10 Mr. G. F. Rodwell on the Theory of Phlogiston. 



with they wipe their hands. They put their fingers amongst 

 coals, into clay and ordure, not into gold rings. They are sooty 

 and black like smiths or colliers, and do not pride themselves 

 upon clean and beautiful faces"*. 



We still possess in the science of chemistry traces of the con- 

 nexion which once existed between alchemy and astrology ; for 

 the symbolic notation of chemistry undoubtedly originated from 

 the profuse system of symbolization employed in astrology. The 

 Chaldseans at a very early period designated the stars by signs ; 

 and the number gradually increased until astrological works 

 became one mass of symbolism. The sun, moon, and prin- 

 cipal planets were among the first to receive symbols; and 

 before the time of Geber the seven metals were designated by 

 the same names and symbols, and each star was supposed to di- 

 rectly influence the metal which bore its name. To a certain 

 extent this was appropriate ; for what could better represent the 

 sun than gold, or the moon than silver ? The nimble Mercury 

 would naturally fall to argentum vivum, while Saturn, with its 

 adverse influence ("malevolus et malitiosus"), would find a 

 fitting representative in lead, the most despised of metals. By 

 an enlargement of the idea the direct influence of the sun was 

 supposed by some to be necessary for the work of transmutation ; 

 hence we read of endeavours to effect " the fixation of Sol/' viz, 

 the occlusion of the qualities supposed to exist in sunbeams in 

 various base metals, which operation, once effected, thenceforth 

 aurified them for ever. Symbols having been once introduced 

 into chemistry, the practice spread ; a number of substances, 

 together with chemical operations, and even vessels, were so de- 

 signated, and long before the time of Dalton an extensive sym- 

 bolic system prevailed. In the Vienna library there is a Greek 

 manuscript, entitled "KXeoTrdjpa? %puo-07rotta," which abounds 

 with symbols, and which there is every reason to believe was 

 written before the time of Geber. There can be no doubt that 

 there were many writers on chemistry before the time of Geber, 

 who lived in the eighth century of our era. In an unpublished 

 MS. written by Antonio Neri, certainly before the year 1613, I 

 find mercury designated by no less than thirty-five different 

 names and twenty-two symbols, lead by sixteen names and four- 

 teen symbols, and sulphur by two names and sixteen symbols. 

 The following example (from Sir Kenelm Digby's ( Chemical 

 Secrets,' published in 1683) illustrates the manner of employing 

 symbols in the time of Becher : — " Take good mineral J ,mortifie 

 it with radicated vinegar; then seperate its quintessence with 

 pure S.V. ; with that quintessence dissolve £ duplicatum of $ , 

 that both become an oyl, which unite with a subtle calx of 0, 



* De Rerum Natura, lib. viii. 



