The book and the crucible: chemists in search of recognition

Abstract

From the outset, alchemy had both practical and theoretical value. Alchemists sought the transmutation of metals and the application of their art to medicine; they also espoused a theory of matter, as well as a view of nature and of human knowledge. The status of alchemy and its position in the classification of the sciences was a matter of debate for a long time and was often linked to the assessment of the possibility and legitimacy of the transmutation. The discussion on the status of alchemy and on its relationship to philosophy started in the twelfth century, when alchemy entered the Latin West. Albertus Magnus endeavoured to incorporate alchemy into Aristotelian natural philosophy by maintaining that alchemy had a dual status. In his view, alchemy had a place among the sciences, because it was engaged in the knowledge of causes, notably the generation of metals, but it was also to be regarded as ars because it was practical, although distinct from the mechanical arts. By contrast, Thomas Aquinas (who was sceptical about transmutations) saw alchemy as a practical discipline, to be included among the mechanical arts. Roger Bacon promoted alchemy and maintained that it occupied a central position in experimental science (scientia experimentalis), which, in his view, combined theory and practice. Alchemy was also the subject of sixteenth-century Questiones dealing with the validity and legitimacy of the discipline. Benedetto Varchi’s Questione sull’alchimia (1544) distinguished three different kinds of alchemy: the true, the