, the author is obviously referring to Becher's "Minera Arenaria" process (which, as Becher's pupil Stahl explains, he got the basics of from some works of Glauber.)

His ideas regarding alchemy and the Stone, properly, sound pretty mistaken, though. The comparisons with things like agriculture, animal digestion and such are old, not original, not very "revealing" either, rather naive and on top of that based on false analogies.

As for his recommendation of Becher: I can only condone it for some "chymical" processes and methods, certainly not for alchemy. Becher, as the author himself seems to be aware, was NOT an alchemist or an "adept". He never said he knew how to make the Stone and his works are not wholly devoted to that subject either. But he was indeed successful in some gold/silver-making "particulars".

Hellin Hermetist
01-18-2018, 11:14 PM
In at least one case, the author is obviously referring to Becher's "Minera Arenaria" process (which, as Becher's pupil Stahl explains, he got the basics of from some works of Glauber.)

Its most probably a reference to the process of "Minera Arenaria" which uses lead or lead glass to extract gold from sand. Have you ever tried it?


As for his recommendation of Becher: I can only condone it for some "chymical" processes and methods, certainly not for alchemy. Becher, as the author himself seems to be aware, was NOT an alchemist or an "adept". He never said he knew how to make the Stone and his works are not wholly devoted to that subject either. But he was indeed successful in some gold/silver-making "particulars".

As for Becher, the author says that he wasnt an adept and didnt have the Stone, but his analysis of physical phenomena and its arguments about transmutation and the existence of the Stone are the rightest of any other chemist/chymist. He even says that if someone study some of the things which clearly teaches Becher and combine them with the obsure language of Cosmopolite, he may find a secret key. I cant understand Latin so I have never studied Becher's works. Have you found any value in them?

JDP
01-19-2018, 06:22 AM
Its most probably a reference to the process of "Minera Arenaria" which uses lead or lead glass to extract gold from sand. Have you ever tried it?

Yes, but it is not an "extraction" (which implies "preexistence" of the gold in either the sand or any other of the substances involved in the process.) Becher was very well aware that some sands can contain gold, and he knew very well how to assay for gold & silver content in raw materials. "Gradatory glass" processes work whether the sand does or does not contain gold. Silver treated by such "gradatory glasses" always yields a "dark calx" when assayed. It has nothing to do with gold impurities supposedly preexisting in the sand or in any of the other substances involved in such processes.


As for Becher, the author says that he wasnt an adept and didnt have the Stone, but his analysis of physical phenomena and its arguments about transmutation and the existence of the Stone are the rightest of any other chemist/chymist. He even says that if someone study some of the things which clearly teaches Becher and combine them with the obsure language of Cosmopolite, he may find a secret key. I cant understand Latin so I have never studied Becher's works. Have you found any value in them?

I am familiar with several of Becher's books: Physica Subterranea, the Second Supplement to that work, the Minera Arenaria Perpetua, the Chymischer Glücks-Hafen ("Chymical Luck-Pot" or "Chymical Lottery"; it is a massive collection of chymical processes, mostly regarding transmutation, which Becher assembled from all manner of manuscripts and printed books that fell into his hands), the Rosetum Chymicum (basically another large collection of processes) and the Mineralisches ABC. As for value: yes, but purely "chymical", not alchemical. Becher did not know how to make the Stone, so he obviously cannot teach much regarding this subject (beyond what he learnt and copied from other authors), even if he had been willing to do so. For example, Becher seriously entertained the possibility of "animated mercuries" as a means of making the Stone, and he actually took seriously the "mercurialist" absurdities proposed by authors like Gaston "Claveus" DuClo (this 16th century French lawyer was well aware of the reality of transmutation through some "particulars", but when it comes to making the Stone all of what he proposes are mercury-amalgams sheer nonsense. So his books are interesting from a "chymical" point of view, but from an alchemical one they are worthless.) When Becher talks about the Stone he is just speculating. He didn't know how it was made. Some of the "particular" processes found in Becher's books do work, though; but as I have pointed out in other threads, Becher followed the same strategy used by most other transmutational chymists (like Glauber) and filled his books with loads of nonsense and false processes as well, which makes it very hard to sift through and get to the ones that are really interesting.