The Greatest Alchemist?

[Awani]

This is a Phoenix-thread from the old site. Polls are reset to 0!

Alchemy is hard work, so let's have some fun!

Enter the poll and let us decide who is the greastest alchemist!

I've limited the list to real alchemists!

Well for me it is hard to make this choice since they are all cool in their own way (and then of course there are many not listed here - it was hard to pick 10 names to start with so give me a break), but I shall vote for Paracelsus. Although I'd like to vote for Count de Saint Germain, but with pains in my heart I cut him from the list...

Well I'm a fan of Hermes myself, but Isaac Newton, I liked his style......


This "The Life of Apollonius" you posted over at abrahadabra is incredible, by the way.

Well I'm a fan of Hermes myself, but Isaac Newton, I liked his style...

Yeah I know... but one can only have 10 choices and there are so many, so I stuck with people who have real dicks!

There should be more female alchemists, but during the years the guys in the above list were active it was not much of an option. Even a man could get burned for putting his finger in anything esoteric. Women couldn't even have a black cat...

This "The Life of Apollonius" you posted over at abrahadabra is incredible, by the way.

I re-post it here so you can take part...

Apollonius of Tyana

lol...

People who had real dicks?! What do you mean?

Thanks for the repost....I feel so banished....

I only meant that Hermes, and such similar characters, aren't real flesh and blood people (per se)!

As I said before, behave and you can stay here as long as you like!

I am sure you can contribute much (and you already have)!

Looks like Newton is winning, by the way!

[off-topic removed]

Hmm, I'm inclined to vote for the Monarch of Arcana, Paracelsus

That is what I voted for too...

Looks like there is a tie between Newton and Paracelsus as of this moment...

Tis a shame that Tycho Brahe's more famed for his astronomical achievements than his alchemical. I'm a bit fond of the walrus-mustached, copper-nosed fellow. But, Sir Newton comes closest, I feel.

I was going to include him, but the poll is limited to 10 and he had to go along with many others...

I opted for the more famous alchemists to get more action in the poll!

Come on folks... we've had Newton and Paracelsus tied for weeks.

There should be more female alchemists, but during the years the guys in the above list were active it was not much of an option.

Um, I'm pretty sure Pernelle Flamel was a contempory of Nicholas Flamel. Can't remember where I read that but...

Hard to make a judgement about who is the greatest, its all too subjective. So I chose the one whose work has probably been the biggest influence on me from those presented. Boehme. Although Dee comes a close second on that score since the Monas Hieroglyphica was a big influence on my own book. I would have voted for Newton just to make sure Paracelsus didn't win (what kind of advert for alchemy is a fat celibate physician that died young? , but I'd have been lying because although I know Newton was an accomplished alchemist, I have not yet read his work on that score.

Um, I'm pretty sure Pernelle Flamel was a contempory of Nicholas Flamel. Can't remember where I read that but...

Yeah... that is true...

But this election is not to be taken too seriously (but I think you understood that anyway)!

Nice to see Boehme gettin' a vote!

Wow...no love for Fulcanelli. I voted for him because, though it's all in my head, I feel I connect with him on a personal level, he brought far more understanding of the Cabala then anyone previous. He just felt more alive and real then many alchemist before him. Whereas with some alchemist the most you can really gleam of personality would be on par with those writing a cook book. Paracelsus was a very close second, especially in attitude, and if Philalethes were on the list it would be a close call as well...I must say Newton is a bit of a shock, especially considering much of his writing on the topic has only recently come out and in very limited amounts. Although his work in physics is very noble, I don't feel he actually attained anything significant in the art...but this is just my opinion.

I voted Nicolas Flamel since his story is the most inspiring one and seems to have gone the whole nine yards.

Second for me would be Paracelsus since he wrote so extensively and really revitalised alchemy. I consider his work to be a magnum opus.

I don't know enough about some alchemists such as Robert Fludd and Fulcanelli to judge yet but I'm starting to read something about Fulcanelli and he seems very interesting.

For me personally the worst would be John Dee and his partner since they seem like simple dabblers in alchemy compared to the others on the list, since they tried to gain alchemy secrets through ceremonial magick instead of real work. Not sure about Cornelius Agrippa; Agrippa was maybe an alchemist but didn't seem to practice it much and didn't write any alchemical "magnum opus".

I think Isaac Newton and Roger Bacon were good alchemists but not in the same sense as Paracelsus, Nicolas Flamel or Fulcanelli. Newton and Bacon weren't "strict alchemists" but men of science and I doubt you can learn as much about the Art from them although they're inspiring.

Yes...I'm glad someone else sees through the John Dee mess. He's always rang through as more of a performer to me, something of a showman. But I do feel Edward Kelly actually completed the work after their separation. A good litmus test for me, although it doesn't always prove true, is to ask how often in the text do the philosophers name drop one another. Very often I believe it's them almost saying "this is the persons writing I learned this aspect of alchemy from."- but I could be wrong. In any event Roger Bacon is definitely name dropped often, and his Tract on the Tincture and oil of Antimony is a great gem.

It's a close call between Paracelsus, Flamel, and Fulcanelli.

I'm going to have to go with Paracelsus on this, since he was really one of the earlier pioneers and his work in medicine was indeed quite great.

Hmmm.... I went with Newton - mainly for the way he went about researching Alchemy. He put alot of emphesis on Universal affects (aka Astronomy/astrology) - which is why he was so well known as a scientist.

I have to say, I'm not a huge fan of Dee myself.

[Salazius]

I vote for Paracelsus, Hollandus and Ripley are also good alchemists.
My heart goes to Flamel and Fulcanelli too.

Salazius

[Dizardos]

Great alchemists do more than write good treatises. They influence entire nations. Based upon those requirements I find Aristotle, Comte de Saint Germain, Roger Bacon and Paracelsus excellent alchemists. Arthur Edward Waite, Morienus The Roman, D'Espagnet, Thomas Vaughan, Pernety, Sendivogius, Ripley, Deforest Bryant and Dowd are truly great as well. As a matter of fact a great number of alchemical works are excellent. What nowadays is often true for me is that I wonder how I could have missed the excellence and brilliance of treatises that I read before. Problems with understanding the words of the Philosophers is not an external problem. Its cause lies internal. We often only see what we want to see. Many lesser known alchemists are often just as good as the more popular ones. As a matter of fact it appears that the works of those who stand in the shadows surpasses the brilliance of the more famous ones. Everyone who can carry out the Great Work is an alchemist, but to harness its power does not mean that one understands the finer aspects of it (similar to the use of electricity). Those who are able to explain all that is in the universe are the greatest teachers and of all those massive libraries of alchemical works so very few can do that in a satisfactory manner....

There is no greatest alchemist in my opinion since knowledge is never completely gained by one's own doing and while they are all alchemists they each excel in so many different ways.

[solomon levi]

I guess I'll have to go with Paracelsus.

We must give mention to George Starkey, Rudolph Glauber
and Basil Valentine, all of whom I am very fond of.
I wish we had more info on the old alchemists.

[Awani]

There is no greatest alchemist in my opinion since knowledge is never completely gained by one's own doing and while they are all alchemists they each excel in so many different ways.

Agreed!

This is just mindless fun!

[Weidenfeld]

You should also take into account that there are severe doubts that (pseudo) Ramon Lull could be accounted for a real person rather than a popular name for unknown authors who simply intended to increase the acceptance of their pamphlets. It's similar with Hollandus or Flamel and there are doubts that they even had existed as single persons.

[Awani]

Kind of like Jesus...

[Darin Hamel]

Nicolas Flamel

[Seth-Ra]

I really liked Isaac Newton, and Paracelsus, but i have to go with Nicholas Flamel. Mostly cause from what ive read he had a very "peaceful" nature about him, always reading, not criticizing like the above mentioned (though i can understand their aggravation with the mainstream views, and in that respect, im more like them.) But i guess Flamel is more like how id want to be; having a loving wife (who helped him with the Work), a kind nature, uses the stone to open churches and hospitals to help people...ect...ect.
Though what ive read may be bias, but i voted to what i knew of.

[MarkostheGnostic]

I really liked Isaac Newton, and Paracelsus, but i have to go with Nicholas Flamel. Mostly cause from what ive read he had a very "peaceful" nature about him, always reading, not criticizing like the above mentioned (though i can understand their aggravation with the mainstream views, and in that respect, im more like them.) But i guess Flamel is more like how id want to be; having a loving wife (who helped him with the Work), a kind nature, uses the stone to open churches and hospitals to help people...ect...ect.
Though what ive read may be bias, but i voted to what i knew of.

I voted for Paracelsus, but I'm attracted to Flamel for the same reasons you stated. However, it was the thrust of The Work that I voted on, and Paracelsus was moving in an Iatrochemical way toward modern medicine. He rejected Celsus and put forth new paradigms (not that they resonated well with reality, necessarily).