Ji-LY, 191:^ 



KNOWLEDGE. 



an evoluti()iiar\- process which works upwards from 

 lead to i;"l*i- They behaved, further, that man, 

 given the right methods, might assist in this process, 

 producing the final result more speedih'. This, the 

 transmutation of the "base" metals into gold, was 

 to be accomplished, they believed, by means of that 

 One Thing which is the origin of, and lies concealed 

 within, ail things — not, however, in its pure, 

 transcendent state, but concentrated in a suitable 

 material form. This was the Philosopher's Stone. 

 To achieve the nui<^iiiiiii 

 opus, as this transmu- 

 tation was called, was 

 to have gained the 

 One Thing, and to 

 have demonstrated the 

 validity of the alchem- 

 istic theory. 



In the a 1 c h e m - 

 istic theory of the 

 transmutation of the 

 metals by the aid of 

 that wonderful arcanum, 

 the Philosopher's Stone, 

 we have an attempted 

 physical application of 

 mystical theological doc- 

 trines concerning man's 

 regeneration. It is im- 

 possible to suppose that 

 so curious a theory as 

 this could have been 

 suggested to the alchem- 

 ists merel\- by the results 

 of their chemical experi- 

 ments. Once formulated, 

 however, many facts 

 (t'.^f., the apparent trans- 

 mutation of iron into 

 cop[)er wiien immersed 

 in a solution of blue 

 vitriol) were noted that 

 could be instanced in 

 support of this and their 

 other curious theories. 



Many cases of the 

 supposed transmutation 

 of " base " metals into 

 gold are recorded bv the 



alchemists. Perhaps the most interesting claim to 

 have affected the magnum opus is that of John 

 Baptist van Helmont (see Figure 288), a celebrated 

 seventeenth-century chemist and physician, who 

 invented the word gas, and was the first chemist to 

 investigate the gas now known as carbon dioxide. 

 He says that he converted quicksilver (eight ounces 

 on one occasion, nine ounces and three-quarters on 

 another) into gold, by the aid of small quantities of 

 a yellow, dense, crystalline powder of unknown 



composition, which had been given to him by a 

 stranger.' Undoubtedly, however, the alchemists 

 were frequently deceived b\- yellow alloys superficially 

 resembling gold ; which may have been the case 

 with van Helmont — lacking definite evidence, definite 

 statements are unwise. 



Modern science, which works from facts to theories, 

 not from theories to facts, stands in strong contrast 

 with the science of the ancients. Indeed, the 

 contrast is so great that nowadays many of the 

 theories of the alchemists 

 seem almost unintelli- 

 gible ; and confusion is 

 rendered the worse by 

 their use of diverse and 

 often conflicting symbols 

 and systems of nomen- 

 clature. But despite the 

 fantastic mould in which 

 their ideas were cast, as 

 we have indicated al- 

 ready, the alchemists do 

 appear to have intuitively 

 grasped certain funda- 

 mental facts, which lost 

 awhile, are being redis- 

 covered by the more 

 certain, if less rapid, 

 methods of modern 

 science. The investiga- 

 tions of radioactivity and 

 allied phenomena have 

 demonstrated that the 

 so-called elements are 

 not immutable, but are 

 one in essence and are 

 produced by an evolu- 

 tionary process : so the 

 alchemists, in a sense, 

 were right, and the 

 follow^ers of Dalton 

 wrong. As Sir William 

 Tilden remarks : " . . . 

 It appears that modern 

 ideas as to the genesis 

 of the elements, and 

 hence of all matter, 

 stand in strong contrast 

 with those which chiefl\' 

 ]Mevailed among ex|)erimental philosophers from 

 the time of Newton, and seem to reflect in an 

 altered form the speculative views of the ancients." + 

 Moreover, recent researches by Sir William 

 Ramsay indicate the possibility of producing true 

 transmutations of the elements, meaning thereby 

 the conversion of one element into another at will, 

 as distinguished from a spontaneous change of 

 one element into another. We shall now briefly 

 discuss these researches. 



Figure 2HiS. 



Portraits of J. H. van Helmont (1577-1644) and his son, F. M. 



van Helmont (1618-16991, from the Frontispiece to J. B. van 



Helmont's " Oiiatrike." 



■' See J. B. van Helmont : " Oriatrike" (trans, by J. C, 16621. pages 751, 752, and 807. 

 Sir William A. Tilden: "The Elements: Speculations as to their Nature and Origin" (1910), pages 108, 109. 



