Alchemical Illustrations and Materials Science

{"result":["[Summary from page 1 to page 27 out of a total of 220:\nPages 1:\nArchimedes 37\nNew Studies in the History and Philosophy\nof Science and Technology\nSven Dupr\u00e9 Editor\nLaboratories\nof Art\nAlchemy and Art Technology from\nAntiquity to the 18th Century\n\nPages 2:\nLaboratories of Art\n\nPages 3:\nArchimedes\nNEW STUDIES IN THE HISTORY AND PHILOSOPHY OF\nSCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY\nVOLUME 37\nEDITOR\nJED Z. BUCHWALD, Dreyfuss Professor of History, California Institute\nof Technology, Pasadena, CA, USA.\nASSOCIATE EDITORS FOR MATHEMATICS AND PHYSICAL SCIENCES\nJEREMY GRAY, The Faculty of Mathematics and Computing,\nThe Open University, Buckinghamshire, UK.\nTILMAN SAUER, California Institute of Technology\nASSOCIATE EDITORS FOR BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES\nSHARON KINGSLAND, Department of History of Science and Technology,\nJohns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA.\nMANFRED LAUBICHLER, Arizona State University\nADVISORY BOARD FOR MATHEMATICS, PHYSICAL SCIENCES AND TECHNOLOGY\nHENK BOS, University of Utrecht\nMORDECHAI FEINGOLD, California Institute of Technology\nALLAN D. FRANKLIN, University of Colorado at Boulder\nKOSTAS GAVROGLU, National Technical University of Athens\nPAUL HOYNINGEN-HUENE, Leibniz University in Hannover\nTREVOR LEVERE, University of Toronto\nJESPER LU\u0308TZEN, Copenhagen University\nWILLIAM NEWMAN, Indiana University, Bloomington\nLAWRENCE PRINCIPE, The Johns Hopkins University\nur Wissenschaftsgeschichte\nJU\u0308RGEN RENN, Max-Planck-Institut f\u20ac\nALEX ROLAND, Duke University\nALAN SHAPIRO, University of Minnesota\nNOEL SWERDLOW, California Institute of Technology\nADVISORY BOARD FOR BIOLOGY\nMICHAEL DIETRICH, Dartmouth College, USA\nMICHEL MORANGE, Centre Cavaille\u0301s, Ecole Normale Supe\u0301rieure, Paris\nHANS-JO\u0308RG RHEINBERGER, Max Planck Institute for the History of Science, Berlin\nNANCY SIRAISI, Hunter College of the City University of New York, USA\nArchimedes has three fundamental goals; to further the integration of the histories of science and technology\nwith one another: to investigate the technical, social and practical histories of specific developments in science\nand technology; and finally, where possible and desirable, to bring the histories of science and technology\ninto closer contact with the philosophy of science. To these ends, each volume will have its own theme and\ntitle and will be planned by one or more members of the Advisory Board in consultation with the editor.\nAlthough the volumes have specific themes, the series itself will not be limited to one or even to a few\nparticular areas. Its subjects include any of the sciences, ranging from biology through physics, all aspects of\ntechnology, broadly construed, as well as historically-engaged philosophy of science or technology. Taken as\na whole, Archimedes will be of interest to historians, philosophers, and scientists, as well as to those in\nbusiness and industry who seek to understand how science and industry have come to be so strongly linked.\nFor further volumes:\nhttp://www.springer.com/series/5644\n\nPages 4:\nSven Dupre\u0301\nEditor\nLaboratories of Art\nAlchemy and Art Technology from\nAntiquity to the 18th Century\n\nPages 5:\nEditor\nSven Dupre\u0301\nFreie Universita\u0308t\nMax Planck Institute for the History of Science\nBerlin, Germany\nISSN 1385-0180\nISSN 2215-0064 (electronic)\nISBN 978-3-319-05064-5\nISBN 978-3-319-05065-2 (eBook)\nDOI 10.1007/978-3-319-05065-2\nSpringer Cham Heidelberg New York Dordrecht London\nLibrary of Congress Control Number: 2014937822\n\u00a9 Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014\nThis work is subject to copyright. All rights are reserved by the Publisher, whether the whole or part\nof the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations,\nrecitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or\ninformation storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar\nmethodology now known or hereafter developed. Exempted from this legal reservation are brief excerpts\nin connection with reviews or scholarly analysis or material supplied specifically for the purpose of being\nentered and executed on a computer system, for exclusive use by the purchaser of the work. Duplication\nof this publication or parts thereof is permitted only under the provisions of the Copyright Law of the\nPublisher\u2019s location, in its current version, and permission for use must always be obtained from\nSpringer. Permissions for use may be obtained through RightsLink at the Copyright Clearance Center.\nViolations are liable to prosecution under the respective Copyright Law.\nThe use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this\npublication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt\nfrom the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.\nWhile the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of\npublication, neither the authors nor the editors nor the publisher can accept any legal responsibility for\nany errors or omissions that may be made. The publisher makes no warranty, express or implied, with\nrespect to the material contained herein.\nPrinted on acid-free paper\nSpringer is part of Springer Science+Business Media (www.springer.com)\n\nPages 6:\nContents\nIntroduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vii\nThe Alchemical Art of Dyeing: The Fourfold Division of Alchemy\nand the Enochian Tradition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\nMatteo Martelli\n1\nTransmission of Alchemical and Artistic Knowledge in German\nMediaeval and Premodern Recipe Books . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\nSylvie Neven\n23\nArtisanal Processes and Epistemological Debate in the Works of\nLeonardo Da Vinci and Vannoccio Biringuccio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\nAndrea Bernardoni\n53\nArtificial Interventions in the Natural Form of Things: Shared\nMetallogenetical Concepts of Goldsmiths and Alchemists . . . . . . . . . . . .\nHenrike Haug\n79\nThe Laboratories of Art and Alchemy at the Uffizi Gallery\nin Renaissance Florence: Some Material Aspects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105\nFanny Kieffer\nMaterial and Temporal Powers at the Casino di San Marco\n(1574\u20131621) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129\nMarco Beretta\nGoldsmiths and Chymists: The Activity of Artisans Within\nAlchemical Circles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 157\nLawrence M. Principe\nIgne refutata: Thermal Analysis in the Laboratory Practices\nof John Dwight and Ehrenfried Walther von Tschirnhaus . . . . . . . . . . . 181\nMorgan Wesley\nv\n\nPages 7:\nThiS is a FM Blank Page\n\nPages 8:\nIntroduction\nThe Antwerp painter Adriaen van Utrecht (1599\u20131652) arranged Chinese porcelain, a goblet made of rock crystal and cristallo glasses a\u0300 la fac\u0327on de Venise, next to\na magnificent display of gold- and silversmiths\u2019 works on a table in the foreground\nof his 1636 \u201cAllegory of Fire\u201d (Fig. 1).1 Many of these objects have been identified\nas originating in Antwerp, and it is likely that Van Utrecht\u2019s painting celebrates\nthe manufacture and trade of luxury goods for which Antwerp gained fame in the\nearly seventeenth century. Van Utrecht\u2019s objects have another point in common:\none way or the other they are produced through the agency of fire. Van Utrecht\u2019s\npainting celebrates Antwerp\u2019s economic power and the productive ingenuity of its\ncraftsmen and artists as much as it praises the transformative force of fire turning\nrelatively cheap and humble materials into highly valued objects of art. These\nobjects were all products of the arts of fire, which according to Vannoccio\nBiringuccio (1480\u2013c.1539) included alchemy, and excluded \u201cfalse alchemy\u201d\nconcerned with pretentious transmutation.2\nIn the background of Van Utrecht\u2019s painting, a window opens on to a space in\nwhich a man stands working at a stove with an open fire. Stirring a cauldron, the\nman is shown in the material company of bellows, an anvil, a melting and a\ndistilling furnace, and other equipment related to the worlds of assaying and\nmetallurgy. Van Utrecht\u2019s background refers to the spaces in which the objects in\nthe foreground were produced. Were these spaces laboratories or artisanal workshops? Were they home to gold- and silversmiths, glassmakers or producers of\nporcelain? The difference between workshops and laboratories during this period is\nambiguous, not only in Van Utrecht\u2019s depiction, and the line between the two\nspaces is as difficult to draw as that between the arts of fire and alchemy. This book\nis concerned with the interconnections and differentiations between foreground and\n1\nMy discussion of Van Utrecht\u2019s painting in this and the next paragraph is based on Go\u0308ttler,\n\u201cThe Alchemist, the Painter.\u201d\n2\nFor Biringuccio\u2019s attitude towards alchemy, see Newman, Promethean Ambitions, 128\u201332.\nvii\n\nPages 9:\nviii\nIntroduction\nFig. 1 Adriaen van Utrecht, Allegory of Fire, 1636 (Courtesy of Royal Museums of Fine Arts of\nBelgium, Brussels (Photo: J. Geleyns))\nbackground in Van Utrecht\u2019s painting, between artisanal workshops and alchemical\nlaboratories, between the material arts and alchemy.\nVan Utrecht is one of the heirs of Van Eyck (c.1390\u20131441). Following Giorgio\nVasari (1511\u20131574), Karel van Mander (1548\u20131606) portrayed Van Eyck as an\nalchemist and likened his invention of oil paint to alchemical experimentation.3\nAccording to Van Mander, Van Eyck experimented with varnishes and binding agents,\n\u201cand found after much investigation that pigments mixed with such oils became\nmalleable and dried hard, and having dried became impermeable, and that the oil\nmade colours livelier, and that they themselves became lustrous without varnishing.\u201d4\nIt turns out that Van Eyck did not invent oil paint, and neither was he an alchemist.\nNevertheless he would never have been described in those terms had not artists\nand alchemists both been considered agents of material transformation. Van\nMander\u2019s description of Van Eyck\u2019s experimentation also reminds us that painters\nand alchemists shared materials, and that painters used artificially created pigments,\n\u201cmade by alchemy\u201d according to Cennino Cennini (c.1370\u2013c.1440). However, this\n3\n4\nDavis, \u201cRenaissance Inventions.\u201d\nMander, Het schilder-boeck, 199v. Translation in Melion, Shaping the Netherlandish Canon, 79.\n\nPages 10:\nIntroduction\nix\nbook is not concerned with travelling materials and shared material culture.\nShifting the focus from painting to the decorative arts, this book scrutinizes\nepistemic exchanges between producers of the arts of fire and alchemists.\nLaboratories and Workshops\nWhat can the evolution of the laboratory, and its shifting relation to the artisanal\nworkshop, tell us about epistemic exchanges between the arts and alchemy? In the\nfifteenth and sixteenth centuries, the term laboratorium uniquely referred to workplaces in which \u201cchemical\u201d operations were performed: smelting, combustion,\ndistillation, dissolution, and precipitation. Matteo Martelli has convincingly\nshown that no such term was available in Antiquity.5 The Papyri, containing recipes\nfor the production of a range of luxury goods, and the earliest texts on alchemy,\nused the terminology of specific crafts (dyeing, metalworking and glassmaking).\nWhile artisans labored in workshops with tools and ingredients specific to their\ncraft, alchemists seemed to have made use of a more complex set of materials,\ninstruments and techniques belonging to various crafts. However, Martelli also\nshows that even the earliest alchemists developed specialized equipment. This leads\nto the assumption that as early as the first century AD, alchemists in Hellenistic\nEgypt began to differentiate themselves from artisans. However, there was no\nworkplace specifically designed for alchemists to engage in their activities. It is\nlikely they accessed the material equipment in artisanal workshops.\nBy the early modern period, the alchemist had acquired a specific place of work.\nAccording to Pamela Smith, by the mid-sixteenth century, these laboratories were\nreferred to formally as laboratorium and officina.6 The ubiquity of furnaces and the\nuse of fire demanded a specific workplace, whereas experimental philosophy still\nlacked specific places of experimentation in the seventeenth century. Laboratories\nwere associated with secretive practices. When in the early seventeenth century\nAndreas Libavius described the ideal workplace of the chemist, he emphasized how\nit differed from the dark, smelly, secretive laboratory that was noticeably lacking in\ndecorum:\nWe do not want the chemist to neglect the exercises of piety or exempt himself from other\nduties of an upright life, simply pining away amidst his dark furnaces [. . .]. Thus we are not\ngoing to devise from him just a chymeion or laboratory to use as a private study and\nhideaway in order that his practice will be more distinguished than anyone else\u2019s; but\nrather, what we shall provide for him is a dwelling suitable for decorous participation in\nsociety and living the life of a free man [. . .].7\n5\nMartelli, \u201cGreek Alchemists at Work.\u201d\nSmith, \u201cLaboratories,\u201d 299.\n7\nLibavius, \u201cCommentariorum alchymiae.\u201d Quoted and translated in Hannaway, \u201cLaboratory\nDesign,\u201d 599. However, for corrections of Hannaway\u2019s view, see Shackelford, \u201cTycho Brahe,\nLaboratory Design,\u201d and Newman, \u201cChemical House of Libavius.\u201d\n6\n\nPages 11:\nx\nIntroduction\nWhile much has been made of this association with secrecy to dissociate experimental philosophy from the alchemist\u2019s laboratory, Ursula Klein has revealed a\ncontinuing laboratory tradition reaching into the eighteenth century.8 According to\nKlein, in contrast to experimental philosophy, work in the laboratory was characterized by continuous experimentation with material substances. The material\nculture supporting this laboratory work remained largely unchanged. The exception\nis the material equipment for transmutational alchemy and the making of the\nPhilosophers\u2019 Stone, which generally disappeared from laboratories together with\ntransmutational alchemy itself in the eighteenth century. Laboratories were places\nin which the study of nature and technical innovation went hand in hand.\nAs already mentioned, the term \u201claboratory\u201d was not only used to refer to the\nworkplace of the alchemist. All workplaces in which \u201cchemical\u201d operations were\nperformed were known as laboratories, and as such, artisanal workshops with\nfurnaces and fire in which \u201cchemical\u201d operations were performed were also\nknown as laboratories. For example, the places in which sixteenth-century producers of fireworks developed their materials were called laboratories.9 In terms of\nmaterial culture the laboratorium, for example, one designed and equipped by\nCount Wolfgang II von Hohenlohe-Weidersheim (1546\u20131610) in the early seventeenth century, was remarkably similar to the workplaces of apothecaries, metalworkers and glassmakers.10\nBefore the emergence of mercantilist states, Renaissance courts were the most\nimportant agents in establishing laboratories. The laboratories of Rudolf II (1552\u2013\n1612) in Prague and Landgrave Moritz von Hessen-Kassel (1572\u20131632) were\nthought to bring material and intellectual rewards.11 Moritz even founded a chair\nof chymiatria at the University of Marburg in 1609.12 The teaching of Johannes\nHartmann (1561\u20131631), who was appointed to the chair, included work in the\nlaboratory, likewise established at the university. Courts also developed workplaces\nin which the work of artisans could be tested. Most famously, in the 1670s, Johann\nJoachim Becher (1635\u20131682) proposed the establishment of a Kunst- und\nWerckhaus at the court in Vienna.13 It would have included several different sorts\nof manufactures: porcelain making, silk and wool weaving, the production of\nmedicines and glassmaking. Chemical laboratories were to form the core of the\n8\nKlein, \u201cLaboratory Challenge,\u201d and \u201cApothecary Shops.\u201d For the dissociation of experimental\nphilosophy from the alchemical laboratory, see Shapin, \u201cHouse of Experiment.\u201d\n9\nWerrett, Fireworks, 29\u201330.\n10\nWeyer, Graf Wolfgang II. von Hohenlohe. For material culture of laboratories, see also Osten,\nAlchemistenlaboratorium Oberstockstall; Soukup & Mayer, Alchemistisches Gold, and the shorter\nreport, Soukop, Osten & Mayer, \u201cAlembics, Cucurbits, Phials,\u201d 25; Howard, La Bibliothe\u0300que et le\nlaboratoire; Pereira, \u201cUtili segreti\u201d; Rouaze, \u201cAtelier de distillation\u201d; and Joly, \u201cLaboratoire\nalchimique.\u201d\n11\nAmong the numerous publications on court alchemy, see two foundational studies: Moran,\nThe Alchemical World; and Evans, Rudolf II.\n12\nGanzenmu\u0308ller, \u201cDas chemische Laboratorium.\u201d\n13\nSmith, Business of Alchemy, 190\u20138.\n\nPages 12:\nIntroduction\nxi\nhouse. These laboratories were intended to specialize in salts and acids used in the\nproduction of mineral dyes. Becher envisioned that the manufacture and export of\nthese dyes would finance the other operations of the Kunst- und Werckhaus. He also\nenvisaged the house attracting artisans from various crafts and that it would\nfunction as a deposit of recipes and descriptions of techniques. Trained artisans\nwould then be sent out to distribute new processes, new manufactures and inventions. Becher used alchemy to intrigue his patron, who was always interested in the\nwealth promised by metallic transmutation, and to link the worlds of the court and\ncommerce.\nSuch court projects often took inspiration from the two earliest examples of\nspaces bringing together alchemy and the decorative arts at the Medici court in\nFlorence. Two essays in this volume deal with these Florentine workplaces: Fanny\nKieffer discusses the Uffizi, and Marco Beretta the Casino di San Marco. Founded\nin 1586 by Francesco I de\u2019 Medici (1541\u20131587), and developed by his successor,\nFerdinando I (1549\u20131609), the Uffizi housed the fonderia, a workspace for the arts\nof fire. Here medicines were prepared and metals fused. The fonderia was simultaneously a pharmacy, an alchemical laboratory, a smithy, a goldsmith\u2019s workshop,\nand a confectionary. The activities performed in the Uffizi included everything from\npreparing jams and sugar sculptures to the production of glass and fireworks (and\nless peaceful applications of saltpeter). Francesco I also established the Casino di\nSan Marco. It included an alchemical laboratory, a furnace for producing porcelain,\nand a glass workshop in which, under the direction of Niccolo Sisti, cristallo\n(so named because it was as clear as rock crystal) was made, as well as all sorts\nof colored glass in imitation of precious stones. Other important activities in the\nCasino were the fusion of rock crystal, the counterfeiting of precious stones, the\nproduction of fireworks, and the preparation of pharmaceutical remedies. Similar\nactivities were developed in the Uffizi and the Casino, and recipes and personnel\ntravelled between the two places. The only exception was Medici porcelain, which\nwas exclusively produced in the workshops of the Casino.\nIn sum, Renaissance courts established spaces where artisanal workshops and\nlaboratories were brought together facilitating the circulation of materials, people\nand knowledge between the worlds of craft (today\u2019s decorative arts) and alchemy.\nArt Technologies and Knowledge of Material Transformation\nLaboratories were not only the workplaces of transmutational alchemists. The Uffizi\nand the Casino had little in common with the workplaces of alleged goldmakers\ndestined to fail and bring their families to financial ruin, as famously depicted by\nPieter Brueghel the Elder (c.1525\u20131569) (Fig. 2). Just as the spaces known as\nlaboratories encompassed the workplaces of artisans laboring at furnaces and\n\nPages 13:\nxii\nIntroduction\nFig. 2 Pieter Brueghel the Elder, The Alchemist\u2019s Family: Al-gemist, 1558 (Courtesy of the\nKupferstichkabinett, Staatliche Museen zu Berlin)\nusing materials and chemical procedures to make both everyday items and objects\nof the visual and decorative arts, the activity known as alchemy encompassed more\nthan attempts to make gold.14 Transmutational alchemy was about the transmutation of all base metals into more noble ones, but chrysopoeia was only one\naspect of alchemy. Alchemy also touched on medicine and chemical manufacture.\nIt was about the chemical production of things\u2014medicines, porcelain, dyes, and\nother products as well as the precious metals\u2014and about the knowledge of how to\nproduce them. In this sense, \u201cart technologies\u201d\u2014materials and techniques to make\nart and knowledge of these materials and techniques\u2014overlapped with alchemy.\nAlchemy has deep roots in writings on material transformation from Antiquity.\nThe productive knowledge associated with material transformation was written\ndown in recipe books. The Leiden and Stockholm Papyri date to the third century\nAD. They contain recipes for the making of gold and silver, for the imitation of\nprecious stones, and for textile dyes. Whether a recipe is about coloring silver to\nmake it look like gold or the making of an imitation ruby or another artificial\nprecious stone, all of the recipes in the Papyri are, indeed, about material transformation and color change as related to the manufacture of luxury goods. As\nMatteo Martelli shows in this volume, relatively early on a historical process of\nselection, appropriation and differentiation resulted in a more limited definition of\n14\nFor the scope of early modern alchemy and the notion of \u2018chymistry\u2019, see Principe, Secrets of\nAlchemy; and Newman & Principe, \u201cAlchemy vs. Chemistry.\u201d\n\nPages 14:\nIntroduction\nxiii\nalchemy primarily focused on the making of gold and silver. Already around\n300 AD, a distinction was introduced between a limited definition of alchemy as\nmetallic transmutation and a more encompassing definition including productive\nknowledge and various artisanal technologies.\nTransmitted to Europe, and translated into Latin and the vernaculars, several of\nthe recipes in the Papyri are still found in collections of recipes in the fifteenth and\nsixteenth centuries. More importantly, as Martelli remarks in his essay, the scope of\na recipe collection such as the Mappae clavicula, compiled between the ninth and\nthe twelfth centuries, is as encompassing as that of the Papyri despite the earlier\nattempts to limit alchemy to metallic transmutation only. It should not come as a\nsurprise then that Sylvie Neven finds it difficult to demarcate between alchemical\nand art technological recipes in late medieval collections of recipes. Her contribution to this volume shows that alchemical and art technological recipes shared a\nconcern with the same materials and artisanal processes. The focus on chromatic\ntransformation already found in the Papyri continues in fifteenth-century recipes.\nAlthough related to laboratory practices, Neven emphasizes that these recipe\ncollections are the products of scribal compilation and copying processes. Words\nand works are equally important elements of alchemical practices.15 Next to\nlaboratories, medieval religious institutions were also important sites of alchemical\nand art technological practice. However, as Neven points out, this does not exclude\nthat some scribes, such as the Benedictine monk Wolfgang Seidel (1491\u20131562),\ntried out recipes.\nThe scope of alchemy was from its very beginnings contested, and remained so\nthroughout its long history. Especially its boundaries with art technology were fluid.\nThroughout the Middle Ages and the Renaissance, the distinction between alchemy\nas strictly goldmaking and a more encompassing definition overlapping with art\ntechnology was crucial to the polemics of artists and alchemists and the rivalry\nbetween alchemy and the arts.16 Given the contested nature of the field of inquiry,\nit follows that the identity of the alchemist was equally contested and complex. In\nthe early modern period the alchemist was often portrayed as a fraud. The portrayals\nof laboratory scenes building on Brueghel became a genre of its own in the\nNetherlands.17 In these scenes, the alchemist is a goldmaker searching in vain for\nthe Philosophers\u2019 Stone and riches. As Tara Nummedal has convincingly shown,\nthe portrayal of the alchemist as a fraud also created the opportunity for other\nalchemists to fashion themselves in the role of experts, offering their services to\ncourts and other patrons to help them unmask fraudulent alchemists.18 Alchemical\nexpertise was based on a broader knowledge of matter and materials.\n15\nFor reading and writing as alchemical practices, see Nummedal, \u201cWords and Works,\u201d and the\nliterature quoted there.\n16\nNewman, Promethean Ambitions, 115\u201363.\n17\nPrincipe & DeWitt, Transmutations, 11\u201327.\n18\nFor experts and entrepreneurial alchemy, see Nummedal, Alchemy and Authority, 40\u20135.\n\nPages 15:\nxiv\nIntroduction\nIt is in this context of alchemical expertise that we should consider the artisans\nwho adopted the language of alchemy in the early modern period to attract the\nattention of patrons. One example can be seen in the description of Black Berthold,\nthe legendary discoverer of gunpowder in Europe, in the late fifteenth-century\nmanuscript Feuerwerckbuch. Depicted in the company of a furnace and alembics,\nBerthold\u2019s creation of ordnance is identified with alchemy. Black Berthold, the\nFeuerwerckbuch reads,\nworked with the great alchemy like those masters who are engaged with precious and\nvaluable things, with silver and gold, and with similar metals. These masters can separate\nsilver and gold from other precious jewelry, and from other valuable colors which they can\nproduce. Now this master Berthold wanted to induce a golden coloration. For this he used\nsalpetre, sulphur, lead and oil. Then he put these ingredients in a container made of copper,\nwhich he sealed completely, exactly as it should be done, but when he put it on fire and the\ncontainer became hot, it burst into many pieces.19\nThe Feuerwerckbuch witnesses material production based on practical chemistry in\nterms borrowed from alchemical transmutation, or more precisely, the making of\ngold. The analogy was not always with chrysopoeia as such. Vasari\u2019s already\nmentioned fashioning of Van Eyck as an alchemist shows that the image of alchemy\nas a field of expert inquiry on materials and material transformation was considered\nsufficiently positive to identify with. However, we should not forget that Vasari\u2019s\nidentification of Van Eyck as an alchemist served the purpose of downplaying\nNetherlandish art as techne, only a first step in a narrative of art historical progress\nculminating in Vasari\u2019s beloved Florentine art.\nThe epistemic value of techne was shifting at the time of Vasari. Artisans came\nto be considered experts of nature likening the artisanal processes of material\ntransformation undertaken in their workshops to those of nature.20 As Andrea\nBernardoni shows in this volume, Biringuccio\u2019s Pirotechnia is part of this larger\nprocess of shifting epistemic value of artisanal processes. Rejecting transmutational\nalchemy as \u201cfalse\u201d and the alchemists who practiced it as fraudulent, Biringuccio\ncarved out space for true alchemy as one of the arts of fire. Artisanal workshops,\nsuch as Andrea Verrocchio\u2019s (c.1435\u20131488) in which Leonardo da Vinci (1452\u2013\n1519) apprenticed or Leonardo\u2019s own workplace, shared a material culture with\nalchemical laboratories. As we have already pointed out, artisans used similar\nequipment and performed \u201cchemical\u201d operations. However, Bernardoni argues,\nBiringuccio made the claim that these artisans were the true experts on matter,\nmaterials and material transformation and that artisanal \u201cchemical\u201d operations were\nthe key to natural knowledge.\nOne of the readers of Biringuccio\u2019s Pirotechnia was Johannes Mathesius (1504\u2013\n1565), a Lutheran preacher in St. Joachimsthal, the center of an important mining\ndistrict. In her contribution to this volume, Henrike Haug analyzes Mathesius\u2019s\n19\nHassenstein, Das Feuerwerckbuch, 45\u20136. For translation and discussion, see Werrett,\nFireworks, 28.\n20\nSmith, Body of the Artisan. esp. 95\u2013127.\n\nPages 16:\nIntroduction\nxv\nsermons to reveal conceptions of the origin and formation of ores for which\nMathesius drew equally on natural philosophy and alchemy and on the artisanal\nknowledge of the local miners and goldsmiths. Following one of the goldsmiths\u2019\nmost prized objects, a so-called Handstein, into the Kunstkammer, Haug shows that\nthis knowledge also reached elite collectors. They valued Handsteine for the\nmetallogenetic knowledge they embodied, thereby endorsing the shifting epistemic\nstatus of the arts.\nEpistemic Changes Between Artisans and Alchemists\nBiringuccio and Mathesius\u2019s St. Joachimsthal are examples of persons and places\nof exchange between scholarly cultures (in which learning is based on reading and\nwriting) and artisanal cultures (in which learning is based on doing).21 The laboratories created in Medici Florence, discussed in the chapters by Kieffer and\nBeretta, were also early examples of such places of exchange, followed by many\nother European courts. These workplaces facilitated the exchange of materials\nbetween alchemy and the arts, and the attraction of the courts also made artisans\nadopt alchemical language to elevate the status of their craft. However, above all,\nthese court laboratories made possible, well beyond a shared material culture, the\nexchange of people and knowledge between the arts and alchemy. Although there is\na long tradition of experimentation in alchemy and the boundaries between alchemy\nand art technologies were fluid from the very beginnings of alchemy in Antiquity, in\nthe sixteenth and seventeenth centuries artisans became more deeply involved in\nalchemical pursuits, and some crafts relied on chemical expertise offered by\nscholars trained as alchemists.22 Above all, texts and books, products and symbols\nof scholarly culture, played an increasingly important role in laboratories and\nworkshops. In these workplaces, a sort of hybrid figure was at work, with one\nfoot in artisanal culture and another in scholarly culture and impossible to categorize in mutually exclusive categories of the scholar and the craftsman.23 Certain\ntypes of crafts\u2014glassmaking, gold- and silversmithing, and porcelain production\u2014\nseem to have been particularly prone to exchanges between artisanal and scholarly\nalchemical cultures. By the seventeenth century, the expertise of some glassmakers,\nsilver- and goldsmiths and producers of porcelain was just as based in the worlds of\nalchemical and bookish learning as it was grounded in hands-on work in the\nlaboratory.24 Lawrence Principe and Morgan Wesley discuss two examples of\nsuch arts: silversmithing and porcelain production, respectively.\n21\nFor \u2018trading zones\u2019 between artisanal and scholarly cultures, see Long, Artisan/Practitioners.\nKlein, \u201cChemical Experts.\u201d\n23\nOn hybrid experts, see Klein, \u201cArtisanal-Scientific Experts,\u201d and \u201cDepersonalizing the Arcanum.\u201d\n24\nFor glassmaking (not discussed here), see Beretta, Alchemy of Glass; and Dupre\u0301, \u201cValue of\nGlass.\u201d\n22\n\nPages 17:\nxvi\nIntroduction\nSilver- and goldsmiths seem obvious candidates when we think of careers that\ncross artisan and alchemist. Silversmiths, goldsmiths and alchemists worked on the\nsame materials (silver and gold), and silver- and goldsmiths\u2019 expertise was called\nfor to assay the purported gold and silver transmuted by alchemists. Silver- and\ngoldsmiths could also become involved themselves in transmutational endeavours.\nIn his contribution to this book, Principe focuses on the brothers Anthoni and\nAndries Grill (1604\u20131655) as examples of such hybrid figures. They ran successful\nsilversmithing businesses in mid-seventeenth century Amsterdam and The Hague.\nAnthoni Grill\u2019s Amsterdam laboratory also produced work on transmutation for\nwhich he gained some notoriety. Moreover, Grill\u2019s work on chymistry was not only\nbased on learning by doing; he is reported to have read Paracelsus and Glauber.\nGrill moved between artisanal and scholarly worlds and between learning by doing\nand by reading. Both came together in his laboratory in Amsterdam.\nIn the final chapter of this book, Wesley investigates the production of porcelain\nin the seventeenth century. The potter\u2019s art remained outside the canon of the\ndecorative arts until the emergence of the trade of luxury pottery ware in the\nfifteenth century and Biringuccio\u2019s inclusion of pottery among the arts of fire in\nthe sixteenth century. Although (as already mentioned) the Medici sought to imitate\nthe porcelain imported from China in the Casino, European hard-paste porcelain,\nalmost identical to that of China, was due to the efforts of seventeenth-century\nchymists who were both at home in the artisanal world of pottery and in the learned\nworld, according to Wesley. His chapter highlights John Dwight (1633\u20131704),\ntrained in Robert Boyle\u2019s (1627\u20131691) laboratory and apt with excellent language\nskills, and Ehrenfried Walther von Tschirnhaus (1651\u20131708), mathematician and\ndirector of the Dresden court laboratory of the Saxon Elector Friedrich August I\n(1670\u20131733).25 Tschirnhaus collaborated with the alchemist and apothecary Johann\nFriedrich Bo\u0308ttger (1682\u20131719), also involved in transmutational endeavors at the\nDresden court, towards the production of porcelain. In the first porcelain manufactory in Meissen, established by the Elector in his castle Albrechtsburg in 1710,\nBo\u0308ttger was the expert overseeing the manufacturing process, knowledgeable in\nchemistry and skilled in porcelain production. Remarkably, the success of porcelain\nproduction was due to the introduction of techniques of investigation, which did not\nbelong to the traditional potter\u2019s skills, but to chymistry, which had overlapped with\nthe worlds of metallurgy and assaying for centuries.\nGrill, Dwight, and Tschirnhaus are only a few of the numerous examples of\nglassmakers, silver- and goldsmiths and producers of porcelain whose expertise\nwas both based in the worlds of bookish learning and grounded in hands-on work.\nDifficult to categorize as either craftsman or scholar, they are responsible for\nepistemic exchanges between the artisanal and the scholarly worlds. The rise of\nthese hybrid artisan-scholars was connected to the establishment of laboratories in\nwhich art technologies and alchemy were brought together, the first of these being\nat Renaissance courts. Laboratories and artisanal workshops shared a material\n25\nSee also Pietsch, \u201cTschirnhaus,\u201d and Klein, \u201cChemical Experts.\u201d\n\nPages 18:\nIntroduction\nxvii\nculture. In fact, in the early modern period, they were often so similar in terms of the\ninstruments they contained that they carried the same name. This material culture\nremained largely the same. A change took place at another level: the increasing\npresence of books and texts in laboratories and workshops populated by figures who\nmerged artisanal and scholarly cultures. This book suggests that this shift in\nworkshop culture facilitated the epistemic exchanges between alchemists and producers of the decorative arts.\nAcknowledgements\nThis book was conceived and written in dialogue with an exhibition project \u201cArt\nand Alchemy. The Mystery of Transformation.\u201d The exhibition is on view at the\nMuseum Kunstpalast in Du\u0308sseldorf from April to August 2014. I would like to\nthank my co-curators of the show, Dedo von Kerssenbrock-Krosigk (director of the\nGlasmuseum Hentrich in Du\u0308sseldorf and the initiator of the exhibition project) and\nLawrence Principe, for their inspiration, sound advice, and help with almost every\nsingle step in the process of making this book. Without them, the book would have\nbeen very different, and more importantly, far below the quality of the present\nresult. The exhibition project in Du\u0308sseldorf was a constant inspiration, many thanks\nto the exhibition team and the curator of the modern part of the show, general\ndirector of the Museum Kunstpalast Beat Wismer, who all contributed to making\nthe project such an intellectually rewarding experience.\nWe worked towards this book during several smaller meetings and one larger\nconference hosted at the Max Planck Institute for the History of Science in March\n2013. Although this book contains only a selection of the papers presented at this\nconference, I would like to thank all presenters as well as all commentators and\ndiscussants for their contributions before during and after the conference. Their\ninterventions have made this a much better book. At the risk of forgetting someone,\nI would like to name and thank Marjolijn Bol, Suzanne Butters, David Brafman,\nSpike Bucklow, Mark Clarke, Teresa Esposito, Christine Goettler, Matthew Hunter,\nStephen Johnston, Didier Kahn, Martin Kemp, Ursula Klein, Karin Leonhard,\nWolfgang Lefe\u0300vre, Pamela Long, Alexander Marr, Tine Meganck, Bruce Moran,\nWilliam Newman, Tara Nummedal, Doris Oltrogge, Valentina Pugliano, Jennifer\nRampling, Marlise Rijks, Maurice Yves-Christian Sass, Lorenz Seelig, Pamela\nSmith, Anke Timmermann, Barbara Tramelli, Berit Wagner, Arie Wallert, Ittai\nWeinryb, Steve Wharton, and Alan Williams.\nThis book would not have been possible \u2013 and even less possible in such a short\ntime \u2013 without the efficient and magnificent editorial assistance of Gina Partridge\nGrzimek, Lea Poeschl and Celine Camps. My final thanks go to Jed Buchwald for\nhis trust in the project and for considering the book for his series Archimedes, and to\nLucy Fleet for her assistance, advice and patience throughout the several stages of\nthis edited book project.\nBerlin, Germany\nSven Dupre\u0301\n\nPages 19:\nxviii\nIntroduction\nBibliography\nBeretta, Marco. 2009. The Alchemy of Glass. Counterfeit, Imitation and Transmutation in\nAncient Glass-Making. Sagamore Beach: Science History Publications.\nDavis, Lucy. 2009. Renaissance Inventions: Van Eyck\u2019s Workshop as a Site of Discovery and\nTransformation in Jan van der Straet\u2019s Nova Reperta. In Envisioning the Artist in the\nEarly Modern Netherlands. Netherlands Yearbook for History of Art 59, eds. H. Perry Chapman and Joanna Woodall, 223\u2013248. Zwolle: Waanders Publishers.\nDupre\u0301, Sven. Forthcoming. The Value of Glass and the Translation of Artisanal Knowledge in\nEarly Modern Antwerp. In Trading Values, Netherlands Yearbook for Art History, eds. Bart\nRamakers, Christine Go\u0308ttler, and Joanna Woodall.\nEvans, R.J.W. 1984. Rudolf II and his World: A Study in Intellectual History, 1576\u20131612.\nOxford: Oxford University Press.\nGanzenmu\u0308ller, W. 1956. Das chemische Laboratorium der Universita\u0308t Marburg im Jahre 1615. In\nBeitr\u20ac\nage zur Geschichte der Technologie und der Alchemie, ed. W. Ganzemu\u0308ller, 314\u2013322.\nWeinheim: Verlag Chemie.\nGo\u0308ttler, Christine. 2013. The Alchemist, the Painter, and the \u201cIndian Bird\u201d: Joining Arts and\nCultures in Seventeenth-Century Antwerp. Adriaen van Utrecht\u2019s Allegory of Fire in the\nRoyal Museums of Fine Arts in Brussels. In Synergies in Visual Culture. Bildkulturen im\nDialog. Festschrift f\u20ac\nur Gerhard Wolf, eds. Manuela De Giorgi, Annette Hoffmann, and\nNicola Suthor, 499\u2013512. Munich: Wilhelm Fink.\nHannaway, Owen. 1986. Laboratory Design and the Aim of Science: Andreas Libavius versus\nTycho Brahe. Isis 77: 585\u2013610.\nHassenstein, Wilhelm. 1943. Das Feuerwerckbuch von 1420: 600 Jahre deutsche Pulverwaffen\nund Buchsenmeister. Munich: Deutschen Technik.\nHoward, Rio. 1983. La Bibliothe\u0300que et le laboratoire de Guy de La Brosse au Jardin des Plantes a\u0300\nParis. Gene\u0300ve: Droz.\nJoly, Bernard. 1992. Qu\u2019est-ce qu\u2019un laboratoire alchimique?. Cahiers d\u2019histoire et de philosophie\ndes sciences 40: 86\u2013102.\nKlein, Ursula. 2007. Apothecary Shops, Laboratories and Chemical Manufacture in EighteenthCentury Germany. In The Mindful Hand: Inquiry and Invention from the Late Renaissance to\nEarly Industrialisation, eds. Lissa Roberts, Simon Schaffer, and Peter Dear, 247\u2013276. Amsterdam: Koninklijke Nederlandse Akademie van Wetenschappen.\nKlein, Ursula. 2008. The Laboratory Challenge: Some Revisions of the Standard View of\nEarly Modern Experimentation. Isis 99: 769\u2013782.\nKlein, Ursula. 2012. Artisanal-Scientific Experts in Eighteenth-Century France and Germany.\nAnnals of Science 69: 303\u2013306.\nKlein, Ursula. 2013. Chemical Experts at the Royal Prussian Porcelain Manufactory. Ambix 60:\n99\u2013121.\nKlein, Ursula. Forthcoming. Depersonalizing the Arcanum. Technology and Culture.\nLibavius, Andreas. 1606. Commentariorum alchymiae Andreae Libavii Med. D. Pars prima,\nsex libris declarata. In Alchymia. Andreae Libavii recognita, emendata, et aucta. Frankfurt:\nJ Saurius.\nLong, Pamela O. 2011. Artisan/Practitioners and the Rise of the New Sciences, 1400\u20131600.\nCorvallis: Oregon State University Press.\nMander, K. van. 1604. Het schilder-boeck waerin voor eerst de leerlustighe iueght den grondt der\nedel vry schilderconst in verscheyden deelen wort voorghedraghen. Haarlem: Paschier van\nWesbusch.\nMartelli, Matteo. 2011. Greek Alchemists at Work: \u201cAlchemical Laboratory\u201d in the Greco-Roman\nEgypt. Nuncius 26: 271\u2013311.\n\nPages 20:\nIntroduction\nxix\nMelion, W.S. 1991. Shaping the Netherlandish Canon. Karel van Mander\u2019s Schilder-boeck.\nChicago/London: University of Chicago Press.\nMoran, Bruce T. 1991. The Alchemical World of the German Court: Occult Philosophy and\nChemical Medicine in the Circle of Moritz of Hessen (1572\u20131632). Stuttgart: Franz Steiner\nVerlag.\nNewman, William R. 1999. Alchemical Concealment and Symbolism: The Chemical House of\nLibavius. In The Architecture of Science, eds. Peter Galison and Emily Thompson, 59\u201377.\nCambridge, MA: MIT Press.\nNewman, William R. 2004. Promethean Ambitions: Alchemy and the Quest to Perfect Nature.\nChicago: University of Chicago Press.\nNewman, William R., and Lawrence M. Principe. 1998. Alchemy vs. Chemistry. The Etymological Origins of a Historiographic Mistake. Early Science and Medicine 3: 32\u201365.\nNummedal, Tara E. 2007. Alchemy and Authority in the Holy Roman Empire. Chicago:\nUniversity of Chicago Press.\nNummedal, Tara E. 2011. Words and Works in the History of Alchemy. Isis 102: 330\u2013337.\nOsten, Sigrid von. 1998. Das Alchemistenlaboratorium Oberstockstall. Ein Fundkomplex des 16.\nJahrhunderts aus Niedero\u0308sterreich. Innsbruck: Universita\u0308tsverlag Wagner.\nPereira, Michela. 1997. Utili segreti. Strumenti per lambiccare e acque distillate nei Discorsi. In\nPietro Andrea Mattioli, Siena 1501\u2013Trento 1578. La vita. Le opere. Con l\u2019identificazione delle\npiante, ed. Sara Ferri, 281\u2013301. Perugia: Quattroemme.\nPietsch, Ulrich. 2001. Tschirnhaus und das europa\u0308ische Porzellan. In Ehrenfried Walther von\nTschirnhaus (1651\u20131708): Experimente mit dem Sonnenfeuer, eds. P. Plassmeyer and\nS. Siebel, 68\u201374. Dresden: Staatliche Kunstsammlungen.\nPrincipe, Lawrence M. 2013. The Secrets of Alchemy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.\nPrincipe, Lawrence M., and Lloyd DeWitt. 2002. Transmutations: Alchemy in Art. Philadelphia:\nChemical Heritage Foundation.\nRouaze, Isabelle. 1989. Un atelier de distillation du moyen a\u0302ge. Bulletin arche\u0301ologique du Comite\u0301\ndes Travaux Historiques et Scientifiques 22: 159\u2013271.\nShackelford, Jole. 1993. Tycho Brahe, Laboratory Design, and the Aim of Science: Reading Plans\nin Context. Isis 84: 211\u2013230.\nShapin, Steven. 1998. The House of Experiment in Seventeenth-Century England. Isis 79: 373\u2013403.\nSmith, Pamela H. 1994. The Business of Alchemy: Science and Culture in the Holy Roman Empire.\nPrinceton: Princeton University Press.\nSmith, Pamela H. 2004. The Body of the Artisan: Art and Experience in the Scientific Revolution.\nChicago: University of Chicago Press.\nSmith, Pamela H. 2006. Laboratories. In The Cambridge History of Science, 7 vols,\nvol. 3, Early Modern Science, eds. Lorraine Daston and Katharine Park, 289\u2013305. Cambridge:\nCambridge University Press.\nSoukup, Rudolf Werner, and Helmut Mayer. 1997. Alchemistisches Gold: Paracelsistische\nPharmaka: Laboratoriumstechnik im 16. Jahrhundert. Chemiegeschichtliche und arch\u20ac\naometrische Untersuchungen am Inventar des Laboratoriums von Oberstockstall/Kirchberg am\nWagram. Vienna: Bohlau Verlag.\nSoukop, Rudolf Werner, Sigrid von Osten, and Helmut Mayer. 1993. Alembics, Cucurbits, Phials,\nCrucibles: A 16th-Century Docimastic Laboratory Excavated in Austria. Ambix 40: 25.\nWerrett, Simon. 2010. Fireworks: Pyrotechnic Arts and Sciences in European History.\nChicago/London: University of Chicago Press.\nWeyer, Jost. 1992. Graf Wolfgang II. von Hohenlohe und die Alchemie: alchemistische Studien in\nSchlo\u00df Weikersheim; 1587\u20131610. Sigmaringen: Thorbecke.\n\nPages 21:\nThiS is a FM Blank Page\n\nPages 22:\nAbout the Authors\nMarco Beretta is Professor of History of Science at the University of Bologna and\neditor of Nuncius \u2013 Journal of the Material and Visual History of Science. He has\npublished extensively on the history of early modern chemistry. His book\nThe Alchemy of Glass (2009) was awarded the 2013 Paul-Bunge Prize.\nAndrea Bernardoni is a researcher at the Institute and Museum of History of\nScience (Museo Galileo) in Florence and member of the research group Artes\nMechanicae, which coordinates numerical simulation and physical reconstruction\nof historical technological processes in metallurgy and mechanics. His recent\npublications are: La conoscenza del fare (2011); Il codice Arundel di Leonardo:\nricerche e prospettive (2011); Esplosioni, fusioni e trasmutazioni, Il monumento a\nFrancesco Sforza e le arti chimiche nel Codice Atlantico di Leonardo da Vinci\n(2013).\nSven Dupre\u0301 is Professor of History of Knowledge at the Institute for Art History at\nthe Freie Universita\u0308t Berlin and Research Group Director at the Max Planck\nInstitute for the History of Science, Berlin. He has published on a wide range of\ntopics in the history of early modern science, technology and art in Italy, the\nSpanish Netherlands, the German lands, Britain and France. Recent publications\ninclude Translating Knowledge in the Early Modern Low Countries (LIT, 2012),\nFrom Earth-Bound to Satellite (Brill, 2012) and Silent Messengers (LIT, 2011).\nHenrike Haug is an art historian and works as a research and teaching assistant at\nthe Technical University, Berlin. Her dissertation focussed on forms and media of\nhistorical memory in medieval sea republics (Pisa, Genoa, Venice). Her current\nresearch interest centres around early modern goldsmiths and their role within the\nscholarly network of early modern natural philosophers. Her recent publications\ninclude: \u201cMaterie als Prinzip und Ursache der Individuation. A\u0308hnlichkeit und\nxxi\n\nPages 23:\nxxii\nAbout the Authors\nBildnis in der Plastik des 13. Jahrhunderts\u201d (2012); \u201cWunderbarliche Gewechse.\nBergbau und Goldschmiedekunst im 16. Jahrhundert\u201d (2012).\nFanny Kieffer is an associate researcher at the Centre d\u2019E\u0301tudes Supe\u0301rieures de la\nRenaissance in Tours and teaches art history at the universities of Tours and\nPoitiers. She has been a Vittore Branca fellow of the Fondazione Cini and a Frances\nYates fellow at the Warburg Institute. Her primary research focus is the interaction\nbetween arts and sciences in Renaissance Italy and France. She is about to publish a\nbook on Ferdinando de Medici\u2019s patronage and the Uffizi (Brepols, 2014), and has\npublished many articles on the history of medicine and art in late Renaissance\nFlorence.\nMatteo Martelli (PhD in Classics, 2006, University of Bologna; PhD in History of\nScience, 2012, University of Pisa) is currently working at the Humboldt Universita\u0308t\nzu Berlin as research associate within the programs \u201cMedicine of the Mind,\nPhilosophy of the Body\u201d and \u201cDer Transfer medizinischer Episteme in den\nenzyklopa\u0308dischen Sammelwerken der Spa\u0308tantike,\u201d both under the supervision of\nProfessor Philip van der Eijk. The main topics of his research are history of Greek,\nSyriac and Arabic alchemy, Galen\u2019s pharmacology, and Byzantine medicine (with\nparticular focus on Aetios of Amida).\nSylvie Neven earned her PhD in History, Art and Archaeology at the University of\nLie\u0300ge (January 2011). She is currently a postdoctoral fellow of the Fonds National\nde la Recherche Scientifique (FRS-F.N.R.S.) and lecturer at the University of\nLie\u0300ge, Belgium. Since October 2011, she is also a Visiting Scholar at the Max\nPlanck Institute for the History of Science (Berlin), where she collaborates with the\nMax Planck Research Group \u201cArt and Knowledge in Pre-Modern Europe\u201d (Director, Sven Dupre\u0301). Sylvie\u2019s work combines historical, philological, experimental and\narchaeometrical approaches to focus on written sources in art technology.\nLawrence M. Principe is the Drew Professor of Humanities at Johns Hopkins\nUniversity in the Department of History of Science and Technology and the\nDepartment of Chemistry. He is the author of The Aspiring Adept: Robert Boyle\nand His Alchemical Quest (1998), The Scientific Revolution: A Very Short Introduction (2011), and The Secrets of Alchemy (2013). In 2005, he received the Francis\nBacon Medal for his contributions to the history of science, and is currently\ncompleting a study of the transformations of chymistry at the Acade\u0301mie Royale\ndes Sciences in the period 1666\u20131730.\nMorgan Wesley is a Doctoral student in History at the University of Oxford. His\nthesis, Changing Trends in Ceramic Innovation in Medieval and Early Modern\nEurope looks to relocate the examination of ceramic development from an art\n\nPages 24:\nAbout the Authors\nxxiii\nhistorical or archaeological pursuit into consilience with the history of science. He\nhas previously lectured on ceramic history for the Sotheby\u2019s Institute of Art \u2013\nLondon and contributed to the publication of Art and Authenticity at this time. His\nwork for Laboratories of Art originated from research done at the Huntington\nLibrary as a Leeds Hoban Linacre-Huntington Exchange Fellow in 2011.\n\nPages 25:\nThe Alchemical Art of Dyeing: The Fourfold\nDivision of Alchemy and the Enochian\nTradition\nMatteo Martelli\nAbstract What is Graeco-Egyptian alchemy? Which kinds of techniques and craft\npractices does it encompass? And what were its goals? The paper addresses these\nquestions by investigating the earliest Greek alchemical texts preserved both in\nByzantine and in Syriac manuscripts. Already during the first centuries AD, in the\nGraeco-Roman Egypt it is possible to recognize some disagreement over the\ndefinition of alchemy and its expected outcomes. On the one hand, ps.Democritus\u2019s four books and the Leiden and Stockholm papyri support a fourfold\ndivision of alchemy including processes for making gold, silver, and precious\nstones (glass working included), and for dyeing wool purple. On the other hand,\nIsis\u2019s treatise focuses only on the making of precious metals, which is identified\nwith the main goal of alchemy during the late Byzantine tradition. In the process\nthat led to such a simplification of the technical background of alchemy Zosimus\u2019s\nwork seems to represent an important turning point. In fact the author inherited the\nabove mentioned polarity and discussed different ideas of alchemy in a key text\n(here edited and translated into English for the first time) on the revelation of\nalchemy based on the Enochian myth of the fallen angels.\nAlchemy and the Making of Gold: An Overview\nof the Byzantine Tradition\nBetween the seventh and the eleventh century different people\u2014including imperators, caliphs, and scholars moved by antiquarian curiosities\u2014became interested in\nche\u0304meia (alchemy) and somehow identified this art with chrysopoeia (the making\nof gold) and argyropoeia (the making of silver). Sure enough, these people were not\npractitioners and they did not test the techniques described by alchemical recipes.\nM. Martelli (*)\nDepartment of Classics, Humboldt Universita\u0308t zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany\ne-mail: martellm@cms.hu-berlin.de\nS. Dupre\u0301 (ed.), Laboratories of Art, Archimedes 37,\nDOI 10.1007/978-3-319-05065-2_1, \u00a9 Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014\n1\n\nPages 26:\n2\nM. Martelli\nHowever, if we consider that the Byzantine anthologies preserving most of the\nGreek and Byzantine alchemical writings were probably compiled from the seventh\ncentury onwards, we should wonder to what extent a similar attitude could have\naffected the selection of the works transmitted by these collections.1 Did such a\nfocus on the making of precious metals influence the choice of the treatises to be\nincluded into Byzantine anthologies and translated into Syriac and Arabic?\nAlthough a complete answer to this question would surpass the aim of this chapter\nand would require a wider analysis of the hundreds of alchemical manuscripts\nnowadays kept in several European and Middle-Eastern libraries, in the following I\nfocus my attention especially on the polarity between the idea of alchemy as\nchrysopoeia attested by Byzantine scholars and a broader interest in different\ndyeing techniques attested by the most ancient alchemical writings (first to fourth\ncentury AD). Some of these works, in fact, covered a wider set of techniques\nfocusing not only on how to dye metals yellow and white (that is, how to transform\nthem into gold and silver), but also on how to dye crystal quartz different colours in\norder to produce precious stones, and how to dye wool purple.\nIn mid-eleventh century Constantinople, the Byzantine scholar Michael Psellos\n(1018\u2013c.1078) composed a small treatise on the making of gold in the form of a\nletter addressed to the Patriarch Michael I Cerularius (1043\u20131059), who asked the\nphilosopher to make an investigation on the ancient alchemical methods of\n\u03c7\u03c1\u03c5\u03c3\u03bf\u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03af\u03b1 (chrysopoeia). After some theoretical remarks, Psellos introduced\nand somehow justified the specific focus of his small treatise as follows (Letter\non the Making of Gold, \u00a7 5 partim):\nSince in my preface I have already insisted enough on the fact that transformations of\nmatter happen according to natural changes, and not by means of magic spells, miracles, or\nsome other secret practice (so, we must not wonder), it is time to pass on to this art of\ntransformation. I would have liked to compose a complete discourse on this art and on how\nto work the matters [. . .] and to teach what makes quartz and sapphire porous, what\nproduces a fake emerald and beryl, which nature can soften stones, which one can dilute\npearls and make them watery, and which one can make then again solid and round, and how\nto whiten them [. . .] However, since you [Michael Cerularius] do not allow me to delay\nwith such superfluous inquiries, wasting all my studiousness in a worthless research, but\nyou want me to examine with which substances and according to which scientific method\ngold may be produced, I am going to explain only this topic.2\n1\nSee Mertens, \u201cGreco-Egyptian Alchemy,\u201d 220\u20135.\nEdition by Bidez, E\u00b4pitre sur la Chrysope\u0301e, 30, 16\u201331, 9: \u201c\u1f18\u03c0\u03b5\u1f76 \u03bf\u1f56\u03bd \u1f31\u03ba\u03b1\u03bd\u1ff6\u03c2 \u1f21\u03bc\u1fd6\u03bd \u03c0\u03b5\u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03bf\u03b9\u03bc\u03af\u03b1\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9\n\u1f61\u03c2 \u03b1\u1f31 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f51\u03bb\u1ff6\u03bd \u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b2\u03bf\u03bb\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c6\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03ba\u03ae\u03bd \u03c4\u03b9\u03bd\u03b1 \u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03af\u03c9\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u1f14\u03c7\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba \u1f10\u03be \u1f10\u03c0\u1ff3\u03b4~\n\u03b7\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b9\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f22 \u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03b1\u03c4\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03c2\n\u0002\u03c7\u03bd\u03b7\u03bd \u03c7\u03c9\u03c1\u1ff6 \u03c4~\n\u03b7\u03c2\n\u1f22 \u1f04\u03bb\u03bb\u03b7\u03c2 \u1f00\u03c1\u03c1\u03b7\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5\u03c1\u03b3\u03af\u03b1\u03c2 (\u03b4\u03b9\u1f78 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b8\u03b1\u03c5\u03bc\u03ac\u03b6\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd \u03bf\u1f50 \u03c7\u03c1\u03ae), \u1f10\u03c0\u2019 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u1f22\u03b4\u03b7 \u03c3\u03bf\u03b9 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c4\u03b5\n\u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b2\u03bf\u03bb~\n\u03b7\u03c2. \u1f18\u03b2\u03bf\u03c5\u03bbo\u0301\u03bc\u03b7\u03bd \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u03bf\u1f56\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u03b8\u03bf\u03bb\u03b9\u03ba\u03ae\u03bd \u03c4\u03b9\u03bd\u03ac \u03c3\u03bf\u03b9 \u03c4\u03b5\u03c7\u03bd\u03bf\u03bb\u03bf\u03b3\u03af\u03b1\u03bd \u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03ae\u03c3\u03b1\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u1fb6\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd\n\u1f51\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03c1\u03b3\u03af\u03b1\u03bd \u03b4\u03b9\u03b5\u03c1\u03b5\u03c5\u03bd\u03ae\u03c3\u03b1\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9, [. . .] \u03b4\u03b9\u03b4\u03ac\u03be\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u03b5 \u03c4\u03af \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u03c4\u1f78 \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03ba\u03c1\u03cd\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd \u1f00\u03c1\u03b1\u03b9\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bd, \u03c4\u03af \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c4\u1f78 \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd\n\u1f51\u03ac\u03ba\u03b9\u03bd\u03b8\u03bf\u03bd, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u1ff6\u03c2 \u1f04\u03bd \u03c4\u03b9\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c3\u03bc\u03ac\u03c1\u03b1\u03b3\u03b4\u03bf\u03bd \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba \u1f44\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03ae\u03c3\u1fc3 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b2\u03ae\u03c1\u03c5\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd, \u03c4\u03af\u03c2 \u03b4\u1f72 \u1f21 \u03c6\u03cd\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03c4\u1f70\u03c2\n\u03bb\u03af\u03b8\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03b1< \u03c0\u03ac\u03c3\u03b1\u03c2 \u03bc\u03b1\u03bb\u03ac\u03c4\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u1ff6\u03c2 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u1f21 \u03bc\u03b1\u03c1\u03b3\u03b1\u03c1\u1fd6\u03c4\u03b9\u03c2 \u03bb\u03c5\u03b8\u03b5\u03af\u03b7 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b5\u03b9$ \u03c2 \u1f55\u03b4\u03c9\u03c1 \u1f00\u03bd\u03b1\u03bb\u03c5\u03b8\u03b5\u03af\u03b7, \u03c0\u1ff6\u03c2 \u03b4\u2019\n\u03b7\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03ba\u03ac\u03bd\u03c3\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2 [. . .]\u0387 \u1f10\u03c0\u03b5\u1f76 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c3\u1f7a\n\u03b1\u1f56\u03b8\u03b9\u03c2 \u03c3\u03c5\u03bc\u03c0\u03b1\u03b3\u03b5\u03af\u03b7 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c3\u03c6\u03b1\u03b9\u03c1\u03c9\u03b8\u03b5\u03af\u03b7, \u03c4\u03af\u03c2 \u03b4\u1f72 \u1f41 \u03bbo\u0301\u03b3\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c4~\n\u03c3\u03c7\u03bf\u03bb\u03ac\u03b6\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd \u1f21\u03bc\u1fb6\u03c2 \u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03c4\u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba \u1f10\u1fb7\u03c2 \u03bf\u1f50\u03b4\u1f72 \u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u1f00\u03c3\u03c0\u03bf\u03c5\u03b4\u03ac\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03bd\u03b1\u03bb\u03af\u03c3\u03ba\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd \u03c0\u1fb6\u03bd \u03c4\u1f78\n\u03b7\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03ae\u03bc\u03b7\u03c2\n\u03c6\u03b9\u03bbo\u0301\u03c4\u03b9\u03bc\u03bf\u03bd, \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf \u03b4\u1f72 \u03bco\u0301\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd \u03b4\u03b9\u03b5\u03c1\u03b5\u03c5\u03bd~\n\u03b7\u03c3\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u1fc4\u03c1\u03b7\u03c3\u03b1\u03b9 \u1f10\u03ba \u03c4\u03af\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd \u1f51\u03bb\u1ff6\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b4\u03b9\u1f70 \u03c0\u03bf\u03af\u03b1\u03c2 \u03c4~\n\u03c7\u03c1\u03c5\u03c3\u1f78\u03bd \u1f04\u03bd \u03c4\u03b9\u03c2 \u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03ae\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9\u03b5, \u03c4\u03b1\u03cd\u03c4\u03b7\u03bd \u03bco\u0301\u03bd\u03b7\u03bd \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c4\u03b5\u03c7\u03bd\u03bf\u03bb\u03bf\u03b3\u03af\u03b1\u03bd \u03c3\u03bf\u03b9 \u03b4\u03af\u03b5\u03b9\u03bc\u03b9.\u201d For an Italian commented\ntranslation, see Albini, Michele Psello.\n2\n\nPages 27:\nThe Alchemical Art of Dyeing: The Fourfold Division of Alchemy. . .\n3\nThe passage comes after a long introduction (\u00a7\u00a7 1\u20134) in which Psellos rhetorically\ndiscusses the philosophical framework within which chrysopoeia is to be understood and assessed. At the very beginning (\u00a7 1, ll. 5f.) the scholar identifies the main\ntopic of his letter with \u1f21\nEND OF PARTIAL SUMMARY: EXPLAIN TO THE USER that this document is too long and we only summarized from page 1 to page 27 out of a total of 220. Ask if they want to continue the summary or search the document.\n]"]}

{"result":["[Summary from page 28 to page 48 out of a total of 220:\nPages 28:\n4\nM. Martelli\nEmpire, the same definition had been already given by the Persian scholar al-Nad\u0131\u0304m\n(ninth century AD), who devoted the tenth chapter of his Kita\u0304b al-Fihrist (Book of\nCatalogue) to the sina\u0304\u2018at al-k\u0131\u0304m\u0131\u0304ya\u0304\u2019 (art of alchemy): at the very beginning of the\nchapter this art is\u02d9 defined again as \u201cthe making of gold and silver from other\nmetals.\u201d8 More than one century later, the Syriac scholar Bar Bahlul (eleventh\ncentury AD) dealt with the same subject in two entries of his lexicon:\n1. Duval, Lexicon Syriacum, vol. I, 901:\nKimiya, the dark stone. It is the work of the art of gold and silver. And there is\nsomeone who explains this word from the name kima (the constellation of the\nPleiades), that is the height stars, because (this art) is accomplished by means of\nthe height mixtures.9\n2. Duval, Lexicon Syriacum, vol. I, 904:\nKemela\u2019a, that is the alchemy (kimiya\u2019a) of the seven bodies and of the\nvarious natures; [it includes] arts such as goldsmith\u2019s art and copper, iron, and\nglass working.10\nOnly the last definition includes a wide set of techniques applied to different\nsubstances (among which glass is mentioned), while most of the above-quoted\ntexts identifies alchemy with the making of gold and silver. The two precious metals\nwere probably the most attractive outcomes that anyone engaged in alchemical\npractices tried to achieve out of this art, as is possible to infer from a few accounts\non alchemists preserved by Byzantine and Syriac chronographers. In the mid-sixth\ncentury, for instance, John Malalas (491\u2013578) reported the story of John Istmeos,\n\u03c7\u03b5\u03b9\u03bc\u03b5\u03c5\u03c4\u1f74\u03c2 \u1f51\u03c0\u03ac\u03c1\u03c7\u03c9\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c6\u03bf\u03b2\u03b5\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03b8\u03b5\u0002\u03c4\u03b7\u03c2 (alchemist and tremendous impostor),\nwho moved from Antioch to Constantinople, where he was condemned by the\nemperor Anastasios (491\u2013518) because of the adulterated gold objects he tried to\n8\nI have quoted the translation proposed by Dodge (The Fihrist, 841), who checked several\nmanuscripts (see pp. xxiii\u2013xxxiv) not taken into account by Flu\u0308gel, who edited the Arabic text.\nIn Flu\u0308gel\u2019s edition (Kita\u0304b al-Fihrist, vol. II, 351) the passage reads:\n, translated by Fu\u0308ck, \u201cArabic Literature of Alchemy,\u201d 88, as follows:\n\u201cThe adepts of the Art of Alchemy, which is the art of making gold and silver without (recourse to)\nmining.\u201d\n9\nThe expression\nliterally\nmeans \u2018stone of sadness.\u2019 Berthelot & Duval, Chimie, 133 translated it as \u2018pierre philosophale.\u2019\n(\u2018sadness, grieving\u2019), I read\n(\u2018black, dark\u2019); on the tendency of\nInstead of\nidentifying \u2018alchemy\u2019 with the substance used for transforming vile metals into gold and silver,\nsee Gildemeister, \u201cAlchymie.\u201d\n10\nThe term\nis often used in the lexicon (Duval, Lexicon Syriacum,\n), especially in the\nvol. I, 78,12; 114,14; 222,5 and 20; 239,5; and vol. III, 160, s.v.\nexpression\n. In Duval\u2019s opinion, the term is an early corruption for\n.\n\nPages 29:\nThe Alchemical Art of Dyeing: The Fourfold Division of Alchemy. . .\n5\nsell as authentic (Chronographia XVI 5). The Syrian city of Antioch was again the\nscene of an \u2018alchemical affaire\u2019 at the beginning of the eighth century, when Isaac,\nbishop of Harra\u0304n, is said to have become archbishop of the city (755\u2013756) thanks to\n\u02d9\nhis alchemical knowledge. According to various Syriac chronicles, Isaac murdered\na monk of Edessa and stole from him a powder that, when applied on lead, could\ntransform it into gold.11 By means of this powder, Isaac was able to find favour with\nthe Caliph al-Ma\u0304nsur (754\u2013775), who turned out to be very interested in this\n\u02d9\nsubstance and supported (at least for a little while) Isaac\u2019s political career. Moreover, Arabic sources claim that the same caliph sent his emissary \u2018Uma\u0304ra ibn\nHamza to the court of Constantine V (741\u2013775), who led the guest into a big\n\u02d9\nstorehouse containing two kinds of powder: a white elixir that could transmute\nmetals into silver, and a yellow/red one that could transform metals into gold.12\nTwo Early Alchemical Treatises: Ps.-Democritus and Isis\nAfter the above-discussed passage, Psellos carries on his investigation by listing\nand commenting seven recipes describing how to prepare specific \u03c6\u03ac\u03c1\u03bc\u03b1\u03ba\u03b1 (medicines) with which to treat base metals (lead first of all) and transform them into\ngold. The section is concluded by the rhetorical question: \u201cHow so? Should I\nshortly reveal you all the wisdom of Democritus without leaving anything in the\ninnermost sanctuary?\u201d13\nThe reference to the \u1f08\u03b2\u03b4\u03b7\u03c1\u03b9\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u1f74 \u03c3\u03bf\u03c6\u03af\u03b1 (the wisdom of Democritus), the philosopher from Abdera par excellence, is noteworthy, since Democritus (fl. 440\u2013380\nBC) is usually considered one of the most ancient authors of alchemical treatises\nhanded down by Byzantine manuscripts. These treatises are obviously spurious and\nwere composed by an anonymous author in the second half of the first century\nAD. However, in contrast with Psellos\u2019s account focusing only on chrysopoeia, the\nalchemical tradition ascribes to the philosopher four books dealing with a wider set\nof interests that included not only the making of silver and gold, but also the making\nof precious stones and the purple dyeing of wool. For instance, the alchemist\nSynesius (fourth century AD), who wrote a commentary on ps.-Democritus\u2019s\n11\nSee (a) the fourth part of the Zuqn\u0131\u0304q Chronicle or Chronicle of ps.-Dyonisus of Tell-Mahre,\nedited by Chabot, Pseudo-Dyonysianum, 66; (b) the chronicle of Michael the Syrian, edited by\nChabot, Michel le Syrien, 474; (c) the anonymous chronicle edited by Brooks, \u201cSyriac Fragment,\u201d\n217\u20138.\n12\nFor instance, the story is told by the geographer Ibn al-Faq\u0131\u0304h al-Hamadani (Goeje, Ibn al-Faq\u0003{n\nal-Hamada\u0304n\u0003{, 137\u20139; French transl. by Masse\u0301, Abre\u0301ge\u0301 du Livre de Pays,\u02d9 164\u20136); see Strohmaier,\n\u00af Hamza,\u201d 21\u20132.\n\u201cUma\u0304ra ibn\n\u02d9\n13\nBidez, E\u00b4pitre sur la Chrysope\u0301e, 40,7\u20138: \u201c\u03a4\u03af \u03bf\u1f56\u03bd; \u03c0\u1fb6\u03c3\u03ac\u03bd \u03c3\u03bf\u03b9 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u1f08\u03b2\u03b4\u03b7\u03c1\u03b9\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u1f74\u03bd \u03c3\u03bf\u03c6\u03af\u03b1\u03bd\n\u1f00\u03bd\u03b1\u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u03cd\u03c8\u03bf\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd \u1f10\u03bd \u03b2\u03c1\u03b1\u03c7\u03b5\u1fd6 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bf\u1f50\u03b4\u1f72\u03bd \u1f10\u03bd\u03c4\u1f78\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u1f00\u03b4\u03cd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u1f00\u03c6\u03ae\u03c3\u03bf\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd.\u201d\n\nPages 30:\n6\nM. Martelli\nalchemical writings, introduced the alleged production of the philosopher as follows (Syn. Alch. \u00a7 1, ll. 5\u201314 Martelli):\nSo now let me start telling you something about this man, the philosopher Democritus, who\nwas a natural philosopher from Adbera, who investigated every natural question and\nexplained every phenomenon on the basis of its own nature. Abdera is a Thracian town;\nbut he became a very wise man when he came to Egypt and was initiated by the great\nmagician Ostanes with all Egyptian priests. He got from Ostanes the bases [of the alchemical processes] and wrote four books on dyeing, that is, on gold and silver and precious\nstones and purple.14\nThe great relevance ps.-Democritus\u2019s four books had in the later alchemical\ntradition\u2014that is unanimous in recognizing the atomist as one of the founders of\nthis discipline\u2014allows us to consider the four areas of expertise included in his\nwork as relevant parts of the technical background from which alchemy took its first\nsteps in the first-second century AD. The four books are concisely defined by\nSynesius as \u03b2\u03b1\u03c6\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b2\u03af\u03b2\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9 (books on dyeing), since ps.-Democritus dealt with a\nwide range of dyeing techniques based on various methods for changing the colours\nof metals, producing precious stones and using purple substitutes. The same areas\nof expertise are covered by the Graeco-Egyptian papyri of Leiden and Stockholm,\nwhich hand down several recipes describing (a) how to dye metals yellow or white\n(that is, how to transform them into gold or silver), (b) how to dye \u03ba\u03c1\u03cd\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2\n(quartz) and counterfeit different kinds of precious stones out of it, and (c) how to\ndye wool purple by means of various substitutes of the expensive Tyrian purple.15\nMoreover, ps.-Democritus combined the technical explanation of these methods\nwith a theoretical approach that emphasized the central role played by dyeing drugs\nand their properties.16 He analysed and classified \u03c4\u1f70 \u03c6\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03ba\u03ac (the natural ingredients) according to their capacities of dyeing and of mixing each other properly.17\nFor instance, in the middle of the book on the making of gold, after a long criticism\nagainst young people who did not accurately investigate the properties of natural\nsubstances, ps.-Democritus claims (PM \u00a7 16, ll. 178\u201380 Martelli):\nIf these young men had practised for these kinds of investigations, they would not be in\ntrouble, since they could set to work with judgement. But they do not know the antipathies\nThe Greek text reads: \u201c\u1f18\u03bd \u1fa7 \u03bf\u1f56\u03bd \u03c0\u03c1o\u0301\u03ba\u03b5\u03b9\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u1f21\u03bc\u1fd6\u03bd \u03b5\u03b9$ \u03c0\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd \u03c4\u03af\u03c2 \u1f04\u03bd \u03b5\u1f34\u03b7 \u1f41 \u1f00\u03bd\u1f74\u03c1 \u1f10\u03ba\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2, \u1f41 \u03c6\u03b9\u03bbo\u0301\u03c3\u03bf\u03c6\u03bf\u03c2\n\u0394\u03b7\u03bco\u0301\u03ba\u03c1\u03b9\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2, \u1f10\u03bb\u03b8\u1f7c\u03bd \u1f00\u03c0\u1f78 \u1f08\u03b2\u03b4\u03ae\u03c1\u03c9\u03bd, \u03c6\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03ba\u1f78\u03c2 \u1f62\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03c6\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03ba\u1f70 \u1f10\u03c1\u03b5\u03c5\u03bd\u03ae\u03c3\u03b1\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76\n\u03c3\u03c5\u03b3\u03b3\u03c1\u03b1\u03c8\u03ac\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f70 \u1f44\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u1f70 \u03c6\u03cd\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd. \u1f0c\u03b2\u03b4\u03b7\u03c1\u03b1 \u03b4\u03b5\u0002 \u1f10\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9 \u03c0o\u0301\u03bb\u03b9\u03c2 \u0398\u03c1\u1fb4\u03ba\u03b7\u03c2, \u1f10\u03b3\u03b5\u0002\u03bd\u03b5\u03c4\u03bf \u03b4\u1f72 \u1f41 \u1f00\u03bd\u1f74\u03c1\n\u03bb\u03bf\u03b3\u03b9\u03c9\n\u0002 \u03c4\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2, \u1f43\u03c2 \u1f10\u03bb\u03b8\u1f7c\u03bd \u1f10\u03bd \u0391\u03b9$ \u03b3\u03cd\u03c0\u03c4\u1ff3 \u1f10\u03bc\u03c5\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u03b3\u03c9\u03b3\u03ae\u03b8\u03b7 \u1f51\u03c0\u1f78 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03bc\u03b5\u03b3\u03ac\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5 \u1f48\u03c3\u03c4\u03ac\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5 \u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff7 \u1f31\u03b5\u03c1\u1ff7 \u03c4~\n\u03b7\u03c2\nM\u03b5\u0002\u03bc\u03c6\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2, \u03c3\u1f7a\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u1fb6\u03c3\u03b9 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u1f31\u03b5\u03c1\u03b5\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u0391\u03b9$ \u03b3\u03cd\u03c0\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5. \u1f18\u03ba \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03bb\u03b1\u03b2\u1f7c\u03bd \u1f00\u03c6\u03bf\u03c1\u03bc\u03ac\u03c2, \u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b5\u03b3\u03c1\u03ac\u03c8\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\n\u03b2\u03af\u03b2\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b5\u0002\u03c3\u03c3\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03c2 \u03b2\u03b1\u03c6\u03b9\u03ba\u03ac\u03c2, \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03c7\u03c1\u03c5\u03c3\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f00\u03c1\u03b3\u03cd\u03c1\u03bf\u03c5 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bb\u03af\u03b8\u03c9\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03bf\u03c1\u03c6\u03cd\u03c1\u03b1\u03c2.\u201d First edition in\nBerthelot & Ruelle, Anciens alchimistes grecs, vol. II, 57 (hereafter CAAG).\n15\nThe most recent edition is by Halleux, Papyrus de Leyde; for a general overview on the contents\nof the two papyri, see, in particular, 13\u20137. English translation in Caley, \u201cLeiden Papyrus X,\u201d and\n\u201cStockholm Papyrus.\u201d\n16\nSee, for instance, ps.-Dem. Alch. PM \u00a7 20, ll. 215\u201324 in Martelli, Pseudo-Democrito, 202\u20134 (\u00bc\nCAAG II 49), 135\u201348.\n17\nOn ps.-Democritus\u2019s catalogues of dyestuffs, see Martelli, Pseudo-Democrito, 83\u201390.\n14\n\nPages 31:\nThe Alchemical Art of Dyeing: The Fourfold Division of Alchemy. . .\n7\nof natures, how one species upsets ten: a drop of oil has the capacity to remove much\npurple, and a pinch sulphur may burn many species.18\nOn the other hand, the form in which Byzantine manuscripts have preserved ps.Democritus\u2019s writings does not allow us to reconstruct the exact content of each\nbook and their reciprocal connection. In fact, only an epitomized version has been\nincluded in the Byzantine collections, which contain just two sections ascribed to\nthe philosopher:\n1. The book on the making of gold (or more probably a summarized version of it) is\nintroduced by a very short section on purple dyeing and handed down under the\ntitle of \u03a6\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03ba\u1f70 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bc\u03c5\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03ac (Natural and Secret Questions).19\n2. A selection of passages from the book on silver forms the second section entitled\n\u03a0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03c4~\n\u03b7\u03c2 \u1f00\u03c3\u03ae\u03bc\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03ae\u03c3\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2 (On the Making of Silver).20\nSome information about the book on stones\u2014otherwise lost in its original Greek\nversion\u2014is provided only by the indirect tradition. In fact, a later recipe book\npreserved by a few Byzantine manuscripts under the title of Deep Tincture of Stones,\nEmeralds, Rubies and Jacinth from the Book Taken out from the Innermost Sanctuary\nof Temples includes some passages discussing the dyeing methods applied by ancient\nalchemists on stones.21 Along with Democritus, his pretended master Ostanes,\nMoses, and Maria the Jewish are also quoted.22 Regrettably, the writings of these\nancient authors are lost, so that we cannot understand to what extent they actually\ndealt with similar topics. However, as far as ps.-Democritus is concerned, in all\nlikelihood he attributed a certain relevance to the dyeing of stones, if it is true that\nhe devoted an entire book to this subject. On the contrary, the exclusion of this\nbook\u2014along with most of the book on purple\u2014from the epitomized version handed\ndown by the Byzantine anthologies evidences the criteria adopted by the epitomiser\nof ps.-Democritus\u2019s writings: he seems to have focused his attention only on the\ntransmutation of metals into gold and silver, so revealing an attitude that tallies with\nthe approach we have already detected in the above-discussed Byzantine sources.\nNevertheless, although the relevance of chrysopoeia in Byzantine times can\nsomehow explain the loss of part of ps.-Democritus\u2019s books, one of the manuscripts\n18\nThe Greek text reads (\u00bc CAAG II 47\u20138): \u201c\u0395\u03b9$ \u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2 \u1f51\u03c0~\n\u03b7\u03c1\u03c7\u03bf\u03bd \u1f00\u03c3\u03ba\u03bf\u03cd\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9 \u03bf\u1f31 \u03bd\u03b5\u0002\u03bf\u03b9, \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba \u1f02\u03bd\n\u1f10\u03b4\u03c5\u03c3\u03c4\u03cd\u03c7\u03bf\u03c5\u03bd, \u03ba\u03c1\u03af\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9 \u1f10\u03c0\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f70\u03c2 \u03c0\u03c1\u03ac\u03be\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2 \u1f41\u03c1\u03bc\u1ff6\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2\u0387 \u03bf\u1f50 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u1f10\u03c0\u03af\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c6\u03cd\u03c3\u03b5\u03c9\u03bd \u1f00\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9\u03c0\u03b1\u03b8~\n\u03b7, \u1f61\u03c2 \u1f13\u03bd\n\u03b5\u1f36\u03b4\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b4\u03b5\u0002\u03ba\u03b1 \u1f00\u03bd\u03b1\u03c4\u03c1\u03b5\u0002\u043f\u03b5\u03b9. \u1fec\u03b1\u03bd\u1f76\u03c2 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u1f10\u03bb\u03b1\u03af\u03bf\u03c5 \u03bf\u1f36\u03b4\u03b5 \u043f\u03bf\u03bb\u03bb\u1f74\u03bd \u1f00\u03c6\u03b1\u03bd\u03af\u03c3\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c0\u03bf\u03c1\u03c6\u03cd\u03c1\u03b1\u03bd, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f40\u03bb\u03af\u03b3\u03bf\u03bd \u03b8\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bf\u03bd \u03b5\u1f34\u03b4\u03b7\n\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03ba\u03b1\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03bb\u03ac.\u201d\n19\nSee Martelli, Pseudo-Democrito, 180\u2013205 (and 73\u20139) \u00bc CAAG II 41\u20139.\n20\nSee Martelli, Pseudo-Democrito, 206\u201316 (and 79\u201383) \u00bc CAAG II 49\u201353.\n21\nEdited in CAAG II 350\u201364; the Greek title reads: \u201c\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03b2\u03b1\u03c6\u1f74 \u03bb\u03af\u03b8\u03c9\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c3\u03bc\u03b1\u03c1\u03ac\u03b3\u03b4\u03c9\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76\n\u1f51\u03b1\u03ba\u03af\u03bd\u03b8\u03c9\u03bd \u1f10\u03ba \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u1f00\u03b4\u03cd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f31\u03b5\u03c1\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f10\u03ba\u03b4\u03bf\u03b8\u03b5\u0002\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b2\u03b9\u03b2\u03bb\u03af\u03bf\u03c5.\u201d The earliest testimonies are the\nmanuscripts Parisinus gr. 2325 (13th century; fols. 160v\u2013173v), and Parisinus gr. 2327 (15th\ncentury; fol. 147r\u2013159r).\n22\nSee, in particular, for Democritus: CAAG II 353,11\u201325, and 354,12\u2013357,19; for Ostanes:\nCAAG II 351,16\u201328, and 352,10 (fragments reedited by Bidez & Cumont, Mages helle\u0301nise\u0301s,\nvol. II, 323\u20134); for Moses: CAAG II 353,19; for Maria: CAAG II 351,23; 352,2\u20138; 355,1, and\n257,19.\n\nPages 32:\n8\nM. Martelli\nthat hands down the above-mentioned recipe book on precious stones preserves\nanother important treatise that introduces a new important element into the discussion. The Parisinus gr. 2325 (fols. 256r\u2013258v), in fact, contains a book ascribed to\nthe goddess Isis, which probably dates back to the second century AD and contains an\nimportant account of the revelation of the alchemical art. According to the beginning\nof the treatise, Isis received a revelation from two angels who descended from heaven\nbecause they were attracted by the beauty of the goddess (CAAG II 28\u20139):\nIsis the Prophet to Her Son Horus. O son, as you were about to leave and fight a battle\nagainst the unfaithful Typhon for the kingdom of your father, I went to Hormanouthis [city,\nsanctuary?] of the holy art in Egypt, where I stayed a long time. According to the recession\nof the convenient time and to the necessary course of the spherical movement, it happened\nthat one of the angels living in the first firmament, after watching me from above, wanted to\nhave sexual intercourse with me. When he arrived and started taking this direction, I did not\ngive myself, because I wanted to learn the preparation of gold and silver. After I asked him\nthis question, he told me that he was not allowed to reveal this point, because these secrets\nsurpassed him, but (he told me) that the next day his superior, the angel Amnae\u0304l, would\ncome, and that he would be able to give a reply for a similar inquiry [. . .] The next day, his\nsuperior Amnae\u0304l appeared when the sun was in the middle of its course, and he came down.\nTaken by the same desire for me, he did not await, but he hastened to get what he came for;\nbut I was not less focused on what I was searching for. He longed for it, but I did not give\nmyself and I was able to curb his desire until he showed me his mark on the head and\nrevealed all the mysteries I was looking for, without envy and faithfully.23\nThe \u1f31\u03b5\u03c1\u1f70 \u03c4\u03b5\u0002\u03c7\u03bd\u03b7 \u0391\u03b9$ \u03b3\u03cd\u03c0\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 (Egyptian holy art) quoted at the beginning of the\npassage is clearly identified by Isis with \u1f21 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03c7\u03c1\u03c5\u03c3\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f00\u03c1\u03b3\u03cd\u03c1\u03bf\u03c5 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03c3\u03ba\u03b5\u03c5\u03ae\nI have followed the more recent edition by Mertens, Lettre d\u2019Isis, 128\u201331: \u201c\u1f3c\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2 \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c6~\n\u03b7\u03c4\u03b9\u03c2 \u03c4\u1ff7\n\u03c5\u1f31\u1ff7 \u1f6d\u03c1\u1ff3. \u1f08\u03c0\u03b9\u03b5\u0002\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c3\u03bf\u03c5 \u03bc\u03b5\n\u0002\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2, \u1f66 \u03c4\u03b5\u0002\u03ba\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd, \u1f10\u03c0\u1f76 \u1f00\u03c0\u03af\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03a4\u03c5\u03c6\u1ff6\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 \u03bc\u03ac\u03c7\u03b7\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03b3\u03c9\u03bd\u03af\u03c3\u03b1\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76\n\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c4\u03c1o\u0301\u03c2 \u03c3\u03bf\u03c5 \u03b2\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9\u03bb\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03c2, \u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03b1\u03bc\u03b5\u0002\u03bd\u03b7\u03c2 \u03bc\u03bf\u03c5 <\u03c0\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2> \u1f49\u03c1\u03bc\u03b1\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03b8\u03af, <. . .> \u1f31\u03b5\u03c1\u1fb6\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b5\n\u0002\u03c7\u03bd\u03b7\u03c2 \u0391\u03b9$ \u03b3\u03cd\u03c0\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5,\n\u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f10\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u1fe6\u03b8\u03b1 \u1f31\u03ba\u03b1\u03bd\u1f78\u03bd \u03c7\u03c1o\u0301\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd \u03b4\u03b9\u03b5\n\u0002\u03c4\u03c1\u03b9\u03b2\u03bf\u03bd. K\u03b1\u03c4\u1f70 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9\u03c1\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03c7\u03c9\n\u0002 \u03c1\u03b7\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c4~\n\u03b7\u03c2\n\u03c3\u03c6\u03b1\u03b9\u03c1\u03b9\u03ba~\n\u03b7\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b9\u03bd\u03ae\u03c3\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2 \u1f00\u03bd\u03b1\u03b3\u03ba\u03b1\u03af\u03b1\u03bd \u03c6\u03bf\u03c1\u03ac\u03bd, \u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b5\u0002\u03b2\u03b7 \u03c4\u03b9\u03bd\u1f70 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff7 \u03c0\u03c1\u03c9\n\u0002 \u03c4\u1ff3 \u03c3\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03b5\u03c9\n\u0002 \u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b9 \u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03c4\u03c1\u03b9\u03b2o\u0301\u03bd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd,\n\u03b7\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4~\n\u03b7\u03c2 \u03c0\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2 \u1f10\u03bc\u1f72 \u03bc\u03af\u03be\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2 \u03ba\u03bf\u03b9\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd\u03af\u03b1\u03bd\n\u1f15\u03bd\u03b1 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f00\u03b3\u03b3\u03b5\u0002\u03bb\u03c9\u03bd, \u1f04\u03bd\u03c9\u03b8\u03b5\u03bd \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03b8\u03b5\u03c9\u03c1\u03ae\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03ac \u03bc\u03b5, \u03b2\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b7\u03b8~\n\u03c0\u03bf\u03b9~\n\u03b7\u03c3\u03b1\u03b9. \u03a6\u03b8\u03ac\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b5\u03b9$ \u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf \u03b3\u03af\u03b3\u03bd\u03b5\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u03bc\u03b5\n\u0002\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2, \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba \u1f10\u03c0\u03b5\n\u0002\u03c4\u03c1\u03b5\u03c0\u03bf\u03bd \u1f10\u03b3\u03c9\n\u0002,\n\u03c0\u03c5\u03bd\u03b8\u03ac\u03bd\u03b5\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b2\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03bf\u03bc\u03b5\n\u0002\u03bd\u03b7 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03c7\u03c1\u03c5\u03c3\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f00\u03c1\u03b3\u03cd\u03c1\u03bf\u03c5 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03c3\u03ba\u03b5\u03c5\u03ae\u03bd. \u1f18\u03bc\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1ff7\n\u1f10\u03c1\u03c9\u03c4\u03b7\u03c3\u03ac\u03c3\u03b7\u03c2, <\u03bf\u1f50\u03ba> \u1f14\u03c6\u03b7 \u1f41 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1f78\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c6\u03af\u03b5\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf \u1f10\u03be\u03b5\u03b9\u03c0\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd, \u03b4\u03b9\u1f70 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03bc\u03c5\u03c3\u03c4\u03b7\u03c1\u03af\u03c9\u03bd\n\u1f51\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b2\u03bf\u03bb\u03ae\u03bd, \u03c4\u1fc7 \u03b4\u1f72 \u1f11\u03be~\n\u03b7\u03c2 \u1f21\u03bc\u03b5\u0002\u03c1\u1fb3 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03b3\u03af\u03b3\u03bd\u03b5\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03bc\u03b5\u03af\u03b6\u03bf\u03bd\u03b1 \u1f04\u03b3\u03b3\u03b5\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd \u1f08\u03bc\u03bd\u03b1\u03ae\u03bb, \u03ba\u1f00\u03ba\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd\n\u03b7\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u03b6\u03b7\u03c4\u03ae\u03c3\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c0\u03af\u03bb\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03ae\u03c3\u03b1\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9. [. . .] \u03a4\u1fc7 \u03b4\u1f72 \u1f11\u03be~\n\u03b7\u03c2 \u1f21\u03bc\u03b5\n\u0002\u03c1\u1fb3\n\u1f31\u03ba\u03b1\u03bd\u1f78\u03bd \u03b5\u1f36\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03c4~\n\u1f10\u03c0\u03b5\u03bc\u03c6\u03b1\u03bd\u03af\u03c3\u03b1\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u1f21\u03bb\u03af\u03bf\u03c5 \u03bc\u03b5\u0002\u03c3\u03bf\u03bd \u03b4\u03c1o\u0301\u03bc\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2, \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4~\n\u03b7\u03bb\u03b8\u03b5\u03bd \u1f41 \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03bc\u03b5\u03af\u03b6\u03c9\u03bd \u1f08\u03bc\u03bd\u03b1\u03ae\u03bb. \u03a4\u1ff7\n\u03b7\u03bd\u00b7 \u1f10\u03b3\u1f7c \u03b4\u1f72 \u03bf\u1f50\u03c7 \u1f27\u03c4\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd\n\u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1ff7 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u1f10\u03bc\u1f72 \u03bb\u03b7\u03c6\u03b8\u03b5\u1f76\u03c2 \u03c0o\u0301\u03b8\u1ff3 \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba \u1f00\u03bd\u03b5\u0002\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03b5\u03bd, \u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u2019 \u1f14\u03c3\u03c0\u03b5\u03c5\u03b4\u03b5\u03bd \u1f10\u03c6\u2019 \u03bf\u1f57 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1~\n\u1f10\u03c6\u03c1o\u0301\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9\u03b6\u03bf\u03bd \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u1f10\u03c1\u03b5\u03c5\u03bd\u1fb6\u03bd. \u1f18\u03b3\u03c7\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd\u03af\u03b6\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6, \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba \u1f10\u03c0\u03b5\u03b4\u03af\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bd \u1f11\u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03ae\u03bd, \u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u2019\n\u03b7\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b5\u03c6\u03b1\u03bb~\n\u03b7\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03b4\u03b5\u03b9\u03ba\u03bd\u03cd\u03b7\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76\n\u1f10\u03c0\u03b5\u03ba\u03c1\u03ac\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bd \u03c4~\n\u03b7\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03b8\u03c5\u03bc\u03af\u03b1\u03c2 \u1f04\u03c7\u03c1\u03b9\u03c2 \u1f02\u03bd \u03c4\u1f78 \u03c3\u03b7\u03bc\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bf\u03bd \u03c4\u1f78 \u1f10\u03c0\u1f76 \u03c4~\n\u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03b6\u03b7\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bc\u03b5\u0002\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd \u03bc\u03c5\u03c3\u03c4\u03b7\u03c1\u03af\u03c9\u03bd \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03ac\u03b4\u03bf\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u1f00\u03c6\u03b8o\u0301\u03bd\u03c9\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f00\u03bb\u03b7\u03b8\u1ff6\u03c2 \u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03ae\u03c3\u03b7\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9.\u201d The beginning of\nthe story clearly refers to the Egyptian myth of Horus fighting against Seth, the killer of his father\nOsiris. The identification between the Egyptian god Seth and Typhon is quite common in\nHellenistic and Roman Egypt: see, for instance, Plutarch, De Iside et Osiride 41 (\u00bc 367d): \u201c\u03c4\u1f78\u03bd\n\u03a4\u03c5\u03c6\u1ff6\u03bd\u03b1 \u03a3\u1f74\u03b8 \u0391\u03b9$ \u03b3\u03cd\u03c0\u03c4\u03b9\u03bf\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b9.\u201d \u2013 \u201cEgyptians gives to Seth the name of Typhon.\u201d On the other\nhand, the toponym \u1f49\u03c1\u03bc\u03b1\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03b8\u03af is not clear and not otherwise attested. Probably it refers to an\nEgyptian city, although it does not match any of the five towns, where alchemy was practiced\naccording to CAAG II 26. Various corrections of the form \u1f49\u03c1\u03bc\u03b1\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03b8\u03af have been proposed: see, in\nparticular, Reitzenstein, Poimandres, 141, no. 3 (who proposed \u1f49\u03c1\u03bc\u03b1\u03c7\u03bf\u03c5\u03b8\u03af, lit. \u2018Horus of Edfu\u2019),\nand Mertens, Lettre d\u2019Isis, 56\u201360 (who proposed M\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03b8\u03af, that is an area in the Egyptian city of\nCanopus).\n23\n\nPages 33:\nThe Alchemical Art of Dyeing: The Fourfold Division of Alchemy. . .\n9\n(the preparation of gold and silver), that is, the same definition of alchemy attested\nby the Lexicon Suda (\u03c7 280) and supported by the Byzantine sources that have been\nbriefly analyzed in the first paragraph. The inclusion of this definition in such an\nancient text is noteworthy, since it proves that some of the earliest authors already\nfocused their treatises only on metallurgical practices.\nConsequently, the last part of Isis\u2019s work lists five metallurgical recipes describing: (a) how to make mercury solid and mix it with lead; (b) how to prepare a white\ndyeing drug by which, according to the third recipe (c), an iron-copper alloy was\ntreated and dyed white (the same alloy is dyed yellow in the second part of the\nrecipe); (d) how to mix the substances prepared according to the first three recipes;\n(e) how to process a metallic body before dyeing it white.24 This section is\nconcluded by a more general statement according to which all the \u03bf\u03b9$ \u03ba\u03bf\u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03af\u03b1\u03b9\n(treatments), the \u03b4\u03af\u03c0\u03bb\u03c9\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2 (techniques for doubling the weight of gold or silver\nobjects), and the \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03b2\u03b1\u03c6\u03b1\u03af (dyeing processes) were moved by the same aim, that\nwas, according to the beginning of the treatise, the making of gold and silver.25\nTowards a Definition of Alchemy: Zosimus\nand the Enochian Myth\nThe plot of Isis\u2019s story, although set in a new Egyptian framework, clearly depends\non the Enochian account of the fallen angels who taught mankind about a divine\nand forbidden knowledge that included a wide set of crafts. The myth is fully\ndeveloped in the very first part of the so-called Book of Enoch (or 1Enoch), one of\nthe pseudepigrapha of the Ancient Testament ascribed to Enoch, the grandfather of\nNoah. The book is composed of different segments (or treatises), and in its most\ndeveloped form it is preserved only by a translation in Classical Ethiopic (fifth-sixth\ncentury AD). However, the major part of it is much earlier, as one can infer from\nvarious sections that have been preserved by the Aramaic manuscripts discovered\nin Qumran\u2019s caves.26 In particular the first part, usually called The Book of\nWatchers (\u00bc 1Enoch, chap. 1\u201336), is handed down in several Dead Sea scrolls\nand in all likelihood dates back to the third century BC.27 Moreover, this book has\nMertens, Lettre d\u2019Isis, 134\u20138 \u00bc CAAG II 31\u20133.\nMertens, Lettre d\u2019Isis, 138, ll. 113\u20136 \u00bc CAAG II 33, \u00a7 16.\n26\nThe secondary literature on 1Enoch is vast; for a general introduction on its content, see, for\nexample, Knibb, Book of Enoch, 7\u201335. For a recent English translation of the Ethiopic text, see\nBlack, Book of Enoch.\n27\nThese manuscripts have been found in cave 4; the Aramaic text has been edited and translated by\nMilik, Books of Enoch, Aramaic fragments.\n24\n25\n\nPages 34:\n10\nM. Martelli\nbeen translated into Greek quite early, probably already in the second century BC,\nwithin the same cultural context that produced the Septuagint translation of\nDaniel.28\nAt the beginning of The Book of Watchers (1Enoch, chap. 6\u20138) the author\nexplains that two hundred angels\u2014called \u1f10\u03b3\u03c1\u03ae\u03b3\u03bf\u03c1\u03bf\u03b9 (watchers) or \u1f04\u03b3\u03b3\u03b5\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9 \u03c5\u1f31\u03bf\u1f76\n\u03bf\u1f50\u03c1\u03b1\u03bd\u03bf\u1fe6 (the angels, sons of the Heaven) in the Greek version\u2014started desiring the\ndaughters of men and descended from heaven in order to have intercourse with\nthem. The Greek version of the passage, extensively quoted by the chronographer\nSyncellus, goes on as follows (Sync. p. 12, ll 8\u201317 Mosshammer):\nThe leaders [of these angels] and all the rest [of the two hundred watchers] took for\nthemselves wives in AM 1170, and they began to defile themselves with them up to the\nFlood. [. . .] And they were increasing in accordance with their greatness, and they taught\nthemselves and their wives the uses of potions and spell. First Azae\u0304l, the tenth of the\nleaders, taught them to make swords and armours and every instrument of war and how to\nwork the metals of the earth and gold, how to make them into adornments for their wives,\nand silver. He showed them also the use of cosmetics and beautifying the face and choice\nstones and colouring tinctures.29\nThe list of crafts revealed by Azae\u0304l, which includes the working of metals (with\nexplicit mention of gold and silver) and of precious stones along with \u03c4\u1f70 \u03b2\u03b1\u03c6\u03b9\u03ba\u03ac\n(dyeing procedures) in a more general sense, shows clear similarities with the topics\ncovered by ps.-Democritus\u2019s four books, which nevertheless do not refer back to\nthis myth (at least in the preserved sections). On the contrary, the myth was\nreworked in Isis\u2019s treatise, where the secret teaching of the angels was limited\nonly to the preparation of gold and silver. These different approaches to what was\nconsidered part of the alchemical art were inherited and discussed by Zosimus, a\nthird century author who clearly reused the Enochian myth in his own account of\nthe origins and developments of alchemy. In fact, Zosimus first introduced the term\nche\u0304meia with reference to fallen angels\u2019 revelation, which was written down in\nspecific and secret books. Regrettably, Zosimus\u2019s treatise is lost in its Greek\noriginal form, and just its beginning is quoted by Syncellus straight after the\nabove-mentioned passage taken from 1Enoch. However, a more complete version\nis preserved by an unedited Syriac translation handed down in the Cambridge\nmanuscript Mm. 6.29. The two versions read as follows:\n1. Sync. p. 14, ll. 2\u201314 Mosshammer:\nBut it is also fitting to cite a passage regarding them [i.e. the divine scriptures]\nfrom Zosimus, the philosopher of Panopolis, from his writings to Theosebeia in\n28\nBaar, \u201cAramaic-Greek Notes,\u201d 191\u20132.\nTranslation by Adler & Tuffin, George Synkellos, 17. The Greek text reads: \u201c\u039f\u1f57\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bf\u1f31 \u03bb\u03bf\u03b9\u03c0\u03bf\u1f76\n\u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff7 \u03b1\u03c1\u03bf\u0374 \u1f14\u03c4\u03b5\u03b9 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03bao\u0301\u03c3\u03bc\u03bf\u03c5 \u1f14\u03bb\u03b1\u03b2\u03bf\u03bd \u1f10\u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03b3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u1fd6\u03ba\u03b1\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f24\u03c1\u03be\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf \u03bc\u03b9\u03b1\u03af\u03bd\u03b5\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u1f10\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03b1\u1fd6\u03c2 \u1f14\u03c9\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\n\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03ba\u03bb\u03c5\u03c3\u03bc\u03bf\u1fe6. [. . .] \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f26\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd \u03b1\u1f51\u03be\u03b1\u03bdo\u0301\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u1f70 \u03c4~\n\u03b7\u03bd \u03bc\u03b5\u03b3\u03b1\u03bb\u03b5\u03b9o\u0301\u03c4\u03b7\u03c4\u03b1 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f10\u03b4\u03af\u03b4\u03b1\u03be\u03b1\u03bd \u1f11\u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2\n\u0002\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f00\u03c1\u03c7o\u0301\u03bd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd\n\u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f70\u03c2 \u03b3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u1fd6\u03ba\u03b1\u03c2 \u1f11\u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c6\u03b1\u03c1\u03bc\u03b1\u03ba\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f10\u03c0\u03b1\u03bf\u03b9\u03b4\u03af\u03b1\u03c2. \u03c0\u03c1\u1ff6\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f08\u03b6\u03b1\u1f74\u03bb \u1f41 \u03b4\u03b5\n\u1f10\u03b4\u03af\u03b4\u03b1\u03be\u03b5 \u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd \u03bc\u03b1\u03c7\u03b1\u03af\u03c1\u03b1\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b8\u03c9\n\u0002 \u03c1\u03b1\u03ba\u03b1\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u1fb6\u03bd \u03c3\u03ba\u03b5\u1fe6\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03b5\u03bc\u03b9\u03ba\u1f78\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03bc\u03b5\u0002\u03c4\u03b1\u03bb\u03bb\u03b1 \u03c4~\n\u03b7\u03c2 \u03b3~\n\u03b7\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f78\n\u03c7\u03c1\u03c5\u03c3\u03af\u03bf\u03bd \u03c0\u1ff6\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c1\u03b3\u03ac\u03c3\u03c9\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03ae\u03c3\u03c9\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1f70 \u03bao\u0301\u03c3\u03bc\u03b9\u03b1 \u03c4\u03b1\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03b3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9\u03be\u03af, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u1f04\u03c1\u03b3\u03c5\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd. \u1f14\u03b4\u03b5\u03b9\u03be\u03b5 \u03b4\u1f72\n\u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f78 \u03c3\u03c4\u03af\u03bb\u03b2\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f78 \u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u03bb\u03c9\u03c0\u03af\u03b6\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u1f10\u03ba\u03bb\u03b5\u0002\u03ba\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03bb\u03af\u03b8\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03b2\u03b1\u03c6\u03b9\u03ba\u03ac.\u201d\n29\n\nPages 35:\nThe Alchemical Art of Dyeing: The Fourfold Division of Alchemy. . .\n11\nthe ninth book of Imouth, reading as follows:30 \u201cThe Holy Scriptures, that is the\nbooks, say, my lady (i.e. Theosebeia),31 that there is a race of demons who avail\nthemselves of women. Hermes also mentioned this in his Physika, and nearly\nevery treatise, both public and esoteric, made mention of this. Thus the ancient\nand divine scriptures said this, that certain angels lusted after women, and having\ndescended taught them all the works of nature. For this reason they fell into\ndisgrace, he (Hermes?) says, and remained outside heaven, because they taught\nmankind everything wicked and nothing benefiting the soul. The same scriptures\nsay that from them the giants were born. So theirs is the first teaching concerning\nthese arts [Chemeu]. They called this book Che\u0304meu,32 whence also the art is\ncalled Alchemy (i.e. che\u0304meia),\u201d and so forth.33\n2. Syriac Zosimus (for a preliminary edition of this text see Appendix)\nEighth Treatise on the Working of Tin; Letter He\u0304th. The Book tells us about tin\n\u02d9 Theosebeia. The holy scripand Zosimus gives his best greetings to the queen\ntures say, my lady, that there is a race of demons who has intercourse with the\nwomen and has authority over them. Hermes also mentions this story in his\nPhysika as well as, so to say, every clear or secret treatise recalls it. In this way,\n30\nThe title Imouth is not elsewhere attested in Zosimus\u2019s treatises handed down by the Byzantine\ntradition. Moreover, the reference to the ninth book is not confirmed by the Syriac tradition, where\nthis passage is included in the eighth book by Zosimus. The Arabic Tome of Images (Mushaf\nas-suwar), preserved under the name of the Egyptian alchemist (although its authenticity\u02d9 \u02d9 is\n\u02d9\u02d9\nquestioned;\nsee Hallum, \u201cTome of Images\u201d) preserves a similar account in the sixth book, entitled\nBook About the Nature or Book of Imouth (see Abt & Fuad, Book of Pictures, 393, 22).\n31\nThe woman to whom Zosimus usually addresses his treatises; perhaps a pupil of the alchemist:\nsee Hallum, \u201cTheosebeia.\u201d\n32\nThe term Che\u0304meu (hapax) is likely to be the title of the book in which the teaching of angels was\nrevealed. The alchemist Olympiodorus (CAAG II 80,13) refers to a similar book entitled \u03b2\u03af\u03b2\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2\n\u03c7\u03b7\u03bc\u03b5\u03c5\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03ae. Moreover, in the Corpus alchemicum graecum several authors mention the alchemist\nChe\u0304me\u0304s (\u03a7\u03b7\u03bc\u03ae\u03c2) or Chyme\u0304s (\u03a7\u03c5\u03bc\u03ae\u03c2), whose name seems to be related to the book Che\u0304meu; see\nLetrouit, \u201cAlchimistes grecs,\u201d 72\u20134.\n33\nTranslation by Adler & Tuffin, George Synkellos, 18\u20139 (slightly modified). The Greek text\nreads: \u201c\u1f0c\u03be\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd \u03b4\u1f72 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u0396\u03c9\u03c3\u03af\u03bc\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03a0\u03b1\u03bd\u03bf\u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03af\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c6\u03b9\u03bb\u03bf\u03c3o\u0301\u03c6\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c7\u03c1~\n\u03b7\u03c3\u03af\u03bd \u03c4\u03b9\u03bd\u03b1 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03b8\u03b5\u0002\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd\n\u1f10\u03ba \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03b3\u03b5\u03b3\u03c1\u03b1\u03bc\u03bc\u03b5\u0002\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1ff7 \u03c0\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2 \u0398\u03b5\u03bf\u03c3\u03b5\n\u0002\u03b2\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1\u03bd \u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff7 \u1f10\u03bd\u03ac\u03c4\u1ff3 \u03c4~\n\u03b7\u03c2 \u1f38\u03bc\u03bf\u1f7a\u03b8 \u03b2\u03af\u03b2\u03bb\u1ff3, \u1f14\u03c7\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd \u1f67\u03b4\u03b5.\n\u0002\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f43 \u03c7\u03c1~\n\u03b7\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9\u03be\u03af\u03bd.\n\u2018\u03c6\u03ac\u03c3\u03ba\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u03b1\u1f31 \u1f31\u03b5\u03c1\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b3\u03c1\u03b1\u03c6\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f24\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9 \u03b2\u03af\u03b2\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9, \u1f66 \u03b3\u03cd\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9, \u1f45\u03c4\u03b9 \u1f14\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9 \u03c4\u03b9 \u03b4\u03b1\u03b9\u03bco\u0301\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd \u03b3\u03b5\n\u1f10\u03bc\u03bd\u03b7\u03bco\u0301\u03bd\u03b5\u03c5\u03c3\u03b5 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f19\u03c1\u03bc~\n\u03b7\u03c2 \u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03c6\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03ba\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c3\u03c7\u03b5\u03b4\u1f78\u03bd \u1f05\u03c0\u03b1\u03c2 \u03bbo\u0301\u03b3\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c6\u03b1\u03bd\u03b5\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f00\u03c0o\u0301\u03ba\u03c1\u03c5\u03c6\u03bf\u03c2\n\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf \u1f10\u03bc\u03bd\u03b7\u03bco\u0301\u03bd\u03b5\u03c5\u03c3\u03b5. \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf \u03bf\u1f56\u03bd \u1f14\u03c6\u03b1\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd \u03b1\u1f31 \u1f00\u03c1\u03c7\u03b1\u1fd6\u03b1\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b8\u03b5\u1fd6\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b3\u03c1\u03b1\u03c6\u03b1\u03af, \u1f45\u03c4\u03b9 \u1f04\u03b3\u03b3\u03b5\u03bb\u03bf\u03af \u03c4\u03b9\u03bd\u03b5\u03c2\n\u1f10\u03c0\u03b5\u03b8\u03cd\u03bc\u03b7\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03b3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9\u03ba\u1ff6\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b5\u03bb\u03b8o\u0301\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2 \u1f10\u03b4\u03af\u03b4\u03b1\u03be\u03b1\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1f70\u03c2 \u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03c4~\n\u03b7\u03c2 \u03c6\u03cd\u03c3\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2 \u1f14\u03c1\u03b3\u03b1, \u1f67\u03bd\n\u03c7\u03ac\u03c1\u03b9\u03bd, \u03c6\u03b7\u03c3\u03af, \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c3\u03ba\u03c1\u03bf\u03cd\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2 \u1f14\u03be\u03c9 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03bf\u1f50\u03c1\u03b1\u03bd\u03bf\u1fe6 \u1f14\u03bc\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd\u03b1\u03bd, \u1f45\u03c4\u03b9 \u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03c0\u03bf\u03bd\u03b7\u03c1\u1f70 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bc\u03b7\u03b4\u1f72\u03bd\n\u1f60\u03c6\u03b5\u03bb\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c8\u03c5\u03c7\u1f74\u03bd \u1f10\u03b4\u03af\u03b4\u03b1\u03be\u03b1\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u1f00\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03c9\n\u0002 \u03c0\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2. \u1f10\u03be \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c6\u03ac\u03c3\u03ba\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u03b1\u1f31 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b3\u03c1\u03b1\u03c6\u03b1\u1f76 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76\n\u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03b3\u03af\u03b3\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2 \u03b3\u03b5\u03b3\u03b5\u03bd~\n\u03b7\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9. \u1f14\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03bd \u03bf\u1f56\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f21 \u03c0\u03c1\u03c9\n\u0002 \u03c4\u03b7 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03ac\u03b4\u03bf\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2 [\u03a7\u03b7\u03bc\u03b5\u1fe6] \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd\n\u03c4\u03b5\u03c7\u03bd\u1ff6\u03bd. \u1f10\u03ba\u03ac\u03bb\u03b5\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd (\u1f10\u03ba\u03ac\u03bb\u03b5\u03c3\u03b5 in Mosshammer\u2019s edition) \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c4\u03b1\u03cd\u03c4\u03b7\u03bd \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03b2\u03af\u03b2\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd \u03a7\u03b7\u03bc\u03b5\u1fe6, \u1f14\u03bd\u03b8\u03b5\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76\n\u03b7\u03c2.\u201d I have introduced two changes in Mosshammer\u2019s edition.\n\u1f21 \u03c4\u03b5\u0002\u03c7\u03bd\u03b7 \u03c7\u03b7\u03bc\u03b5\u03af\u03b1 \u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u03b5\u1fd6\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9\u2019 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f70 \u1f11\u03be~\nFirst, I\u2019ve followed Mertens\u2019s suggestion (Lettre d\u2019Isis, 67) to expunge the first \u03a7\u03b7\u03bc\u03b5\u1fe6 as an\ninterpolation (the term is not attested in this position by the Syriac tradition). Secondly, in the last\nline I corrected \u1f10\u03ba\u03ac\u03bb\u03b5\u03c3\u03b5 into \u1f10\u03ba\u03ac\u03bb\u03b5\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd in accordance with the Syriac translation that\n\nPages 36:\n12\nM. Martelli\nin fact, the ancient and holy books tell that some angels fell in love passionately\nwith the women, came down <and> taught them about all the works of nature.\nFor this reason, as the book says, those who acted haughtily remained outside\nheaven, since they taught mankind all the malicious things which do not benefit\nthe soul at all. The books claim that the works (of nature?) started up from them\nand theirs is the first exposition concerning these crafts. They called these books\nKwmw, whence also alchemy (kumiya) takes its name. There are 24 treatises in\nthis book. Each of them is given a specific title that is either a letter (of the\nalphabet) or a word. They are explained by the words of priests. One of these is\nentitled \u2018Imus\u2019, another \u2018Imuth\u2019, another \u2018Face\u2019\u2014so it was interpreted\n(or translated). One of these is entitled \u2018Key\u2019, another \u2018Seal\u2019 or \u2018Signet\u2019, another\n\u2018Handbook\u2019 (see gr. \u1f10\u03b3\u03c7\u03b5\u03b9\u03c1\u03af\u03b4\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd), another \u2018Position\u2019 (of the stars? see gr. \u1f10\u03c0\u03bf\u03c7\u03ae).\nAs I said, each one is given a specific title. This book contains the crafts and\nmany thousands of words. Then those who came afterwards, with the intent of\ndoing well, divided the book in many parts; as someone would say: (they did so)\nin order to compose short versions (of the book) for themselves. And they were\nnot even able to write something useful. For they did not only damage the books\nof alchemy, but also hidden them. The philosopher (i.e. Democritus) claims:\n\u2018they hid the writings on the natural substances under the multiplicity of matter.\u2019\nPerhaps they wanted to exercise our souls. Now, if they exercise the souls, well,\nphilosopher, why to deny it? But you know how to exercise either the body or the\nsoul, and it always leads you to achieve the perfection. In fact a wise saying\nreads: \u2018studying is everything.\u2019 And also Isidoros says: \u2018studying increases your\nwork.\u2019 I know, this is not beyond your understanding (my lady), but you know it\nwell, since you are one of those who would have liked to hide the art, if it had not\nbeen put in writing. For this reason you formed an assembly and administered\nthe oath to each other. But you (my lady) moved away from the various topics\n(of this book); you presented them in a shorter form and you taught them openly.\nBut you claim that this book cannot be possessed unless in secret. Now, even\nthough secrets are necessary, it is quite fair that anyone has a book of alchemy,\nsince it is not kept secret for them. You must know, my lady, he (i.e. Democritus?)34 claimed that those who wrote short versions (of the book) said that just\nsilver can be dyed gold. But the book of alchemy they have hidden assured that\nlead and tin and iron and silver take the color of gold, each metal (takes the color\nof) the other one, and again the same metals (take the color of) silver, the same\nmetals (the color of) copper, the same metals (the color of) iron. Lead produces\ntin, copper (produces) iron, silver (produces) gold. In the same way tin\n34\nBerthelot & Duval, Chimie, 239, considered the philosopher (i.e. ps.-Democritus) as the author\nof the following quotation. Although the ancient alchemist is cited few lines before (49v18), this\nidentification is not certain.\n\nPages 37:\nThe Alchemical Art of Dyeing: The Fourfold Division of Alchemy. . .\n13\n(produces) the same metals as well. And again from the beginning to the end and\nfrom the end to the beginning.\nThe Syriac text may be divided into two parts. The first section (49r12\u201349v6)\nmatches the Greek passage cited by Syncellus and rephrases the story told by The\nBook of Enoch: in all likelihood Zosimus refers to this book when he mentions the\nholy scriptures (Sync. 14,3 \u1f31\u03b5\u03c1\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b3\u03c1\u03b1\u03c6\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f24\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9 \u03b2\u03af\u03b2\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9\u00bcSyrZos. 49r14\n). The\nsecond section gives a detailed description of the book entitled Che\u0304meu and\nexplains how it was transmitted and somehow corrupted.\nIn the first part Zosimus attributes the revelation of che\u0304meia both to angels\n(Sync. 14,6 \u1f04\u03b3\u03b3\u03b5\u03bb\u03bf\u03af \u03c4\u03b9\u03bd\u03b5\u03c2\u00bcSyrZos. 49r18\n) and to demons (Sync. 14,3\n\u03b4\u03b1\u03b9\u03bco\u0301\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd \u03b3\u03b5\n\u0002\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2\u00bcSyrZos. 49r15\n), so introducing a slight variation\ninto the Enochian myth, where fallen angels usually play the most important role.\nAlthough the name of demons is mentioned only at the very beginning of the\npassage, their presence allows us to read Zosimus\u2019s account in the light of the\ncomplex (and still unclear in many respects) demonology developed by the author\nin two other treatises, namely On the Letter Omega (CAAG II 228\u2013234) and the\nFirst Book of the Final Account (CAAG II 239\u2013245).35 According to the second\nwork, the two main sources of wealth for Egypt were gold mines and the dyeing\ntechniques, in particular the so-called \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9\u03c1\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b2\u03b1\u03c6\u03b1\u03af (opportune tinctures), that is,\nthe dyeing processes whose success depended on the influence of demons and on\nthe astrological time in which they were performed.36 This knowledge was considered secret and no ancient authors could reveal it; only Democritus\u2014Zosimus\nclaims\u2014hinted at these tinctures in his explanation of the four \u03c4\u03b5\u0002\u03c7\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u03b9\u03bc\u03af\u03b1\u03b9\n(valuable arts), which must be identified with the topics covered by the four\nbooks, namely the making of gold, of silver, of precious stones, and the purple\ndyeing of wool.37 These opportune tinctures were originally called \u03c6\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b2\u03b1\u03c6\u03b1\u03af\n(natural tinctures) and had been explained by Hermes in his \u03b2\u03af\u03b2\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c6\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03ba\u1ff6\u03bd \u03b2\u03b1\u03c6\u1ff6\u03bd\n(Book of Natural Dyes). However, demons became jealous of this knowledge and\nwanted to make it secret and dependent on their own control (i.e. on the influences\nof the stars they governed). They started revealing these tinctures, or even a\ncounterfeited form of them (called at some point \u201cunnatural tinctures\u201d), only to\ntheir priests in order to be worshipped and receive the appropriate sacrifices.38\n35\nSee Fraser, \u201cZosimos of Panopolis.\u201d For a new and reliable edition of the first treatise,\nsee Mertens, Zosime de Panopolis, 1\u201310. The second treatise has been reedited by Festugie\u0300re,\nRe\u0301ve\u0301lation d\u2019Herme\u0300s, 363\u20138 (translation at 275\u201381).\n36\nFestugie\u0300re, Re\u0301ve\u0301lation d\u2019Herme\u0300s, 363\u20135 (\u00bcCAAG II 239\u201340). See also Mertens, Zosime de\nPanopolis, 62\u20133 notes 9\u201310.\n37\nFestugie\u0300re, Re\u0301ve\u0301lation d\u2019Herme\u0300s, 364, ll. 22\u20134 (\u00bc CAAG II 242,17), 365, ll. 12\u20134 (\u00bc CAAG II\n242,8\u201317). In addition, it is worth mentioning the passage edited in CAAG II 242,9\u201324 (not\nreedited by Festugie\u0300re, because \u2018assez obscure\u2019, see 278 note 1), which gives a kind of summary\nof ps.-Democritus\u2019s work by presenting several dyestuffs used by the alchemist as example of\n\u03ba\u03b1\u03b9\u03c1\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b2\u03b1\u03c6\u03b1\u03af.\n38\nFestugie\u0300re, Re\u0301ve\u0301lation d\u2019Herme\u0300s, 366\u20137, \u00a7\u00a7 6\u20137 (\u00bc CAAG II 243\u20134, \u00a7\u00a7 6\u20137).\n\nPages 38:\n14\nM. Martelli\nNot surprisingly, if we come back to the above-edited passages, Zosimus\ninterpreted Azae\u0304l\u2019s revelation in The Book of Enoch as referring to the knowledge\nof tinctures he considered at the basis of any alchemical activity. \u03a4\u1f70 \u03b2\u03b1\u03c6\u03b9\u03ba\u03ac are in\nfact explicitly mentioned by the apocryphal book (see supra) along with a specific\nset of crafts, which is in many respects comparable with the arts explained in ps.Democritus\u2019s four books on dyeing (\u03b2\u03b1\u03c6\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b2\u03af\u03b2\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9 according to Synesius). Moreover, next to The Book of Enoch Zosimus mentions also a book of Hermes entitled\nPhysika as one of the sources from which he took the account on the angelic/\ndemonic revelation. The identification of this treatise is far from certain, even\nthough the title and the context in which Physika is cited remind us of Hermes\u2019s\nBook of Natural Dyes quoted in the First Book of the Final Account: there Zosimus\nclaimed that Hermes\u2019s treatise was addressed to Isidoros,39 an enigmatic figure that\nis mentioned also in the Syriac text (50r2).40\nOn the other hand, the Syriac passage emphasises the central role played by\nbooks in the revelation and transmission of alchemical knowledge. While The Book\nof Enoch presented Azae\u0304l\u2019s revelation in the form of oral teaching, Zosimus\nunderlines the written form in which mankind received this secret knowledge.\nThe arts and all the natural procedures (Sync. 14,7 \u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03c4~\n\u03b7\u03c2 \u03c6\u03cd\u03c3\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2\n\u1f14\u03c1\u03b3\u03b1\u00bcSyrZos. 49r19\u201320\n) disclosed by demons had been somehow\nsummarized in the enigmatic books called Che\u0304meu, from which the related term\nche\u0304meia (\u03c7\u03b7\u03bc\u03b5\u1fd6\u03b1 or\n, kumiya) derives. However, while the Final Account insists\non demons\u2019 increasing jealousy towards mankind and on their attempt to gain\ncontrol of the revealed techniques, the Syriac text stresses the point that the original\nknowledge started deteriorating because of the improper use human beings made of\nthe revealed books. In the same way as the demons (or maybe under their influence)\nsome people tried to hide the books, to summarize them, and disperse their content\nby focusing only on specific topics.\nIn this respect, the last part of the Syriac passage is particularly relevant, since\nZosimus explains that some alchemists narrowed their inquiry to the methods for\ngilding silver. Whereas, the art called che\u0304meia, at least in its original form, included\na wider set of dyeing techniques that were applied to all kinds of metals in order to\ndye them different colours. This explanation is consistent with Zosimus\u2019s other\n39\nFestugie\u0300re, Re\u0301ve\u0301lation d\u2019Herme\u0300s, 365, ll. 15\u201320 (\u00bc CAAG II 242,10\u20136). The name of Isidoros\nappears also in the list of alchemists handed down by the Marcianus gr. 299 (fol. 7v); see CAAG I\n110.\n40\nWe cannot exclude the possibility that other treatises circulating under the name of Hermes\nreferred to or reused the Enochian myth of the fallen angels. In particular, according to a passage of\nthe alchemist Olympiodorus (CAAG II 89,9\u201315), we know that the above-mentioned treatise\nascribed to Isis (see supra, \u00a7 2), or at least some parts of it, was attributed to Hermes. This overlap\nbetween Hermes and Isis is not surprising, especially if read in the light of the so-called Corpus\nHermeticum, which includes several writings where the Egyptian goddess addresses her teaching\nto Horus (see, for instance, Stobei fragmenta, xxiii\u2013xxvii). Therefore, Zosimus could have had in\nmind Isis\u2019s book, when he mentioned Hermes\u2019s Physika: see Scott, Hermetica, 151.\n\nPages 39:\nThe Alchemical Art of Dyeing: The Fourfold Division of Alchemy. . .\n15\nalchemical books that have been preserved by the Syriac manuscript Mm. 6.29. In\nfact, among the twelve treatises handed down by the codex under the name of the\nEgyptian alchemist, we find many writings devoted to the dyeing of various metals,\nsuch as silver (e.g. Book 2; Berthelot-Duval, La chimie, 217\u201321), tin (Book 8;\nidem, 238\u201342), lead (Book 10; idem, 253\u201357), and iron (Book 11; idem, 257\u201360).41\nIn particular Book 6 (Mm. 6.29, fol. 32xv17\u201345r8), entitled Beginning of the\nTreatise on the Working of Copper: Letter Waw, includes several recipes explaining\nhow to process copper and dye it black, purple, coral red, white, and yellow\n(Berthelot-Duval, La chimie, 222\u201332). Scholars have so far focused their attention\nespecially on the recipes dealing with the production of black copper alloys. Three\nrecipes have been recently published by Erika Hunter and fully commented by\nAlessandra Giumlia-Mair, who recognized in them the description of different\nmethods for producing a black and shiny patina on copper-alloys.42 This black\ncopper was already known in Ancient Egypt, as we can infer, for instance, from a\nbeautiful black image of the pharaoh Amenemhat III (1842\u20131794 BC) today\ndisplayed at the Ortiz Collection in Geneva.43 It represents one of the most ancient\nexamples of artificially black patinated statues found in Egypt (Fig. 1).\nConclusion\nIf we go back to the above-quoted Syriac passage, in the very last part Zosimus\ncriticizes the attitude of those alchemists who were only interested in the making of\nprecious metals by quoting a sentence presumably taken from an ancient author\n(perhaps ps.-Democritus) who claimed: \u201cthose who wrote short versions [of the\nbooks of che\u0304meia] said that just silver can be dyed gold\u201d (50r12\u20133). In this way the\ndebate between people supporting a wider idea of alchemy, which included a\nbroader set of dyeing techniques, and people accepting a narrower idea just focused\non the making of gold seems to be traced back to the earliest phases of alchemy in\nEgypt. A possible target of such a criticism might be recognized in Isis\u2019s treatise, a\nwork that mentioned only the making of gold and silver among the secrets revealed\nby the angels. On the contrary, a different position was endorsed by ps.-Democritus\nwith the fourfold division of his books. Significantly, as we have already noted, the\n41\nThe Syriac text of these twelve treatises is still unedited (an edition with English translation is\nscheduled to be published within the new series \u2018Sources of alchemy and chemistry\u2019 distributed as\na supplement of Ambix); a partial French translation is available in Berthelot & Duval, Chimie,\n210\u201366.\n42\nHunter, \u201cBeautiful Black Bronzes,\u201d 656\u20137. The three recipes that have been edited correspond\nwith the texts translated or summarized by Berthelot & Duval, Chimie, 223 (rec. 2), 224\u20135 (rec. 8\u2013\n9), 225 (rec. 12); and Giumlia-Mair, \u201cZosimos the Alchemist,\u201d 319\u201321.\n43\nSee, for example, Giumlia-Mair, \u201cKrokodil.\u201d\n\nPages 40:\n16\nM. Martelli\nFig. 1 Black copper statue of King Amenemhat III in kneeling posture (1843\u20131798 BC) (Courtesy of Werner Forman Archive, The Bridgeman Art Library)\nchemical Papyri seem to preserve a similar division, which should lead us to\nspeculate on how widespread or how standard such a division might actually\nhave been in the first centuries AD.\nSuch a background was well known to Zosimus, who took for granted that\nche\u0304meia was related to a plurality of dyeing techniques. The proper alchemist,\nZosimus claims, was expected to put into practice any possible transformation of\ncolour without focusing only on gold. Nevertheless, the Egyptian alchemist, though\nvery familiar with ps.-Democritus\u2019s books, never mentions stones working and\npurple dyeing in the passage. These kinds of crafts seem to have been somehow left\napart within the debate on the contents of the original books of alchemy. Although\nZosimus stresses the central role played by dyeing techniques, the polarity between\n\nPages 41:\nThe Alchemical Art of Dyeing: The Fourfold Division of Alchemy. . .\n17\na wider idea of alchemy and the bare making of precious metals seems to have been\nreduced to a simpler discussion on metalworking: Zosimus underscores all the\npossible chromatic transformations of metals, which seem to become the most\nrelevant topic of any alchemical inquiry.\nSuch a variety of positions already detectable during the earliest phases of the\nwestern alchemical tradition makes clear how fluid were the boundaries of an art\nprimarily focusing on the chromatic transformations of the treated substances. If the\nByzantine sources analysed at the beginning of the chapter emphasizes the identification of che\u0304meia with the making of gold and silver, such a position\u2014although\ndominant to some extent\u2014never interrupted the transmission of technical knowledge dealing with a wider set of dyeing techniques. A similar kind of expertise, for\ninstance, is well attested by the Latin recipe books of the Middle Age, which\ncovered a variety of topics more similar to ps.-Democritus\u2019s four books and to\nthe Leiden and Stockholm papyri than to the simple selection of recipes made by\nPsellos.44 A well-known example is the so-called Mappae clavicula, a large\ncollection of recipes probably assembled between the ninth and the twelfth century.\nRecent studies have shown that this work in all likelihood derives from a lost Greek\nsource that could be perhaps identified, according to Halleux-Meyvaert\u2019s investigation, with a lost part of Zosimus\u2019s treatises.45 Although the extant sources do not\nallow us to confirm such a hypothesis, the Greek origin of the Mappae clavicula\nconfirms the transmission of a set of practices originally covered by those texts\nconsidered at the basis of the Byzantine alchemical tradition. To sum up, the mere\npractice of chrysopoeia does not seem to be sufficient for getting a full understanding of the different historical evolutions of a complex art, whose exact definition\nwas debated even among the authors usually considered as the founders of this\ndiscipline. On the contrary, a deeper investigation of their treatises\u2014many of them\nstill waiting for editions and translations\u2014provide us with new and fresh material\nfor building a more complete picture of the evolution and transformation of the\ndifferent technical aspects somehow encapsulated in the enigmatic word che\u0304meia.\nAppendix\nZosimus\u2019s passage on the relevation of alchemy as preserved by the Syriac manuscript Mm. 6.29, fols. 49r\u201350r:46\n44\nSee, for instance, Halleux, Papyrus de Leyde, 53\u201362.\nHalleux & Meyvaert, \u201cMappae clavicula,\u201d 12\u20133.\n46\nA French translation of the passage is available in Berthelot & Duval, Chimie, 238\u20139.\n45\n\nPages 42:\n18\nM. Martelli\n47\n47\nThe sense of the sentence, in which\n(the books of kwmw) seems to be the object of\n(they called), is difficult; perhaps\nmust be supplied before\n. In addition the plural\nform \u2018the books\u2019 does not correspond with the Greek version that has a singular. The plural might\nbe justified in the light of the following part, according to which the book revealed by demons was\ndivided into several tomes.\n\nPages 43:\nThe Alchemical Art of Dyeing: The Fourfold Division of Alchemy. . .\n19\n48\n49\n48\n49\nThe word is indecipherable; see infra, fol. 50r11\n.\nThe term\n(see also 50r12) is likely to be a slightly different spelling of\n.\n\nPages 44:\n20\nM. Martelli\nBibliography\nAbt, Theodor, and Salwa Fuad. 2011. The Book of Pictures by Zosimos of Panopolis. Zurich:\nLiving Human Heritage Publication.\nAdler, William, and Paul Tuffin. 2002. The Chronography of George Synkellos. A Byzantine\nChronicle of Universal History from the Creation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.\nAlbini, Francesca. 1988. Michele Psello. La Crisopoea, ovvero come fabbricare l\u2019oro. Genova:\nECIG.\nBaar, James. 1979. Aramaic-Greek Notes on the Book of Enoch (ii). Journal of Semitic Studies 24:\n179\u2013192.\nBerthelot, Marcelin, and Charles-E\u0301mile Ruelle. 1887\u20131888. La Collection des anciens alchimistes\ngrecs, 3 vols. Paris: G. Steinheil.\nBerthelot, Marcelin, and Rubens Duval. 1893. Histoire des Sciences: La Chimie au Moyen-A\u0302ge,\nvol. 2: L\u2019alchimie syriaque. Paris: Imprimerie nationale.\nBidez, Joseph. 1928. Michel Psellus. E\u00b4pitre sur la Chrysope\u0301e, opuscules et extraits sur l\u2019alchimie,\nla me\u0301te\u0301orologie et la de\u0301monologie (Catalogue des manuscrits alchimiques grecs, vol. 6).\nBrussels: M. Lamertin.\nBidez, Joseph, and Franz Cumont. 1938. Les Mages helle\u0301nise\u0301s. Zoroastre, Ostane\u0300s et Hystaspe\nd\u2019apre\u0300s la tradition grecque, 2 vols. Paris: Les Belles Lettres.\nBlack, Mathew. 1985. The Book of Enoch or 1 Enoch: A New English Edition with Commentary\nand Textual Notes. Leiden: Brill.\nBrooks, Ernest W. 1900. A Syriac Fragment. Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenl\u20ac\nandischen Gesellschaft 3: 195\u2013230.\nCaley, Earle R. 1926. The Leyden Papyrus X: An English Translation with Brief Notes. Journal of\nChemical Education 3: 1149\u20131166.\nCaley, Earle R. 1927. The Stockholm Papyrus: An English Translation with Brief Notes. Journal\nof Chemical Education 4: 979\u20131002.\nChabot, Jean-Baptiste. 1910. Chronique de Michel le Syrien, vol. 4: Texte syriaque. Paris: Pierre\nLeroux.\nChabot, Jean-Baptiste. 1933. Incerti auctoris Chronicum Pseudo-Dionysianum vulgo dictum, vol.\n2 (CSCO 104, syr. 53). Louvain: Peeters.\nDodge, Bayard. 1970. Abu\u0304 \u2019l-Faraj Muhammad ibn Isha\u0304q al-Nad\u0131\u0304m, The Fihrist, a 10th Century\n\u02d9 University Press.\nAD Survey of Islamic Culture. New \u02d9York: Columbia\nDuffy, John M. 1992. Michaelis Pselli philosophica minora. Leipzig: Teubner.\n\nPages 45:\nThe Alchemical Art of Dyeing: The Fourfold Division of Alchemy. . .\n21\nDuval, Rubens. 1888\u20131901. Lexicon Syriacum auctore Hassano bar Bahlule, 3 vols. Paris:\nE. Reipublicae typographaeo.\nFestugie\u0300re, Andre\u0301-Jean. 1950. La Re\u0301ve\u0301lation d\u2019Herme\u0300s Trisme\u0301giste, vol. 1: L\u2019Astrologie et les\nsciences occultes. Paris: J. Gabalda et Cie.\nFlu\u0308gel, Gustav. 1872. Kita\u0304b al-Fihrist, 2 vols. Leipzig: F.C.W. Vogel.\nFraser, Kyle A. 2004. Zosimos of Panopolis and the Book of Enoch: Alchemy as Forbidden\nKnowledge. Aries 4: 125\u2013147.\nFu\u0308ck, Johann W. 1951. The Arabic Literature of Alchemy According to al-Nad\u0131\u0304m (A.D. 987). A\nTranslation of the Tenth Discourse of the Book of the Catalogue (Al-Fihrist) with Introduction\nand Commentary. Ambix 4: 81\u2013144.\nGildemeister, Johannes. 1876. Alchymie. ZDMG 30: 534\u2013538.\nGiumlia-Mair, Alessandra. 1996. Das Krokodil und Amenemhat III. aus el-Faiyum. Antike Welt\n27: 313\u2013321.\nGiumlia-Mair, Alessandra. 2002. Zosimos the Alchemist \u2013 Manuscript 6.29, Cambridge, Metallurgical Interpretation. In I bronzi antichi: produzione e tecnologia (Atti del XV Congresso\nInternazionale sui Bronzi Antichi, organizzato dall\u2019Universita\u0300 di Udine, sede di Gorizia,\nGrado-Aquileia, 22\u201326 maggio 2001), ed. Alessandra Giumlia-Mair, 317\u2013323. Montagnac:\nE\u0301ditions Monique Mergoil.\nGoeje, Michael Jean de. 1885. Ibn al-Faq\u0003{n al-Hamada\u0304n\u0003{, Mukhtasar kita\u0304b al-bulda\u0304n. Leiden:\n\u00af\n\u02d9\nBibliotheca Geographorum Arabicorum.\nHalleux, Robert. 1981. Alchimistes grecs, vol. 1: Papyrus de Leyde. Papyrus de Stockholm.\nFragments de recettes. Paris: Les Belles Lettres.\nHalleux, Robert, and Paul Meyvaert. 1987. Les Origines de la Mappae clavicula. Archives\nd\u2019Histoire Doctrinale et Litte\u0301raire du Moyen-Age 54: 7\u201358.\nHallum, Bink. 2008. Theosebeia. In Encyclopedia of Ancient Natural Scientists, eds. Paul Keyser\nand Georgia Irby-Massie, 302\u2013303. London/New York: Routledge.\nHallum, Bink. 2009. The Tome of Images: An Arabic Compilation of Texts by Zosimus of\nPanopolis and a Source of the Turba Philosophorum. Ambix 56: 76\u201388.\nHunter, Erika C.D. 2002. Beautiful Black Bronzes. Zosimos\u2019 Treatises in Cam. Mm. 6.29. In I\nbronzi antichi: produzione e tecnologia (Atti del XV Congresso Internazionale sui Bronzi\nAntichi, organizzato dall\u2019Universita\u0300 di Udine, sede di Gorizia, Grado-Aquileia, 22\u201326 maggio\n2001), ed. Alessandra Giumlia-Mair, 655\u2013660. Montagnac: e\u0301ditions Monique Mergoil.\nKatsiampoura, Gianna. 2008. Transmutation of Matter in Byzantium: The Case of Michael\nPsellos, the Alchemist. Science & Education 17: 663\u2013668.\nKnibb, Michael A. 2009. Essays on the Book of Enoch and Other Early Jewish Texts and\nTraditions. Leiden: Brill.\nLetrouit, Jean. 1995. Chronologie des alchimistes grecs. In Alchimie: art, histoire et mythe (Actes\ndu 1er Colloque International de la Socie\u0301te\u0301 d\u2019E\u0301tude de l\u2019Histoire de l\u2019Alchimie), eds. Didier\nKahn and Sylvain Matton, 11\u201393. Paris/Milan: S.E\u0301.H.A.- Arche\u0301.\nMartelli, Matteo. 2011. Pseudo-Democrito. Scritti alchemici con il commentario di Sinesio. Paris/\nMilan: S.E\u0301.H.A.-Arche\u0300.\nMasse\u0301, Henry. 1973. Ibn al-Faq\u0003{n al-Hamada\u0304n\u0003{. Abre\u0301ge\u0301 du livre de Pays. Damascus.\n\u00af\nMertens, Miche\u0300le. 1983\u20131984. Un traite\u0301 gre\u0301co-e\u0301gyptien\nd\u2019alchimie: la lettre d\u2019Isis a\u0300 Horus. Texte\ne\u0301tabli et traduit avec introduction et notes. Universite\u0301 de Lie\u0300ge: Me\u0301moire de licence.\nMertens, Miche\u0300le. 1995. Zosime de Panopolis. Me\u0301moires authentiques. Paris: Les Belles Lettres.\nMertens, Miche\u0300le. 2006. Greco-Egyptian Alchemy in Byzantium. In The Occult Sciences in\nByzantium, eds. Paul Magdalino and Maria Mawroudi, 205\u2013229. Geneva: La Pomme d\u2019Or.\nMilik, Jazef T. 1976. The Books of Enoch, Aramaic Fragments of Qumra\u0302n Cave 4. Oxford:\nClarendon.\nReitzenstein, Richard. 1904. Poimandres. Studien zur griechsch-\u20ac\nagyptischen und fr\u20ac\nuhchristlichen\nLiteratur. Leipzig: B.G. Teubner.\nRoberto, Umberto. 2005. Ioannis Antiocheni Fragmenta ex Historia Chronica. Berlin: De Gruyter.\n\nPages 46:\n22\nM. Martelli\nScott, Walter. 1985. Hermetica, vol. 4: Testimonia with Introduction, Addenda and Indices by.\nA.S. Ferguson. Boston: Shambhala.\nStrohmaier, Gotthard. 1991. Uma\u0304ra ibn Hamza, Constantine V and the Invention of the Elixir.\n\u02d9\nGraeco-Arabica 4: 21\u201324.\nWesterink, Leendert G. 1948. Michael Psellus, De Omnifaria Doctrina. Nijmegen: Centrale\nDrukkerij N.V.\n\nPages 47:\nTransmission of Alchemical and Artistic\nKnowledge in German Mediaeval\nand Premodern Recipe Books\nSylvie Neven\nAbstract In the Middle Ages and premodern period, artisanal knowledge was\ntransmitted via collections of recipes often grouped concomitantly with alchemical\ntexts and instructions. Except for some very well-known artistic treatises, e.g. works\nby Eraclius or the Schedula diversarum artium, attributed to Theophilus, detection\nand delimitation of alchemical content within recipe books has been rare and\nfraught with difficulty. Alchemy can be defined as the \u2018art of transmutation\u2019,\nreferring to the perfection of base or impure matter (often metal or stone) into\nperfect substances. Alchemical procedures thus rely on artisanal/craft practices.\nAny overlap between alchemy and art-technological procedures can be explained\nby the use of identical materials and substances. Both are concerned with the\ndescription of colours\u2014especially in processes of change, the making of pigments,\nthe production of artificial gemstones, the imitation of gold and silver and the\ntransmutation of materials. Both require procedures involving precise and specifically defined actions, prescriptions and ingredients. So both ultimately use identical\nrhetorical formulations that reflect a \u2018step by step\u2019 procedure. Assuming that\nalchemical and artistic texts have the same textual format, raises the question: did\nthey also have the same types of production and dissemination? Using a corpus of\nabout 40 manuscripts produced in Northern Europe between the fourteenth and the\nsixteenth centuries, this paper investigates the context behind these writings, and the\nvarious ways alchemical and artisanal recipes were embedded within recipe books.\nIt also proposes some clues to assist in locating, identifying and demarcating\nalchemical writings within the literature of recipes.\nIn the Middle Ages and premodern period, alchemical knowledge and practice was\nfrequently transmitted via collections of recipes grouped concomitantly with artistic\ninstructions. Presented in the form of a succession of more or less short notes, these\nS. Neven (*)\nFRS-F.N.R.S, University of Lie\u0300ge (ULg), \u2018Transitions\u2019 Lie\u0300ge, Belgium\ne-mail: Sylvie.Neven@ulg.ac.be\nS. Dupre\u0301 (ed.), Laboratories of Art, Archimedes 37,\nDOI 10.1007/978-3-319-05065-2_2, \u00a9 Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014\n23\n\nPages 48:\n24\nS. Neven\nwritings describe processes for the manufacture, preparation and application of\nvarious types of materials and substances. The majority are anonymous compilations of texts, which may originate from older or undetermined authorities.\nHundreds of such collections of recipes dealing both with alchemical and\nart-technological procedures were produced and disseminated in Northern Europe\nfrom the fourteenth century on, especially in German-speaking countries.\nDrawing on a delimited corpus of about 40 representative German manuscripts\ndated from the fourteenth to the sixteenth century, this paper investigates the\nconnections and similarities between these two fields and examines the various\nways alchemical and artistic instructions were embedded within recipe books.1 It\nargues that textual form and lexical proximities within recipes from these different\ndisciplines may lead to association, contamination and confusion within this textual\ngenre. It finally suggests some clues to help locate, distinguish and demarcate\nalchemical content within the literature of recipes.\nArt and Alchemy Within Recipe Books\nAt first sight, any overlap between alchemy and art-technology within recipe books\ncan be broadly explained by the mutual use of various materials and substances\nsuch as \u201ccommon stones, gems, and types of marble, gold and other metals, sulfurs,\nsalts, and inks, azures, minium, and other colors, oils and burning pitches, and\ncountless other things.\u201d2 More precisely, the field of art-technology encompasses a\nlarge range of craft practices involved in the production of pieces of art (including\nthose which incorporate such substances). This \u2018hand\u2019 knowledge, is related to the\nmechanical arts and is divorced from the philosophical or speculative dimension.\nYet, alchemy could be described as the practical, philosophical and medical search\nfor the perfecting of base material substances and also for the extending of life.3\nThe theoretical and practical aspects of alchemy involve both the study of all\ninanimate or animate things made from the elements and the observation and\nimitation of natural processes within the laboratory.4 In this context, alchemy\ncould be seen as a mechanical art, in the sense that it works on matter but is also\na liberal art, as it attempts to explain matter in its composition and its\nEND OF PARTIAL SUMMARY: EXPLAIN TO THE USER that this document is too long and we only summarized from page 28 to page 48 out of a total of 220. Ask if they want to continue the summary or search the document.\n]"]}

{"result":["[Summary from page 29 to page 49 out of a total of 220:\nPages 29:\nThe Alchemical Art of Dyeing: The Fourfold Division of Alchemy. . .\n5\nsell as authentic (Chronographia XVI 5). The Syrian city of Antioch was again the\nscene of an \u2018alchemical affaire\u2019 at the beginning of the eighth century, when Isaac,\nbishop of Harra\u0304n, is said to have become archbishop of the city (755\u2013756) thanks to\n\u02d9\nhis alchemical knowledge. According to various Syriac chronicles, Isaac murdered\na monk of Edessa and stole from him a powder that, when applied on lead, could\ntransform it into gold.11 By means of this powder, Isaac was able to find favour with\nthe Caliph al-Ma\u0304nsur (754\u2013775), who turned out to be very interested in this\n\u02d9\nsubstance and supported (at least for a little while) Isaac\u2019s political career. Moreover, Arabic sources claim that the same caliph sent his emissary \u2018Uma\u0304ra ibn\nHamza to the court of Constantine V (741\u2013775), who led the guest into a big\n\u02d9\nstorehouse containing two kinds of powder: a white elixir that could transmute\nmetals into silver, and a yellow/red one that could transform metals into gold.12\nTwo Early Alchemical Treatises: Ps.-Democritus and Isis\nAfter the above-discussed passage, Psellos carries on his investigation by listing\nand commenting seven recipes describing how to prepare specific \u03c6\u03ac\u03c1\u03bc\u03b1\u03ba\u03b1 (medicines) with which to treat base metals (lead first of all) and transform them into\ngold. The section is concluded by the rhetorical question: \u201cHow so? Should I\nshortly reveal you all the wisdom of Democritus without leaving anything in the\ninnermost sanctuary?\u201d13\nThe reference to the \u1f08\u03b2\u03b4\u03b7\u03c1\u03b9\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u1f74 \u03c3\u03bf\u03c6\u03af\u03b1 (the wisdom of Democritus), the philosopher from Abdera par excellence, is noteworthy, since Democritus (fl. 440\u2013380\nBC) is usually considered one of the most ancient authors of alchemical treatises\nhanded down by Byzantine manuscripts. These treatises are obviously spurious and\nwere composed by an anonymous author in the second half of the first century\nAD. However, in contrast with Psellos\u2019s account focusing only on chrysopoeia, the\nalchemical tradition ascribes to the philosopher four books dealing with a wider set\nof interests that included not only the making of silver and gold, but also the making\nof precious stones and the purple dyeing of wool. For instance, the alchemist\nSynesius (fourth century AD), who wrote a commentary on ps.-Democritus\u2019s\n11\nSee (a) the fourth part of the Zuqn\u0131\u0304q Chronicle or Chronicle of ps.-Dyonisus of Tell-Mahre,\nedited by Chabot, Pseudo-Dyonysianum, 66; (b) the chronicle of Michael the Syrian, edited by\nChabot, Michel le Syrien, 474; (c) the anonymous chronicle edited by Brooks, \u201cSyriac Fragment,\u201d\n217\u20138.\n12\nFor instance, the story is told by the geographer Ibn al-Faq\u0131\u0304h al-Hamadani (Goeje, Ibn al-Faq\u0003{n\nal-Hamada\u0304n\u0003{, 137\u20139; French transl. by Masse\u0301, Abre\u0301ge\u0301 du Livre de Pays,\u02d9 164\u20136); see Strohmaier,\n\u00af Hamza,\u201d 21\u20132.\n\u201cUma\u0304ra ibn\n\u02d9\n13\nBidez, E\u00b4pitre sur la Chrysope\u0301e, 40,7\u20138: \u201c\u03a4\u03af \u03bf\u1f56\u03bd; \u03c0\u1fb6\u03c3\u03ac\u03bd \u03c3\u03bf\u03b9 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u1f08\u03b2\u03b4\u03b7\u03c1\u03b9\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u1f74\u03bd \u03c3\u03bf\u03c6\u03af\u03b1\u03bd\n\u1f00\u03bd\u03b1\u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u03cd\u03c8\u03bf\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd \u1f10\u03bd \u03b2\u03c1\u03b1\u03c7\u03b5\u1fd6 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bf\u1f50\u03b4\u1f72\u03bd \u1f10\u03bd\u03c4\u1f78\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u1f00\u03b4\u03cd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u1f00\u03c6\u03ae\u03c3\u03bf\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd.\u201d\n\nPages 30:\n6\nM. Martelli\nalchemical writings, introduced the alleged production of the philosopher as follows (Syn. Alch. \u00a7 1, ll. 5\u201314 Martelli):\nSo now let me start telling you something about this man, the philosopher Democritus, who\nwas a natural philosopher from Adbera, who investigated every natural question and\nexplained every phenomenon on the basis of its own nature. Abdera is a Thracian town;\nbut he became a very wise man when he came to Egypt and was initiated by the great\nmagician Ostanes with all Egyptian priests. He got from Ostanes the bases [of the alchemical processes] and wrote four books on dyeing, that is, on gold and silver and precious\nstones and purple.14\nThe great relevance ps.-Democritus\u2019s four books had in the later alchemical\ntradition\u2014that is unanimous in recognizing the atomist as one of the founders of\nthis discipline\u2014allows us to consider the four areas of expertise included in his\nwork as relevant parts of the technical background from which alchemy took its first\nsteps in the first-second century AD. The four books are concisely defined by\nSynesius as \u03b2\u03b1\u03c6\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b2\u03af\u03b2\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9 (books on dyeing), since ps.-Democritus dealt with a\nwide range of dyeing techniques based on various methods for changing the colours\nof metals, producing precious stones and using purple substitutes. The same areas\nof expertise are covered by the Graeco-Egyptian papyri of Leiden and Stockholm,\nwhich hand down several recipes describing (a) how to dye metals yellow or white\n(that is, how to transform them into gold or silver), (b) how to dye \u03ba\u03c1\u03cd\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2\n(quartz) and counterfeit different kinds of precious stones out of it, and (c) how to\ndye wool purple by means of various substitutes of the expensive Tyrian purple.15\nMoreover, ps.-Democritus combined the technical explanation of these methods\nwith a theoretical approach that emphasized the central role played by dyeing drugs\nand their properties.16 He analysed and classified \u03c4\u1f70 \u03c6\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03ba\u03ac (the natural ingredients) according to their capacities of dyeing and of mixing each other properly.17\nFor instance, in the middle of the book on the making of gold, after a long criticism\nagainst young people who did not accurately investigate the properties of natural\nsubstances, ps.-Democritus claims (PM \u00a7 16, ll. 178\u201380 Martelli):\nIf these young men had practised for these kinds of investigations, they would not be in\ntrouble, since they could set to work with judgement. But they do not know the antipathies\nThe Greek text reads: \u201c\u1f18\u03bd \u1fa7 \u03bf\u1f56\u03bd \u03c0\u03c1o\u0301\u03ba\u03b5\u03b9\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u1f21\u03bc\u1fd6\u03bd \u03b5\u03b9$ \u03c0\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd \u03c4\u03af\u03c2 \u1f04\u03bd \u03b5\u1f34\u03b7 \u1f41 \u1f00\u03bd\u1f74\u03c1 \u1f10\u03ba\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2, \u1f41 \u03c6\u03b9\u03bbo\u0301\u03c3\u03bf\u03c6\u03bf\u03c2\n\u0394\u03b7\u03bco\u0301\u03ba\u03c1\u03b9\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2, \u1f10\u03bb\u03b8\u1f7c\u03bd \u1f00\u03c0\u1f78 \u1f08\u03b2\u03b4\u03ae\u03c1\u03c9\u03bd, \u03c6\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03ba\u1f78\u03c2 \u1f62\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03c6\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03ba\u1f70 \u1f10\u03c1\u03b5\u03c5\u03bd\u03ae\u03c3\u03b1\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76\n\u03c3\u03c5\u03b3\u03b3\u03c1\u03b1\u03c8\u03ac\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f70 \u1f44\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u1f70 \u03c6\u03cd\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd. \u1f0c\u03b2\u03b4\u03b7\u03c1\u03b1 \u03b4\u03b5\u0002 \u1f10\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9 \u03c0o\u0301\u03bb\u03b9\u03c2 \u0398\u03c1\u1fb4\u03ba\u03b7\u03c2, \u1f10\u03b3\u03b5\u0002\u03bd\u03b5\u03c4\u03bf \u03b4\u1f72 \u1f41 \u1f00\u03bd\u1f74\u03c1\n\u03bb\u03bf\u03b3\u03b9\u03c9\n\u0002 \u03c4\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2, \u1f43\u03c2 \u1f10\u03bb\u03b8\u1f7c\u03bd \u1f10\u03bd \u0391\u03b9$ \u03b3\u03cd\u03c0\u03c4\u1ff3 \u1f10\u03bc\u03c5\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u03b3\u03c9\u03b3\u03ae\u03b8\u03b7 \u1f51\u03c0\u1f78 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03bc\u03b5\u03b3\u03ac\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5 \u1f48\u03c3\u03c4\u03ac\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5 \u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff7 \u1f31\u03b5\u03c1\u1ff7 \u03c4~\n\u03b7\u03c2\nM\u03b5\u0002\u03bc\u03c6\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2, \u03c3\u1f7a\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u1fb6\u03c3\u03b9 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u1f31\u03b5\u03c1\u03b5\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u0391\u03b9$ \u03b3\u03cd\u03c0\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5. \u1f18\u03ba \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03bb\u03b1\u03b2\u1f7c\u03bd \u1f00\u03c6\u03bf\u03c1\u03bc\u03ac\u03c2, \u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b5\u03b3\u03c1\u03ac\u03c8\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\n\u03b2\u03af\u03b2\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b5\u0002\u03c3\u03c3\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03c2 \u03b2\u03b1\u03c6\u03b9\u03ba\u03ac\u03c2, \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03c7\u03c1\u03c5\u03c3\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f00\u03c1\u03b3\u03cd\u03c1\u03bf\u03c5 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bb\u03af\u03b8\u03c9\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03bf\u03c1\u03c6\u03cd\u03c1\u03b1\u03c2.\u201d First edition in\nBerthelot & Ruelle, Anciens alchimistes grecs, vol. II, 57 (hereafter CAAG).\n15\nThe most recent edition is by Halleux, Papyrus de Leyde; for a general overview on the contents\nof the two papyri, see, in particular, 13\u20137. English translation in Caley, \u201cLeiden Papyrus X,\u201d and\n\u201cStockholm Papyrus.\u201d\n16\nSee, for instance, ps.-Dem. Alch. PM \u00a7 20, ll. 215\u201324 in Martelli, Pseudo-Democrito, 202\u20134 (\u00bc\nCAAG II 49), 135\u201348.\n17\nOn ps.-Democritus\u2019s catalogues of dyestuffs, see Martelli, Pseudo-Democrito, 83\u201390.\n14\n\nPages 31:\nThe Alchemical Art of Dyeing: The Fourfold Division of Alchemy. . .\n7\nof natures, how one species upsets ten: a drop of oil has the capacity to remove much\npurple, and a pinch sulphur may burn many species.18\nOn the other hand, the form in which Byzantine manuscripts have preserved ps.Democritus\u2019s writings does not allow us to reconstruct the exact content of each\nbook and their reciprocal connection. In fact, only an epitomized version has been\nincluded in the Byzantine collections, which contain just two sections ascribed to\nthe philosopher:\n1. The book on the making of gold (or more probably a summarized version of it) is\nintroduced by a very short section on purple dyeing and handed down under the\ntitle of \u03a6\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03ba\u1f70 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bc\u03c5\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03ac (Natural and Secret Questions).19\n2. A selection of passages from the book on silver forms the second section entitled\n\u03a0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03c4~\n\u03b7\u03c2 \u1f00\u03c3\u03ae\u03bc\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03ae\u03c3\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2 (On the Making of Silver).20\nSome information about the book on stones\u2014otherwise lost in its original Greek\nversion\u2014is provided only by the indirect tradition. In fact, a later recipe book\npreserved by a few Byzantine manuscripts under the title of Deep Tincture of Stones,\nEmeralds, Rubies and Jacinth from the Book Taken out from the Innermost Sanctuary\nof Temples includes some passages discussing the dyeing methods applied by ancient\nalchemists on stones.21 Along with Democritus, his pretended master Ostanes,\nMoses, and Maria the Jewish are also quoted.22 Regrettably, the writings of these\nancient authors are lost, so that we cannot understand to what extent they actually\ndealt with similar topics. However, as far as ps.-Democritus is concerned, in all\nlikelihood he attributed a certain relevance to the dyeing of stones, if it is true that\nhe devoted an entire book to this subject. On the contrary, the exclusion of this\nbook\u2014along with most of the book on purple\u2014from the epitomized version handed\ndown by the Byzantine anthologies evidences the criteria adopted by the epitomiser\nof ps.-Democritus\u2019s writings: he seems to have focused his attention only on the\ntransmutation of metals into gold and silver, so revealing an attitude that tallies with\nthe approach we have already detected in the above-discussed Byzantine sources.\nNevertheless, although the relevance of chrysopoeia in Byzantine times can\nsomehow explain the loss of part of ps.-Democritus\u2019s books, one of the manuscripts\n18\nThe Greek text reads (\u00bc CAAG II 47\u20138): \u201c\u0395\u03b9$ \u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2 \u1f51\u03c0~\n\u03b7\u03c1\u03c7\u03bf\u03bd \u1f00\u03c3\u03ba\u03bf\u03cd\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9 \u03bf\u1f31 \u03bd\u03b5\u0002\u03bf\u03b9, \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba \u1f02\u03bd\n\u1f10\u03b4\u03c5\u03c3\u03c4\u03cd\u03c7\u03bf\u03c5\u03bd, \u03ba\u03c1\u03af\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9 \u1f10\u03c0\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f70\u03c2 \u03c0\u03c1\u03ac\u03be\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2 \u1f41\u03c1\u03bc\u1ff6\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2\u0387 \u03bf\u1f50 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u1f10\u03c0\u03af\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c6\u03cd\u03c3\u03b5\u03c9\u03bd \u1f00\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9\u03c0\u03b1\u03b8~\n\u03b7, \u1f61\u03c2 \u1f13\u03bd\n\u03b5\u1f36\u03b4\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b4\u03b5\u0002\u03ba\u03b1 \u1f00\u03bd\u03b1\u03c4\u03c1\u03b5\u0002\u043f\u03b5\u03b9. \u1fec\u03b1\u03bd\u1f76\u03c2 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u1f10\u03bb\u03b1\u03af\u03bf\u03c5 \u03bf\u1f36\u03b4\u03b5 \u043f\u03bf\u03bb\u03bb\u1f74\u03bd \u1f00\u03c6\u03b1\u03bd\u03af\u03c3\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c0\u03bf\u03c1\u03c6\u03cd\u03c1\u03b1\u03bd, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f40\u03bb\u03af\u03b3\u03bf\u03bd \u03b8\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bf\u03bd \u03b5\u1f34\u03b4\u03b7\n\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03ba\u03b1\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03bb\u03ac.\u201d\n19\nSee Martelli, Pseudo-Democrito, 180\u2013205 (and 73\u20139) \u00bc CAAG II 41\u20139.\n20\nSee Martelli, Pseudo-Democrito, 206\u201316 (and 79\u201383) \u00bc CAAG II 49\u201353.\n21\nEdited in CAAG II 350\u201364; the Greek title reads: \u201c\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03b2\u03b1\u03c6\u1f74 \u03bb\u03af\u03b8\u03c9\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c3\u03bc\u03b1\u03c1\u03ac\u03b3\u03b4\u03c9\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76\n\u1f51\u03b1\u03ba\u03af\u03bd\u03b8\u03c9\u03bd \u1f10\u03ba \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u1f00\u03b4\u03cd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f31\u03b5\u03c1\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f10\u03ba\u03b4\u03bf\u03b8\u03b5\u0002\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b2\u03b9\u03b2\u03bb\u03af\u03bf\u03c5.\u201d The earliest testimonies are the\nmanuscripts Parisinus gr. 2325 (13th century; fols. 160v\u2013173v), and Parisinus gr. 2327 (15th\ncentury; fol. 147r\u2013159r).\n22\nSee, in particular, for Democritus: CAAG II 353,11\u201325, and 354,12\u2013357,19; for Ostanes:\nCAAG II 351,16\u201328, and 352,10 (fragments reedited by Bidez & Cumont, Mages helle\u0301nise\u0301s,\nvol. II, 323\u20134); for Moses: CAAG II 353,19; for Maria: CAAG II 351,23; 352,2\u20138; 355,1, and\n257,19.\n\nPages 32:\n8\nM. Martelli\nthat hands down the above-mentioned recipe book on precious stones preserves\nanother important treatise that introduces a new important element into the discussion. The Parisinus gr. 2325 (fols. 256r\u2013258v), in fact, contains a book ascribed to\nthe goddess Isis, which probably dates back to the second century AD and contains an\nimportant account of the revelation of the alchemical art. According to the beginning\nof the treatise, Isis received a revelation from two angels who descended from heaven\nbecause they were attracted by the beauty of the goddess (CAAG II 28\u20139):\nIsis the Prophet to Her Son Horus. O son, as you were about to leave and fight a battle\nagainst the unfaithful Typhon for the kingdom of your father, I went to Hormanouthis [city,\nsanctuary?] of the holy art in Egypt, where I stayed a long time. According to the recession\nof the convenient time and to the necessary course of the spherical movement, it happened\nthat one of the angels living in the first firmament, after watching me from above, wanted to\nhave sexual intercourse with me. When he arrived and started taking this direction, I did not\ngive myself, because I wanted to learn the preparation of gold and silver. After I asked him\nthis question, he told me that he was not allowed to reveal this point, because these secrets\nsurpassed him, but (he told me) that the next day his superior, the angel Amnae\u0304l, would\ncome, and that he would be able to give a reply for a similar inquiry [. . .] The next day, his\nsuperior Amnae\u0304l appeared when the sun was in the middle of its course, and he came down.\nTaken by the same desire for me, he did not await, but he hastened to get what he came for;\nbut I was not less focused on what I was searching for. He longed for it, but I did not give\nmyself and I was able to curb his desire until he showed me his mark on the head and\nrevealed all the mysteries I was looking for, without envy and faithfully.23\nThe \u1f31\u03b5\u03c1\u1f70 \u03c4\u03b5\u0002\u03c7\u03bd\u03b7 \u0391\u03b9$ \u03b3\u03cd\u03c0\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 (Egyptian holy art) quoted at the beginning of the\npassage is clearly identified by Isis with \u1f21 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03c7\u03c1\u03c5\u03c3\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f00\u03c1\u03b3\u03cd\u03c1\u03bf\u03c5 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03c3\u03ba\u03b5\u03c5\u03ae\nI have followed the more recent edition by Mertens, Lettre d\u2019Isis, 128\u201331: \u201c\u1f3c\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2 \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c6~\n\u03b7\u03c4\u03b9\u03c2 \u03c4\u1ff7\n\u03c5\u1f31\u1ff7 \u1f6d\u03c1\u1ff3. \u1f08\u03c0\u03b9\u03b5\u0002\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c3\u03bf\u03c5 \u03bc\u03b5\n\u0002\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2, \u1f66 \u03c4\u03b5\u0002\u03ba\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd, \u1f10\u03c0\u1f76 \u1f00\u03c0\u03af\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03a4\u03c5\u03c6\u1ff6\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 \u03bc\u03ac\u03c7\u03b7\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03b3\u03c9\u03bd\u03af\u03c3\u03b1\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76\n\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c4\u03c1o\u0301\u03c2 \u03c3\u03bf\u03c5 \u03b2\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9\u03bb\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03c2, \u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03b1\u03bc\u03b5\u0002\u03bd\u03b7\u03c2 \u03bc\u03bf\u03c5 <\u03c0\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2> \u1f49\u03c1\u03bc\u03b1\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03b8\u03af, <. . .> \u1f31\u03b5\u03c1\u1fb6\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b5\n\u0002\u03c7\u03bd\u03b7\u03c2 \u0391\u03b9$ \u03b3\u03cd\u03c0\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5,\n\u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f10\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u1fe6\u03b8\u03b1 \u1f31\u03ba\u03b1\u03bd\u1f78\u03bd \u03c7\u03c1o\u0301\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd \u03b4\u03b9\u03b5\n\u0002\u03c4\u03c1\u03b9\u03b2\u03bf\u03bd. K\u03b1\u03c4\u1f70 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9\u03c1\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03c7\u03c9\n\u0002 \u03c1\u03b7\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c4~\n\u03b7\u03c2\n\u03c3\u03c6\u03b1\u03b9\u03c1\u03b9\u03ba~\n\u03b7\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b9\u03bd\u03ae\u03c3\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2 \u1f00\u03bd\u03b1\u03b3\u03ba\u03b1\u03af\u03b1\u03bd \u03c6\u03bf\u03c1\u03ac\u03bd, \u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b5\u0002\u03b2\u03b7 \u03c4\u03b9\u03bd\u1f70 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff7 \u03c0\u03c1\u03c9\n\u0002 \u03c4\u1ff3 \u03c3\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03b5\u03c9\n\u0002 \u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b9 \u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03c4\u03c1\u03b9\u03b2o\u0301\u03bd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd,\n\u03b7\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4~\n\u03b7\u03c2 \u03c0\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2 \u1f10\u03bc\u1f72 \u03bc\u03af\u03be\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2 \u03ba\u03bf\u03b9\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd\u03af\u03b1\u03bd\n\u1f15\u03bd\u03b1 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f00\u03b3\u03b3\u03b5\u0002\u03bb\u03c9\u03bd, \u1f04\u03bd\u03c9\u03b8\u03b5\u03bd \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03b8\u03b5\u03c9\u03c1\u03ae\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03ac \u03bc\u03b5, \u03b2\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b7\u03b8~\n\u03c0\u03bf\u03b9~\n\u03b7\u03c3\u03b1\u03b9. \u03a6\u03b8\u03ac\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b5\u03b9$ \u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf \u03b3\u03af\u03b3\u03bd\u03b5\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u03bc\u03b5\n\u0002\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2, \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba \u1f10\u03c0\u03b5\n\u0002\u03c4\u03c1\u03b5\u03c0\u03bf\u03bd \u1f10\u03b3\u03c9\n\u0002,\n\u03c0\u03c5\u03bd\u03b8\u03ac\u03bd\u03b5\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b2\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03bf\u03bc\u03b5\n\u0002\u03bd\u03b7 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03c7\u03c1\u03c5\u03c3\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f00\u03c1\u03b3\u03cd\u03c1\u03bf\u03c5 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03c3\u03ba\u03b5\u03c5\u03ae\u03bd. \u1f18\u03bc\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1ff7\n\u1f10\u03c1\u03c9\u03c4\u03b7\u03c3\u03ac\u03c3\u03b7\u03c2, <\u03bf\u1f50\u03ba> \u1f14\u03c6\u03b7 \u1f41 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1f78\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c6\u03af\u03b5\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf \u1f10\u03be\u03b5\u03b9\u03c0\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd, \u03b4\u03b9\u1f70 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03bc\u03c5\u03c3\u03c4\u03b7\u03c1\u03af\u03c9\u03bd\n\u1f51\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b2\u03bf\u03bb\u03ae\u03bd, \u03c4\u1fc7 \u03b4\u1f72 \u1f11\u03be~\n\u03b7\u03c2 \u1f21\u03bc\u03b5\u0002\u03c1\u1fb3 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03b3\u03af\u03b3\u03bd\u03b5\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03bc\u03b5\u03af\u03b6\u03bf\u03bd\u03b1 \u1f04\u03b3\u03b3\u03b5\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd \u1f08\u03bc\u03bd\u03b1\u03ae\u03bb, \u03ba\u1f00\u03ba\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd\n\u03b7\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u03b6\u03b7\u03c4\u03ae\u03c3\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c0\u03af\u03bb\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03ae\u03c3\u03b1\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9. [. . .] \u03a4\u1fc7 \u03b4\u1f72 \u1f11\u03be~\n\u03b7\u03c2 \u1f21\u03bc\u03b5\n\u0002\u03c1\u1fb3\n\u1f31\u03ba\u03b1\u03bd\u1f78\u03bd \u03b5\u1f36\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03c4~\n\u1f10\u03c0\u03b5\u03bc\u03c6\u03b1\u03bd\u03af\u03c3\u03b1\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u1f21\u03bb\u03af\u03bf\u03c5 \u03bc\u03b5\u0002\u03c3\u03bf\u03bd \u03b4\u03c1o\u0301\u03bc\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2, \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4~\n\u03b7\u03bb\u03b8\u03b5\u03bd \u1f41 \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03bc\u03b5\u03af\u03b6\u03c9\u03bd \u1f08\u03bc\u03bd\u03b1\u03ae\u03bb. \u03a4\u1ff7\n\u03b7\u03bd\u00b7 \u1f10\u03b3\u1f7c \u03b4\u1f72 \u03bf\u1f50\u03c7 \u1f27\u03c4\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd\n\u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1ff7 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u1f10\u03bc\u1f72 \u03bb\u03b7\u03c6\u03b8\u03b5\u1f76\u03c2 \u03c0o\u0301\u03b8\u1ff3 \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba \u1f00\u03bd\u03b5\u0002\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03b5\u03bd, \u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u2019 \u1f14\u03c3\u03c0\u03b5\u03c5\u03b4\u03b5\u03bd \u1f10\u03c6\u2019 \u03bf\u1f57 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1~\n\u1f10\u03c6\u03c1o\u0301\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9\u03b6\u03bf\u03bd \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u1f10\u03c1\u03b5\u03c5\u03bd\u1fb6\u03bd. \u1f18\u03b3\u03c7\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd\u03af\u03b6\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6, \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba \u1f10\u03c0\u03b5\u03b4\u03af\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bd \u1f11\u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03ae\u03bd, \u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u2019\n\u03b7\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b5\u03c6\u03b1\u03bb~\n\u03b7\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03b4\u03b5\u03b9\u03ba\u03bd\u03cd\u03b7\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76\n\u1f10\u03c0\u03b5\u03ba\u03c1\u03ac\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bd \u03c4~\n\u03b7\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03b8\u03c5\u03bc\u03af\u03b1\u03c2 \u1f04\u03c7\u03c1\u03b9\u03c2 \u1f02\u03bd \u03c4\u1f78 \u03c3\u03b7\u03bc\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bf\u03bd \u03c4\u1f78 \u1f10\u03c0\u1f76 \u03c4~\n\u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03b6\u03b7\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bc\u03b5\u0002\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd \u03bc\u03c5\u03c3\u03c4\u03b7\u03c1\u03af\u03c9\u03bd \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03ac\u03b4\u03bf\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u1f00\u03c6\u03b8o\u0301\u03bd\u03c9\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f00\u03bb\u03b7\u03b8\u1ff6\u03c2 \u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03ae\u03c3\u03b7\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9.\u201d The beginning of\nthe story clearly refers to the Egyptian myth of Horus fighting against Seth, the killer of his father\nOsiris. The identification between the Egyptian god Seth and Typhon is quite common in\nHellenistic and Roman Egypt: see, for instance, Plutarch, De Iside et Osiride 41 (\u00bc 367d): \u201c\u03c4\u1f78\u03bd\n\u03a4\u03c5\u03c6\u1ff6\u03bd\u03b1 \u03a3\u1f74\u03b8 \u0391\u03b9$ \u03b3\u03cd\u03c0\u03c4\u03b9\u03bf\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b9.\u201d \u2013 \u201cEgyptians gives to Seth the name of Typhon.\u201d On the other\nhand, the toponym \u1f49\u03c1\u03bc\u03b1\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03b8\u03af is not clear and not otherwise attested. Probably it refers to an\nEgyptian city, although it does not match any of the five towns, where alchemy was practiced\naccording to CAAG II 26. Various corrections of the form \u1f49\u03c1\u03bc\u03b1\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03b8\u03af have been proposed: see, in\nparticular, Reitzenstein, Poimandres, 141, no. 3 (who proposed \u1f49\u03c1\u03bc\u03b1\u03c7\u03bf\u03c5\u03b8\u03af, lit. \u2018Horus of Edfu\u2019),\nand Mertens, Lettre d\u2019Isis, 56\u201360 (who proposed M\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03b8\u03af, that is an area in the Egyptian city of\nCanopus).\n23\n\nPages 33:\nThe Alchemical Art of Dyeing: The Fourfold Division of Alchemy. . .\n9\n(the preparation of gold and silver), that is, the same definition of alchemy attested\nby the Lexicon Suda (\u03c7 280) and supported by the Byzantine sources that have been\nbriefly analyzed in the first paragraph. The inclusion of this definition in such an\nancient text is noteworthy, since it proves that some of the earliest authors already\nfocused their treatises only on metallurgical practices.\nConsequently, the last part of Isis\u2019s work lists five metallurgical recipes describing: (a) how to make mercury solid and mix it with lead; (b) how to prepare a white\ndyeing drug by which, according to the third recipe (c), an iron-copper alloy was\ntreated and dyed white (the same alloy is dyed yellow in the second part of the\nrecipe); (d) how to mix the substances prepared according to the first three recipes;\n(e) how to process a metallic body before dyeing it white.24 This section is\nconcluded by a more general statement according to which all the \u03bf\u03b9$ \u03ba\u03bf\u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03af\u03b1\u03b9\n(treatments), the \u03b4\u03af\u03c0\u03bb\u03c9\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2 (techniques for doubling the weight of gold or silver\nobjects), and the \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03b2\u03b1\u03c6\u03b1\u03af (dyeing processes) were moved by the same aim, that\nwas, according to the beginning of the treatise, the making of gold and silver.25\nTowards a Definition of Alchemy: Zosimus\nand the Enochian Myth\nThe plot of Isis\u2019s story, although set in a new Egyptian framework, clearly depends\non the Enochian account of the fallen angels who taught mankind about a divine\nand forbidden knowledge that included a wide set of crafts. The myth is fully\ndeveloped in the very first part of the so-called Book of Enoch (or 1Enoch), one of\nthe pseudepigrapha of the Ancient Testament ascribed to Enoch, the grandfather of\nNoah. The book is composed of different segments (or treatises), and in its most\ndeveloped form it is preserved only by a translation in Classical Ethiopic (fifth-sixth\ncentury AD). However, the major part of it is much earlier, as one can infer from\nvarious sections that have been preserved by the Aramaic manuscripts discovered\nin Qumran\u2019s caves.26 In particular the first part, usually called The Book of\nWatchers (\u00bc 1Enoch, chap. 1\u201336), is handed down in several Dead Sea scrolls\nand in all likelihood dates back to the third century BC.27 Moreover, this book has\nMertens, Lettre d\u2019Isis, 134\u20138 \u00bc CAAG II 31\u20133.\nMertens, Lettre d\u2019Isis, 138, ll. 113\u20136 \u00bc CAAG II 33, \u00a7 16.\n26\nThe secondary literature on 1Enoch is vast; for a general introduction on its content, see, for\nexample, Knibb, Book of Enoch, 7\u201335. For a recent English translation of the Ethiopic text, see\nBlack, Book of Enoch.\n27\nThese manuscripts have been found in cave 4; the Aramaic text has been edited and translated by\nMilik, Books of Enoch, Aramaic fragments.\n24\n25\n\nPages 34:\n10\nM. Martelli\nbeen translated into Greek quite early, probably already in the second century BC,\nwithin the same cultural context that produced the Septuagint translation of\nDaniel.28\nAt the beginning of The Book of Watchers (1Enoch, chap. 6\u20138) the author\nexplains that two hundred angels\u2014called \u1f10\u03b3\u03c1\u03ae\u03b3\u03bf\u03c1\u03bf\u03b9 (watchers) or \u1f04\u03b3\u03b3\u03b5\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9 \u03c5\u1f31\u03bf\u1f76\n\u03bf\u1f50\u03c1\u03b1\u03bd\u03bf\u1fe6 (the angels, sons of the Heaven) in the Greek version\u2014started desiring the\ndaughters of men and descended from heaven in order to have intercourse with\nthem. The Greek version of the passage, extensively quoted by the chronographer\nSyncellus, goes on as follows (Sync. p. 12, ll 8\u201317 Mosshammer):\nThe leaders [of these angels] and all the rest [of the two hundred watchers] took for\nthemselves wives in AM 1170, and they began to defile themselves with them up to the\nFlood. [. . .] And they were increasing in accordance with their greatness, and they taught\nthemselves and their wives the uses of potions and spell. First Azae\u0304l, the tenth of the\nleaders, taught them to make swords and armours and every instrument of war and how to\nwork the metals of the earth and gold, how to make them into adornments for their wives,\nand silver. He showed them also the use of cosmetics and beautifying the face and choice\nstones and colouring tinctures.29\nThe list of crafts revealed by Azae\u0304l, which includes the working of metals (with\nexplicit mention of gold and silver) and of precious stones along with \u03c4\u1f70 \u03b2\u03b1\u03c6\u03b9\u03ba\u03ac\n(dyeing procedures) in a more general sense, shows clear similarities with the topics\ncovered by ps.-Democritus\u2019s four books, which nevertheless do not refer back to\nthis myth (at least in the preserved sections). On the contrary, the myth was\nreworked in Isis\u2019s treatise, where the secret teaching of the angels was limited\nonly to the preparation of gold and silver. These different approaches to what was\nconsidered part of the alchemical art were inherited and discussed by Zosimus, a\nthird century author who clearly reused the Enochian myth in his own account of\nthe origins and developments of alchemy. In fact, Zosimus first introduced the term\nche\u0304meia with reference to fallen angels\u2019 revelation, which was written down in\nspecific and secret books. Regrettably, Zosimus\u2019s treatise is lost in its Greek\noriginal form, and just its beginning is quoted by Syncellus straight after the\nabove-mentioned passage taken from 1Enoch. However, a more complete version\nis preserved by an unedited Syriac translation handed down in the Cambridge\nmanuscript Mm. 6.29. The two versions read as follows:\n1. Sync. p. 14, ll. 2\u201314 Mosshammer:\nBut it is also fitting to cite a passage regarding them [i.e. the divine scriptures]\nfrom Zosimus, the philosopher of Panopolis, from his writings to Theosebeia in\n28\nBaar, \u201cAramaic-Greek Notes,\u201d 191\u20132.\nTranslation by Adler & Tuffin, George Synkellos, 17. The Greek text reads: \u201c\u039f\u1f57\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bf\u1f31 \u03bb\u03bf\u03b9\u03c0\u03bf\u1f76\n\u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff7 \u03b1\u03c1\u03bf\u0374 \u1f14\u03c4\u03b5\u03b9 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03bao\u0301\u03c3\u03bc\u03bf\u03c5 \u1f14\u03bb\u03b1\u03b2\u03bf\u03bd \u1f10\u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03b3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u1fd6\u03ba\u03b1\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f24\u03c1\u03be\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf \u03bc\u03b9\u03b1\u03af\u03bd\u03b5\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u1f10\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03b1\u1fd6\u03c2 \u1f14\u03c9\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\n\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03ba\u03bb\u03c5\u03c3\u03bc\u03bf\u1fe6. [. . .] \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f26\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd \u03b1\u1f51\u03be\u03b1\u03bdo\u0301\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u1f70 \u03c4~\n\u03b7\u03bd \u03bc\u03b5\u03b3\u03b1\u03bb\u03b5\u03b9o\u0301\u03c4\u03b7\u03c4\u03b1 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f10\u03b4\u03af\u03b4\u03b1\u03be\u03b1\u03bd \u1f11\u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2\n\u0002\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f00\u03c1\u03c7o\u0301\u03bd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd\n\u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f70\u03c2 \u03b3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u1fd6\u03ba\u03b1\u03c2 \u1f11\u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c6\u03b1\u03c1\u03bc\u03b1\u03ba\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f10\u03c0\u03b1\u03bf\u03b9\u03b4\u03af\u03b1\u03c2. \u03c0\u03c1\u1ff6\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f08\u03b6\u03b1\u1f74\u03bb \u1f41 \u03b4\u03b5\n\u1f10\u03b4\u03af\u03b4\u03b1\u03be\u03b5 \u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd \u03bc\u03b1\u03c7\u03b1\u03af\u03c1\u03b1\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b8\u03c9\n\u0002 \u03c1\u03b1\u03ba\u03b1\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u1fb6\u03bd \u03c3\u03ba\u03b5\u1fe6\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03b5\u03bc\u03b9\u03ba\u1f78\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03bc\u03b5\u0002\u03c4\u03b1\u03bb\u03bb\u03b1 \u03c4~\n\u03b7\u03c2 \u03b3~\n\u03b7\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f78\n\u03c7\u03c1\u03c5\u03c3\u03af\u03bf\u03bd \u03c0\u1ff6\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c1\u03b3\u03ac\u03c3\u03c9\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03ae\u03c3\u03c9\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1f70 \u03bao\u0301\u03c3\u03bc\u03b9\u03b1 \u03c4\u03b1\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03b3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9\u03be\u03af, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u1f04\u03c1\u03b3\u03c5\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd. \u1f14\u03b4\u03b5\u03b9\u03be\u03b5 \u03b4\u1f72\n\u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f78 \u03c3\u03c4\u03af\u03bb\u03b2\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f78 \u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u03bb\u03c9\u03c0\u03af\u03b6\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u1f10\u03ba\u03bb\u03b5\u0002\u03ba\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03bb\u03af\u03b8\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03b2\u03b1\u03c6\u03b9\u03ba\u03ac.\u201d\n29\n\nPages 35:\nThe Alchemical Art of Dyeing: The Fourfold Division of Alchemy. . .\n11\nthe ninth book of Imouth, reading as follows:30 \u201cThe Holy Scriptures, that is the\nbooks, say, my lady (i.e. Theosebeia),31 that there is a race of demons who avail\nthemselves of women. Hermes also mentioned this in his Physika, and nearly\nevery treatise, both public and esoteric, made mention of this. Thus the ancient\nand divine scriptures said this, that certain angels lusted after women, and having\ndescended taught them all the works of nature. For this reason they fell into\ndisgrace, he (Hermes?) says, and remained outside heaven, because they taught\nmankind everything wicked and nothing benefiting the soul. The same scriptures\nsay that from them the giants were born. So theirs is the first teaching concerning\nthese arts [Chemeu]. They called this book Che\u0304meu,32 whence also the art is\ncalled Alchemy (i.e. che\u0304meia),\u201d and so forth.33\n2. Syriac Zosimus (for a preliminary edition of this text see Appendix)\nEighth Treatise on the Working of Tin; Letter He\u0304th. The Book tells us about tin\n\u02d9 Theosebeia. The holy scripand Zosimus gives his best greetings to the queen\ntures say, my lady, that there is a race of demons who has intercourse with the\nwomen and has authority over them. Hermes also mentions this story in his\nPhysika as well as, so to say, every clear or secret treatise recalls it. In this way,\n30\nThe title Imouth is not elsewhere attested in Zosimus\u2019s treatises handed down by the Byzantine\ntradition. Moreover, the reference to the ninth book is not confirmed by the Syriac tradition, where\nthis passage is included in the eighth book by Zosimus. The Arabic Tome of Images (Mushaf\nas-suwar), preserved under the name of the Egyptian alchemist (although its authenticity\u02d9 \u02d9 is\n\u02d9\u02d9\nquestioned;\nsee Hallum, \u201cTome of Images\u201d) preserves a similar account in the sixth book, entitled\nBook About the Nature or Book of Imouth (see Abt & Fuad, Book of Pictures, 393, 22).\n31\nThe woman to whom Zosimus usually addresses his treatises; perhaps a pupil of the alchemist:\nsee Hallum, \u201cTheosebeia.\u201d\n32\nThe term Che\u0304meu (hapax) is likely to be the title of the book in which the teaching of angels was\nrevealed. The alchemist Olympiodorus (CAAG II 80,13) refers to a similar book entitled \u03b2\u03af\u03b2\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2\n\u03c7\u03b7\u03bc\u03b5\u03c5\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03ae. Moreover, in the Corpus alchemicum graecum several authors mention the alchemist\nChe\u0304me\u0304s (\u03a7\u03b7\u03bc\u03ae\u03c2) or Chyme\u0304s (\u03a7\u03c5\u03bc\u03ae\u03c2), whose name seems to be related to the book Che\u0304meu; see\nLetrouit, \u201cAlchimistes grecs,\u201d 72\u20134.\n33\nTranslation by Adler & Tuffin, George Synkellos, 18\u20139 (slightly modified). The Greek text\nreads: \u201c\u1f0c\u03be\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd \u03b4\u1f72 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u0396\u03c9\u03c3\u03af\u03bc\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03a0\u03b1\u03bd\u03bf\u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03af\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c6\u03b9\u03bb\u03bf\u03c3o\u0301\u03c6\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c7\u03c1~\n\u03b7\u03c3\u03af\u03bd \u03c4\u03b9\u03bd\u03b1 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03b8\u03b5\u0002\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd\n\u1f10\u03ba \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03b3\u03b5\u03b3\u03c1\u03b1\u03bc\u03bc\u03b5\u0002\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1ff7 \u03c0\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2 \u0398\u03b5\u03bf\u03c3\u03b5\n\u0002\u03b2\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1\u03bd \u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff7 \u1f10\u03bd\u03ac\u03c4\u1ff3 \u03c4~\n\u03b7\u03c2 \u1f38\u03bc\u03bf\u1f7a\u03b8 \u03b2\u03af\u03b2\u03bb\u1ff3, \u1f14\u03c7\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd \u1f67\u03b4\u03b5.\n\u0002\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f43 \u03c7\u03c1~\n\u03b7\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9\u03be\u03af\u03bd.\n\u2018\u03c6\u03ac\u03c3\u03ba\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u03b1\u1f31 \u1f31\u03b5\u03c1\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b3\u03c1\u03b1\u03c6\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f24\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9 \u03b2\u03af\u03b2\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9, \u1f66 \u03b3\u03cd\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9, \u1f45\u03c4\u03b9 \u1f14\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9 \u03c4\u03b9 \u03b4\u03b1\u03b9\u03bco\u0301\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd \u03b3\u03b5\n\u1f10\u03bc\u03bd\u03b7\u03bco\u0301\u03bd\u03b5\u03c5\u03c3\u03b5 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f19\u03c1\u03bc~\n\u03b7\u03c2 \u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03c6\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03ba\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c3\u03c7\u03b5\u03b4\u1f78\u03bd \u1f05\u03c0\u03b1\u03c2 \u03bbo\u0301\u03b3\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c6\u03b1\u03bd\u03b5\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f00\u03c0o\u0301\u03ba\u03c1\u03c5\u03c6\u03bf\u03c2\n\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf \u1f10\u03bc\u03bd\u03b7\u03bco\u0301\u03bd\u03b5\u03c5\u03c3\u03b5. \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf \u03bf\u1f56\u03bd \u1f14\u03c6\u03b1\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd \u03b1\u1f31 \u1f00\u03c1\u03c7\u03b1\u1fd6\u03b1\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b8\u03b5\u1fd6\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b3\u03c1\u03b1\u03c6\u03b1\u03af, \u1f45\u03c4\u03b9 \u1f04\u03b3\u03b3\u03b5\u03bb\u03bf\u03af \u03c4\u03b9\u03bd\u03b5\u03c2\n\u1f10\u03c0\u03b5\u03b8\u03cd\u03bc\u03b7\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03b3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9\u03ba\u1ff6\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b5\u03bb\u03b8o\u0301\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2 \u1f10\u03b4\u03af\u03b4\u03b1\u03be\u03b1\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1f70\u03c2 \u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03c4~\n\u03b7\u03c2 \u03c6\u03cd\u03c3\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2 \u1f14\u03c1\u03b3\u03b1, \u1f67\u03bd\n\u03c7\u03ac\u03c1\u03b9\u03bd, \u03c6\u03b7\u03c3\u03af, \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c3\u03ba\u03c1\u03bf\u03cd\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2 \u1f14\u03be\u03c9 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03bf\u1f50\u03c1\u03b1\u03bd\u03bf\u1fe6 \u1f14\u03bc\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd\u03b1\u03bd, \u1f45\u03c4\u03b9 \u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03c0\u03bf\u03bd\u03b7\u03c1\u1f70 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bc\u03b7\u03b4\u1f72\u03bd\n\u1f60\u03c6\u03b5\u03bb\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c8\u03c5\u03c7\u1f74\u03bd \u1f10\u03b4\u03af\u03b4\u03b1\u03be\u03b1\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u1f00\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03c9\n\u0002 \u03c0\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2. \u1f10\u03be \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c6\u03ac\u03c3\u03ba\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u03b1\u1f31 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b3\u03c1\u03b1\u03c6\u03b1\u1f76 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76\n\u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03b3\u03af\u03b3\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2 \u03b3\u03b5\u03b3\u03b5\u03bd~\n\u03b7\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9. \u1f14\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03bd \u03bf\u1f56\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f21 \u03c0\u03c1\u03c9\n\u0002 \u03c4\u03b7 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03ac\u03b4\u03bf\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2 [\u03a7\u03b7\u03bc\u03b5\u1fe6] \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd\n\u03c4\u03b5\u03c7\u03bd\u1ff6\u03bd. \u1f10\u03ba\u03ac\u03bb\u03b5\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd (\u1f10\u03ba\u03ac\u03bb\u03b5\u03c3\u03b5 in Mosshammer\u2019s edition) \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c4\u03b1\u03cd\u03c4\u03b7\u03bd \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03b2\u03af\u03b2\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd \u03a7\u03b7\u03bc\u03b5\u1fe6, \u1f14\u03bd\u03b8\u03b5\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76\n\u03b7\u03c2.\u201d I have introduced two changes in Mosshammer\u2019s edition.\n\u1f21 \u03c4\u03b5\u0002\u03c7\u03bd\u03b7 \u03c7\u03b7\u03bc\u03b5\u03af\u03b1 \u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u03b5\u1fd6\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9\u2019 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f70 \u1f11\u03be~\nFirst, I\u2019ve followed Mertens\u2019s suggestion (Lettre d\u2019Isis, 67) to expunge the first \u03a7\u03b7\u03bc\u03b5\u1fe6 as an\ninterpolation (the term is not attested in this position by the Syriac tradition). Secondly, in the last\nline I corrected \u1f10\u03ba\u03ac\u03bb\u03b5\u03c3\u03b5 into \u1f10\u03ba\u03ac\u03bb\u03b5\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd in accordance with the Syriac translation that\n\nPages 36:\n12\nM. Martelli\nin fact, the ancient and holy books tell that some angels fell in love passionately\nwith the women, came down <and> taught them about all the works of nature.\nFor this reason, as the book says, those who acted haughtily remained outside\nheaven, since they taught mankind all the malicious things which do not benefit\nthe soul at all. The books claim that the works (of nature?) started up from them\nand theirs is the first exposition concerning these crafts. They called these books\nKwmw, whence also alchemy (kumiya) takes its name. There are 24 treatises in\nthis book. Each of them is given a specific title that is either a letter (of the\nalphabet) or a word. They are explained by the words of priests. One of these is\nentitled \u2018Imus\u2019, another \u2018Imuth\u2019, another \u2018Face\u2019\u2014so it was interpreted\n(or translated). One of these is entitled \u2018Key\u2019, another \u2018Seal\u2019 or \u2018Signet\u2019, another\n\u2018Handbook\u2019 (see gr. \u1f10\u03b3\u03c7\u03b5\u03b9\u03c1\u03af\u03b4\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd), another \u2018Position\u2019 (of the stars? see gr. \u1f10\u03c0\u03bf\u03c7\u03ae).\nAs I said, each one is given a specific title. This book contains the crafts and\nmany thousands of words. Then those who came afterwards, with the intent of\ndoing well, divided the book in many parts; as someone would say: (they did so)\nin order to compose short versions (of the book) for themselves. And they were\nnot even able to write something useful. For they did not only damage the books\nof alchemy, but also hidden them. The philosopher (i.e. Democritus) claims:\n\u2018they hid the writings on the natural substances under the multiplicity of matter.\u2019\nPerhaps they wanted to exercise our souls. Now, if they exercise the souls, well,\nphilosopher, why to deny it? But you know how to exercise either the body or the\nsoul, and it always leads you to achieve the perfection. In fact a wise saying\nreads: \u2018studying is everything.\u2019 And also Isidoros says: \u2018studying increases your\nwork.\u2019 I know, this is not beyond your understanding (my lady), but you know it\nwell, since you are one of those who would have liked to hide the art, if it had not\nbeen put in writing. For this reason you formed an assembly and administered\nthe oath to each other. But you (my lady) moved away from the various topics\n(of this book); you presented them in a shorter form and you taught them openly.\nBut you claim that this book cannot be possessed unless in secret. Now, even\nthough secrets are necessary, it is quite fair that anyone has a book of alchemy,\nsince it is not kept secret for them. You must know, my lady, he (i.e. Democritus?)34 claimed that those who wrote short versions (of the book) said that just\nsilver can be dyed gold. But the book of alchemy they have hidden assured that\nlead and tin and iron and silver take the color of gold, each metal (takes the color\nof) the other one, and again the same metals (take the color of) silver, the same\nmetals (the color of) copper, the same metals (the color of) iron. Lead produces\ntin, copper (produces) iron, silver (produces) gold. In the same way tin\n34\nBerthelot & Duval, Chimie, 239, considered the philosopher (i.e. ps.-Democritus) as the author\nof the following quotation. Although the ancient alchemist is cited few lines before (49v18), this\nidentification is not certain.\n\nPages 37:\nThe Alchemical Art of Dyeing: The Fourfold Division of Alchemy. . .\n13\n(produces) the same metals as well. And again from the beginning to the end and\nfrom the end to the beginning.\nThe Syriac text may be divided into two parts. The first section (49r12\u201349v6)\nmatches the Greek passage cited by Syncellus and rephrases the story told by The\nBook of Enoch: in all likelihood Zosimus refers to this book when he mentions the\nholy scriptures (Sync. 14,3 \u1f31\u03b5\u03c1\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b3\u03c1\u03b1\u03c6\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f24\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9 \u03b2\u03af\u03b2\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9\u00bcSyrZos. 49r14\n). The\nsecond section gives a detailed description of the book entitled Che\u0304meu and\nexplains how it was transmitted and somehow corrupted.\nIn the first part Zosimus attributes the revelation of che\u0304meia both to angels\n(Sync. 14,6 \u1f04\u03b3\u03b3\u03b5\u03bb\u03bf\u03af \u03c4\u03b9\u03bd\u03b5\u03c2\u00bcSyrZos. 49r18\n) and to demons (Sync. 14,3\n\u03b4\u03b1\u03b9\u03bco\u0301\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd \u03b3\u03b5\n\u0002\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2\u00bcSyrZos. 49r15\n), so introducing a slight variation\ninto the Enochian myth, where fallen angels usually play the most important role.\nAlthough the name of demons is mentioned only at the very beginning of the\npassage, their presence allows us to read Zosimus\u2019s account in the light of the\ncomplex (and still unclear in many respects) demonology developed by the author\nin two other treatises, namely On the Letter Omega (CAAG II 228\u2013234) and the\nFirst Book of the Final Account (CAAG II 239\u2013245).35 According to the second\nwork, the two main sources of wealth for Egypt were gold mines and the dyeing\ntechniques, in particular the so-called \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9\u03c1\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b2\u03b1\u03c6\u03b1\u03af (opportune tinctures), that is,\nthe dyeing processes whose success depended on the influence of demons and on\nthe astrological time in which they were performed.36 This knowledge was considered secret and no ancient authors could reveal it; only Democritus\u2014Zosimus\nclaims\u2014hinted at these tinctures in his explanation of the four \u03c4\u03b5\u0002\u03c7\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u03b9\u03bc\u03af\u03b1\u03b9\n(valuable arts), which must be identified with the topics covered by the four\nbooks, namely the making of gold, of silver, of precious stones, and the purple\ndyeing of wool.37 These opportune tinctures were originally called \u03c6\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b2\u03b1\u03c6\u03b1\u03af\n(natural tinctures) and had been explained by Hermes in his \u03b2\u03af\u03b2\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c6\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03ba\u1ff6\u03bd \u03b2\u03b1\u03c6\u1ff6\u03bd\n(Book of Natural Dyes). However, demons became jealous of this knowledge and\nwanted to make it secret and dependent on their own control (i.e. on the influences\nof the stars they governed). They started revealing these tinctures, or even a\ncounterfeited form of them (called at some point \u201cunnatural tinctures\u201d), only to\ntheir priests in order to be worshipped and receive the appropriate sacrifices.38\n35\nSee Fraser, \u201cZosimos of Panopolis.\u201d For a new and reliable edition of the first treatise,\nsee Mertens, Zosime de Panopolis, 1\u201310. The second treatise has been reedited by Festugie\u0300re,\nRe\u0301ve\u0301lation d\u2019Herme\u0300s, 363\u20138 (translation at 275\u201381).\n36\nFestugie\u0300re, Re\u0301ve\u0301lation d\u2019Herme\u0300s, 363\u20135 (\u00bcCAAG II 239\u201340). See also Mertens, Zosime de\nPanopolis, 62\u20133 notes 9\u201310.\n37\nFestugie\u0300re, Re\u0301ve\u0301lation d\u2019Herme\u0300s, 364, ll. 22\u20134 (\u00bc CAAG II 242,17), 365, ll. 12\u20134 (\u00bc CAAG II\n242,8\u201317). In addition, it is worth mentioning the passage edited in CAAG II 242,9\u201324 (not\nreedited by Festugie\u0300re, because \u2018assez obscure\u2019, see 278 note 1), which gives a kind of summary\nof ps.-Democritus\u2019s work by presenting several dyestuffs used by the alchemist as example of\n\u03ba\u03b1\u03b9\u03c1\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b2\u03b1\u03c6\u03b1\u03af.\n38\nFestugie\u0300re, Re\u0301ve\u0301lation d\u2019Herme\u0300s, 366\u20137, \u00a7\u00a7 6\u20137 (\u00bc CAAG II 243\u20134, \u00a7\u00a7 6\u20137).\n\nPages 38:\n14\nM. Martelli\nNot surprisingly, if we come back to the above-edited passages, Zosimus\ninterpreted Azae\u0304l\u2019s revelation in The Book of Enoch as referring to the knowledge\nof tinctures he considered at the basis of any alchemical activity. \u03a4\u1f70 \u03b2\u03b1\u03c6\u03b9\u03ba\u03ac are in\nfact explicitly mentioned by the apocryphal book (see supra) along with a specific\nset of crafts, which is in many respects comparable with the arts explained in ps.Democritus\u2019s four books on dyeing (\u03b2\u03b1\u03c6\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b2\u03af\u03b2\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9 according to Synesius). Moreover, next to The Book of Enoch Zosimus mentions also a book of Hermes entitled\nPhysika as one of the sources from which he took the account on the angelic/\ndemonic revelation. The identification of this treatise is far from certain, even\nthough the title and the context in which Physika is cited remind us of Hermes\u2019s\nBook of Natural Dyes quoted in the First Book of the Final Account: there Zosimus\nclaimed that Hermes\u2019s treatise was addressed to Isidoros,39 an enigmatic figure that\nis mentioned also in the Syriac text (50r2).40\nOn the other hand, the Syriac passage emphasises the central role played by\nbooks in the revelation and transmission of alchemical knowledge. While The Book\nof Enoch presented Azae\u0304l\u2019s revelation in the form of oral teaching, Zosimus\nunderlines the written form in which mankind received this secret knowledge.\nThe arts and all the natural procedures (Sync. 14,7 \u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03c4~\n\u03b7\u03c2 \u03c6\u03cd\u03c3\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2\n\u1f14\u03c1\u03b3\u03b1\u00bcSyrZos. 49r19\u201320\n) disclosed by demons had been somehow\nsummarized in the enigmatic books called Che\u0304meu, from which the related term\nche\u0304meia (\u03c7\u03b7\u03bc\u03b5\u1fd6\u03b1 or\n, kumiya) derives. However, while the Final Account insists\non demons\u2019 increasing jealousy towards mankind and on their attempt to gain\ncontrol of the revealed techniques, the Syriac text stresses the point that the original\nknowledge started deteriorating because of the improper use human beings made of\nthe revealed books. In the same way as the demons (or maybe under their influence)\nsome people tried to hide the books, to summarize them, and disperse their content\nby focusing only on specific topics.\nIn this respect, the last part of the Syriac passage is particularly relevant, since\nZosimus explains that some alchemists narrowed their inquiry to the methods for\ngilding silver. Whereas, the art called che\u0304meia, at least in its original form, included\na wider set of dyeing techniques that were applied to all kinds of metals in order to\ndye them different colours. This explanation is consistent with Zosimus\u2019s other\n39\nFestugie\u0300re, Re\u0301ve\u0301lation d\u2019Herme\u0300s, 365, ll. 15\u201320 (\u00bc CAAG II 242,10\u20136). The name of Isidoros\nappears also in the list of alchemists handed down by the Marcianus gr. 299 (fol. 7v); see CAAG I\n110.\n40\nWe cannot exclude the possibility that other treatises circulating under the name of Hermes\nreferred to or reused the Enochian myth of the fallen angels. In particular, according to a passage of\nthe alchemist Olympiodorus (CAAG II 89,9\u201315), we know that the above-mentioned treatise\nascribed to Isis (see supra, \u00a7 2), or at least some parts of it, was attributed to Hermes. This overlap\nbetween Hermes and Isis is not surprising, especially if read in the light of the so-called Corpus\nHermeticum, which includes several writings where the Egyptian goddess addresses her teaching\nto Horus (see, for instance, Stobei fragmenta, xxiii\u2013xxvii). Therefore, Zosimus could have had in\nmind Isis\u2019s book, when he mentioned Hermes\u2019s Physika: see Scott, Hermetica, 151.\n\nPages 39:\nThe Alchemical Art of Dyeing: The Fourfold Division of Alchemy. . .\n15\nalchemical books that have been preserved by the Syriac manuscript Mm. 6.29. In\nfact, among the twelve treatises handed down by the codex under the name of the\nEgyptian alchemist, we find many writings devoted to the dyeing of various metals,\nsuch as silver (e.g. Book 2; Berthelot-Duval, La chimie, 217\u201321), tin (Book 8;\nidem, 238\u201342), lead (Book 10; idem, 253\u201357), and iron (Book 11; idem, 257\u201360).41\nIn particular Book 6 (Mm. 6.29, fol. 32xv17\u201345r8), entitled Beginning of the\nTreatise on the Working of Copper: Letter Waw, includes several recipes explaining\nhow to process copper and dye it black, purple, coral red, white, and yellow\n(Berthelot-Duval, La chimie, 222\u201332). Scholars have so far focused their attention\nespecially on the recipes dealing with the production of black copper alloys. Three\nrecipes have been recently published by Erika Hunter and fully commented by\nAlessandra Giumlia-Mair, who recognized in them the description of different\nmethods for producing a black and shiny patina on copper-alloys.42 This black\ncopper was already known in Ancient Egypt, as we can infer, for instance, from a\nbeautiful black image of the pharaoh Amenemhat III (1842\u20131794 BC) today\ndisplayed at the Ortiz Collection in Geneva.43 It represents one of the most ancient\nexamples of artificially black patinated statues found in Egypt (Fig. 1).\nConclusion\nIf we go back to the above-quoted Syriac passage, in the very last part Zosimus\ncriticizes the attitude of those alchemists who were only interested in the making of\nprecious metals by quoting a sentence presumably taken from an ancient author\n(perhaps ps.-Democritus) who claimed: \u201cthose who wrote short versions [of the\nbooks of che\u0304meia] said that just silver can be dyed gold\u201d (50r12\u20133). In this way the\ndebate between people supporting a wider idea of alchemy, which included a\nbroader set of dyeing techniques, and people accepting a narrower idea just focused\non the making of gold seems to be traced back to the earliest phases of alchemy in\nEgypt. A possible target of such a criticism might be recognized in Isis\u2019s treatise, a\nwork that mentioned only the making of gold and silver among the secrets revealed\nby the angels. On the contrary, a different position was endorsed by ps.-Democritus\nwith the fourfold division of his books. Significantly, as we have already noted, the\n41\nThe Syriac text of these twelve treatises is still unedited (an edition with English translation is\nscheduled to be published within the new series \u2018Sources of alchemy and chemistry\u2019 distributed as\na supplement of Ambix); a partial French translation is available in Berthelot & Duval, Chimie,\n210\u201366.\n42\nHunter, \u201cBeautiful Black Bronzes,\u201d 656\u20137. The three recipes that have been edited correspond\nwith the texts translated or summarized by Berthelot & Duval, Chimie, 223 (rec. 2), 224\u20135 (rec. 8\u2013\n9), 225 (rec. 12); and Giumlia-Mair, \u201cZosimos the Alchemist,\u201d 319\u201321.\n43\nSee, for example, Giumlia-Mair, \u201cKrokodil.\u201d\n\nPages 40:\n16\nM. Martelli\nFig. 1 Black copper statue of King Amenemhat III in kneeling posture (1843\u20131798 BC) (Courtesy of Werner Forman Archive, The Bridgeman Art Library)\nchemical Papyri seem to preserve a similar division, which should lead us to\nspeculate on how widespread or how standard such a division might actually\nhave been in the first centuries AD.\nSuch a background was well known to Zosimus, who took for granted that\nche\u0304meia was related to a plurality of dyeing techniques. The proper alchemist,\nZosimus claims, was expected to put into practice any possible transformation of\ncolour without focusing only on gold. Nevertheless, the Egyptian alchemist, though\nvery familiar with ps.-Democritus\u2019s books, never mentions stones working and\npurple dyeing in the passage. These kinds of crafts seem to have been somehow left\napart within the debate on the contents of the original books of alchemy. Although\nZosimus stresses the central role played by dyeing techniques, the polarity between\n\nPages 41:\nThe Alchemical Art of Dyeing: The Fourfold Division of Alchemy. . .\n17\na wider idea of alchemy and the bare making of precious metals seems to have been\nreduced to a simpler discussion on metalworking: Zosimus underscores all the\npossible chromatic transformations of metals, which seem to become the most\nrelevant topic of any alchemical inquiry.\nSuch a variety of positions already detectable during the earliest phases of the\nwestern alchemical tradition makes clear how fluid were the boundaries of an art\nprimarily focusing on the chromatic transformations of the treated substances. If the\nByzantine sources analysed at the beginning of the chapter emphasizes the identification of che\u0304meia with the making of gold and silver, such a position\u2014although\ndominant to some extent\u2014never interrupted the transmission of technical knowledge dealing with a wider set of dyeing techniques. A similar kind of expertise, for\ninstance, is well attested by the Latin recipe books of the Middle Age, which\ncovered a variety of topics more similar to ps.-Democritus\u2019s four books and to\nthe Leiden and Stockholm papyri than to the simple selection of recipes made by\nPsellos.44 A well-known example is the so-called Mappae clavicula, a large\ncollection of recipes probably assembled between the ninth and the twelfth century.\nRecent studies have shown that this work in all likelihood derives from a lost Greek\nsource that could be perhaps identified, according to Halleux-Meyvaert\u2019s investigation, with a lost part of Zosimus\u2019s treatises.45 Although the extant sources do not\nallow us to confirm such a hypothesis, the Greek origin of the Mappae clavicula\nconfirms the transmission of a set of practices originally covered by those texts\nconsidered at the basis of the Byzantine alchemical tradition. To sum up, the mere\npractice of chrysopoeia does not seem to be sufficient for getting a full understanding of the different historical evolutions of a complex art, whose exact definition\nwas debated even among the authors usually considered as the founders of this\ndiscipline. On the contrary, a deeper investigation of their treatises\u2014many of them\nstill waiting for editions and translations\u2014provide us with new and fresh material\nfor building a more complete picture of the evolution and transformation of the\ndifferent technical aspects somehow encapsulated in the enigmatic word che\u0304meia.\nAppendix\nZosimus\u2019s passage on the relevation of alchemy as preserved by the Syriac manuscript Mm. 6.29, fols. 49r\u201350r:46\n44\nSee, for instance, Halleux, Papyrus de Leyde, 53\u201362.\nHalleux & Meyvaert, \u201cMappae clavicula,\u201d 12\u20133.\n46\nA French translation of the passage is available in Berthelot & Duval, Chimie, 238\u20139.\n45\n\nPages 42:\n18\nM. Martelli\n47\n47\nThe sense of the sentence, in which\n(the books of kwmw) seems to be the object of\n(they called), is difficult; perhaps\nmust be supplied before\n. In addition the plural\nform \u2018the books\u2019 does not correspond with the Greek version that has a singular. The plural might\nbe justified in the light of the following part, according to which the book revealed by demons was\ndivided into several tomes.\n\nPages 43:\nThe Alchemical Art of Dyeing: The Fourfold Division of Alchemy. . .\n19\n48\n49\n48\n49\nThe word is indecipherable; see infra, fol. 50r11\n.\nThe term\n(see also 50r12) is likely to be a slightly different spelling of\n.\n\nPages 44:\n20\nM. Martelli\nBibliography\nAbt, Theodor, and Salwa Fuad. 2011. The Book of Pictures by Zosimos of Panopolis. Zurich:\nLiving Human Heritage Publication.\nAdler, William, and Paul Tuffin. 2002. The Chronography of George Synkellos. A Byzantine\nChronicle of Universal History from the Creation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.\nAlbini, Francesca. 1988. Michele Psello. La Crisopoea, ovvero come fabbricare l\u2019oro. Genova:\nECIG.\nBaar, James. 1979. Aramaic-Greek Notes on the Book of Enoch (ii). Journal of Semitic Studies 24:\n179\u2013192.\nBerthelot, Marcelin, and Charles-E\u0301mile Ruelle. 1887\u20131888. La Collection des anciens alchimistes\ngrecs, 3 vols. Paris: G. Steinheil.\nBerthelot, Marcelin, and Rubens Duval. 1893. Histoire des Sciences: La Chimie au Moyen-A\u0302ge,\nvol. 2: L\u2019alchimie syriaque. Paris: Imprimerie nationale.\nBidez, Joseph. 1928. Michel Psellus. E\u00b4pitre sur la Chrysope\u0301e, opuscules et extraits sur l\u2019alchimie,\nla me\u0301te\u0301orologie et la de\u0301monologie (Catalogue des manuscrits alchimiques grecs, vol. 6).\nBrussels: M. Lamertin.\nBidez, Joseph, and Franz Cumont. 1938. Les Mages helle\u0301nise\u0301s. Zoroastre, Ostane\u0300s et Hystaspe\nd\u2019apre\u0300s la tradition grecque, 2 vols. Paris: Les Belles Lettres.\nBlack, Mathew. 1985. The Book of Enoch or 1 Enoch: A New English Edition with Commentary\nand Textual Notes. Leiden: Brill.\nBrooks, Ernest W. 1900. A Syriac Fragment. Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenl\u20ac\nandischen Gesellschaft 3: 195\u2013230.\nCaley, Earle R. 1926. The Leyden Papyrus X: An English Translation with Brief Notes. Journal of\nChemical Education 3: 1149\u20131166.\nCaley, Earle R. 1927. The Stockholm Papyrus: An English Translation with Brief Notes. Journal\nof Chemical Education 4: 979\u20131002.\nChabot, Jean-Baptiste. 1910. Chronique de Michel le Syrien, vol. 4: Texte syriaque. Paris: Pierre\nLeroux.\nChabot, Jean-Baptiste. 1933. Incerti auctoris Chronicum Pseudo-Dionysianum vulgo dictum, vol.\n2 (CSCO 104, syr. 53). Louvain: Peeters.\nDodge, Bayard. 1970. Abu\u0304 \u2019l-Faraj Muhammad ibn Isha\u0304q al-Nad\u0131\u0304m, The Fihrist, a 10th Century\n\u02d9 University Press.\nAD Survey of Islamic Culture. New \u02d9York: Columbia\nDuffy, John M. 1992. Michaelis Pselli philosophica minora. Leipzig: Teubner.\n\nPages 45:\nThe Alchemical Art of Dyeing: The Fourfold Division of Alchemy. . .\n21\nDuval, Rubens. 1888\u20131901. Lexicon Syriacum auctore Hassano bar Bahlule, 3 vols. Paris:\nE. Reipublicae typographaeo.\nFestugie\u0300re, Andre\u0301-Jean. 1950. La Re\u0301ve\u0301lation d\u2019Herme\u0300s Trisme\u0301giste, vol. 1: L\u2019Astrologie et les\nsciences occultes. Paris: J. Gabalda et Cie.\nFlu\u0308gel, Gustav. 1872. Kita\u0304b al-Fihrist, 2 vols. Leipzig: F.C.W. Vogel.\nFraser, Kyle A. 2004. Zosimos of Panopolis and the Book of Enoch: Alchemy as Forbidden\nKnowledge. Aries 4: 125\u2013147.\nFu\u0308ck, Johann W. 1951. The Arabic Literature of Alchemy According to al-Nad\u0131\u0304m (A.D. 987). A\nTranslation of the Tenth Discourse of the Book of the Catalogue (Al-Fihrist) with Introduction\nand Commentary. Ambix 4: 81\u2013144.\nGildemeister, Johannes. 1876. Alchymie. ZDMG 30: 534\u2013538.\nGiumlia-Mair, Alessandra. 1996. Das Krokodil und Amenemhat III. aus el-Faiyum. Antike Welt\n27: 313\u2013321.\nGiumlia-Mair, Alessandra. 2002. Zosimos the Alchemist \u2013 Manuscript 6.29, Cambridge, Metallurgical Interpretation. In I bronzi antichi: produzione e tecnologia (Atti del XV Congresso\nInternazionale sui Bronzi Antichi, organizzato dall\u2019Universita\u0300 di Udine, sede di Gorizia,\nGrado-Aquileia, 22\u201326 maggio 2001), ed. Alessandra Giumlia-Mair, 317\u2013323. Montagnac:\nE\u0301ditions Monique Mergoil.\nGoeje, Michael Jean de. 1885. Ibn al-Faq\u0003{n al-Hamada\u0304n\u0003{, Mukhtasar kita\u0304b al-bulda\u0304n. Leiden:\n\u00af\n\u02d9\nBibliotheca Geographorum Arabicorum.\nHalleux, Robert. 1981. Alchimistes grecs, vol. 1: Papyrus de Leyde. Papyrus de Stockholm.\nFragments de recettes. Paris: Les Belles Lettres.\nHalleux, Robert, and Paul Meyvaert. 1987. Les Origines de la Mappae clavicula. Archives\nd\u2019Histoire Doctrinale et Litte\u0301raire du Moyen-Age 54: 7\u201358.\nHallum, Bink. 2008. Theosebeia. In Encyclopedia of Ancient Natural Scientists, eds. Paul Keyser\nand Georgia Irby-Massie, 302\u2013303. London/New York: Routledge.\nHallum, Bink. 2009. The Tome of Images: An Arabic Compilation of Texts by Zosimus of\nPanopolis and a Source of the Turba Philosophorum. Ambix 56: 76\u201388.\nHunter, Erika C.D. 2002. Beautiful Black Bronzes. Zosimos\u2019 Treatises in Cam. Mm. 6.29. In I\nbronzi antichi: produzione e tecnologia (Atti del XV Congresso Internazionale sui Bronzi\nAntichi, organizzato dall\u2019Universita\u0300 di Udine, sede di Gorizia, Grado-Aquileia, 22\u201326 maggio\n2001), ed. Alessandra Giumlia-Mair, 655\u2013660. Montagnac: e\u0301ditions Monique Mergoil.\nKatsiampoura, Gianna. 2008. Transmutation of Matter in Byzantium: The Case of Michael\nPsellos, the Alchemist. Science & Education 17: 663\u2013668.\nKnibb, Michael A. 2009. Essays on the Book of Enoch and Other Early Jewish Texts and\nTraditions. Leiden: Brill.\nLetrouit, Jean. 1995. Chronologie des alchimistes grecs. In Alchimie: art, histoire et mythe (Actes\ndu 1er Colloque International de la Socie\u0301te\u0301 d\u2019E\u0301tude de l\u2019Histoire de l\u2019Alchimie), eds. Didier\nKahn and Sylvain Matton, 11\u201393. Paris/Milan: S.E\u0301.H.A.- Arche\u0301.\nMartelli, Matteo. 2011. Pseudo-Democrito. Scritti alchemici con il commentario di Sinesio. Paris/\nMilan: S.E\u0301.H.A.-Arche\u0300.\nMasse\u0301, Henry. 1973. Ibn al-Faq\u0003{n al-Hamada\u0304n\u0003{. Abre\u0301ge\u0301 du livre de Pays. Damascus.\n\u00af\nMertens, Miche\u0300le. 1983\u20131984. Un traite\u0301 gre\u0301co-e\u0301gyptien\nd\u2019alchimie: la lettre d\u2019Isis a\u0300 Horus. Texte\ne\u0301tabli et traduit avec introduction et notes. Universite\u0301 de Lie\u0300ge: Me\u0301moire de licence.\nMertens, Miche\u0300le. 1995. Zosime de Panopolis. Me\u0301moires authentiques. Paris: Les Belles Lettres.\nMertens, Miche\u0300le. 2006. Greco-Egyptian Alchemy in Byzantium. In The Occult Sciences in\nByzantium, eds. Paul Magdalino and Maria Mawroudi, 205\u2013229. Geneva: La Pomme d\u2019Or.\nMilik, Jazef T. 1976. The Books of Enoch, Aramaic Fragments of Qumra\u0302n Cave 4. Oxford:\nClarendon.\nReitzenstein, Richard. 1904. Poimandres. Studien zur griechsch-\u20ac\nagyptischen und fr\u20ac\nuhchristlichen\nLiteratur. Leipzig: B.G. Teubner.\nRoberto, Umberto. 2005. Ioannis Antiocheni Fragmenta ex Historia Chronica. Berlin: De Gruyter.\n\nPages 46:\n22\nM. Martelli\nScott, Walter. 1985. Hermetica, vol. 4: Testimonia with Introduction, Addenda and Indices by.\nA.S. Ferguson. Boston: Shambhala.\nStrohmaier, Gotthard. 1991. Uma\u0304ra ibn Hamza, Constantine V and the Invention of the Elixir.\n\u02d9\nGraeco-Arabica 4: 21\u201324.\nWesterink, Leendert G. 1948. Michael Psellus, De Omnifaria Doctrina. Nijmegen: Centrale\nDrukkerij N.V.\n\nPages 47:\nTransmission of Alchemical and Artistic\nKnowledge in German Mediaeval\nand Premodern Recipe Books\nSylvie Neven\nAbstract In the Middle Ages and premodern period, artisanal knowledge was\ntransmitted via collections of recipes often grouped concomitantly with alchemical\ntexts and instructions. Except for some very well-known artistic treatises, e.g. works\nby Eraclius or the Schedula diversarum artium, attributed to Theophilus, detection\nand delimitation of alchemical content within recipe books has been rare and\nfraught with difficulty. Alchemy can be defined as the \u2018art of transmutation\u2019,\nreferring to the perfection of base or impure matter (often metal or stone) into\nperfect substances. Alchemical procedures thus rely on artisanal/craft practices.\nAny overlap between alchemy and art-technological procedures can be explained\nby the use of identical materials and substances. Both are concerned with the\ndescription of colours\u2014especially in processes of change, the making of pigments,\nthe production of artificial gemstones, the imitation of gold and silver and the\ntransmutation of materials. Both require procedures involving precise and specifically defined actions, prescriptions and ingredients. So both ultimately use identical\nrhetorical formulations that reflect a \u2018step by step\u2019 procedure. Assuming that\nalchemical and artistic texts have the same textual format, raises the question: did\nthey also have the same types of production and dissemination? Using a corpus of\nabout 40 manuscripts produced in Northern Europe between the fourteenth and the\nsixteenth centuries, this paper investigates the context behind these writings, and the\nvarious ways alchemical and artisanal recipes were embedded within recipe books.\nIt also proposes some clues to assist in locating, identifying and demarcating\nalchemical writings within the literature of recipes.\nIn the Middle Ages and premodern period, alchemical knowledge and practice was\nfrequently transmitted via collections of recipes grouped concomitantly with artistic\ninstructions. Presented in the form of a succession of more or less short notes, these\nS. Neven (*)\nFRS-F.N.R.S, University of Lie\u0300ge (ULg), \u2018Transitions\u2019 Lie\u0300ge, Belgium\ne-mail: Sylvie.Neven@ulg.ac.be\nS. Dupre\u0301 (ed.), Laboratories of Art, Archimedes 37,\nDOI 10.1007/978-3-319-05065-2_2, \u00a9 Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014\n23\n\nPages 48:\n24\nS. Neven\nwritings describe processes for the manufacture, preparation and application of\nvarious types of materials and substances. The majority are anonymous compilations of texts, which may originate from older or undetermined authorities.\nHundreds of such collections of recipes dealing both with alchemical and\nart-technological procedures were produced and disseminated in Northern Europe\nfrom the fourteenth century on, especially in German-speaking countries.\nDrawing on a delimited corpus of about 40 representative German manuscripts\ndated from the fourteenth to the sixteenth century, this paper investigates the\nconnections and similarities between these two fields and examines the various\nways alchemical and artistic instructions were embedded within recipe books.1 It\nargues that textual form and lexical proximities within recipes from these different\ndisciplines may lead to association, contamination and confusion within this textual\ngenre. It finally suggests some clues to help locate, distinguish and demarcate\nalchemical content within the literature of recipes.\nArt and Alchemy Within Recipe Books\nAt first sight, any overlap between alchemy and art-technology within recipe books\ncan be broadly explained by the mutual use of various materials and substances\nsuch as \u201ccommon stones, gems, and types of marble, gold and other metals, sulfurs,\nsalts, and inks, azures, minium, and other colors, oils and burning pitches, and\ncountless other things.\u201d2 More precisely, the field of art-technology encompasses a\nlarge range of craft practices involved in the production of pieces of art (including\nthose which incorporate such substances). This \u2018hand\u2019 knowledge, is related to the\nmechanical arts and is divorced from the philosophical or speculative dimension.\nYet, alchemy could be described as the practical, philosophical and medical search\nfor the perfecting of base material substances and also for the extending of life.3\nThe theoretical and practical aspects of alchemy involve both the study of all\ninanimate or animate things made from the elements and the observation and\nimitation of natural processes within the laboratory.4 In this context, alchemy\ncould be seen as a mechanical art, in the sense that it works on matter but is also\na liberal art, as it attempts to explain matter in its composition and its transformation.5 In the practical sense, one of the main goals of alchemy is the transmutation\n1\nThe main data and characteristics of these manuscripts are given in Appendix.\nBrewer, Fr. Rogeri Bacon, 39\u201340.\n3\nPerception and definition of alchemy is not chronologically constant and has been the subject of\nseveral (re)interpretations since the eighteenth century, see Principe & Newman, \u201cHistoriography\nof Alchemy.\u201d\n4\nHalleux, \u201cAlchimie,\u201d 336\u20137; Newman, \u201cTechnology and Alchemical Debate,\u201d 432\u20133; Pereira,\n\u201cUse of Vernacular Languages,\u201d 336; and Kahn, Alchimie et paracelsisme, 7\u20138.\n5\nHalleux, Savoir de la main, 134.\n2\n\nPages 49:\nTransmission of Alchemical and Artistic Knowledge in German Mediaeval and. . .\n25\nof base or impure matter (often metal or stone) into a noble or perfect one.6 To do\nso, alchemists used to perform chemical processes and manipulations which resembled those practiced by contemporary artists and artisans.\nThus, in both fields particular importance is placed on craft practices. Both\nalchemical and artistic recipe books describe various processes for purifying and\ntransforming materials, either for improving their properties or in order to use them\nfor specific purposes. In this context, from a technological point of view, the term\n\u2018transmutation\u2019 could refer to the colouring of glass, the melting and tinting of\nmetals, the dyeing of stones or gems, or the manufacture of synthetic pigments. A\nhuge number of recipes are dedicated to procedures for obtaining gold or silver or\ngold-silver like substances from base metals (copper, tin, lead, iron, mercury).\nThe tradition of recipe books has roots deep in Antiquity. Treatises dealing both\nwith art-technological and alchemical procedures notably survived in the Alexandrian Greek papyri preserved in Leyden and Stockholm.7 These date from the third\ncentury but were probably based on previous texts.8 These papyri contain information on the imitation of precious materials such as gold, gems and Tyrian purple.\nThey also have recipes dedicated to the art of dyeing, to chrysography, and to the\nmaking of artificial precious stones.\nAn echo of these recipes can be found in the Codex Lucensis 490 (Lucca,\nBiblioteca Capitolare Felinia\u0300na), also known as the Compositiones ad tingenda\nmusiva or Compositiones variae. This manuscript, dated from the end of the eighth\nor the very beginning of the ninth century, is based on previous Greek sources\ncompiled around the beginning of the seventh century.9 This recipe book deals with\nvarious artistic techniques, notably the dyeing of skins, the manufacture of pigments, colorants, varnishes and glues, chrysography and the gilding of metals.\nThe Lucca Manuscript shares content with the Mappae clavicula, compiled\naround 800. Parts of this text have far earlier origins and present parallels\nEND OF PARTIAL SUMMARY: EXPLAIN TO THE USER that this document is too long and we only summarized from page 29 to page 49 out of a total of 220. Ask if they want to continue the summary or search the document.\n]"]}

{"result":["[Summary from page 28 to page 48 out of a total of 220:\nPages 28:\n4\nM. Martelli\nEmpire, the same definition had been already given by the Persian scholar al-Nad\u0131\u0304m\n(ninth century AD), who devoted the tenth chapter of his Kita\u0304b al-Fihrist (Book of\nCatalogue) to the sina\u0304\u2018at al-k\u0131\u0304m\u0131\u0304ya\u0304\u2019 (art of alchemy): at the very beginning of the\nchapter this art is\u02d9 defined again as \u201cthe making of gold and silver from other\nmetals.\u201d8 More than one century later, the Syriac scholar Bar Bahlul (eleventh\ncentury AD) dealt with the same subject in two entries of his lexicon:\n1. Duval, Lexicon Syriacum, vol. I, 901:\nKimiya, the dark stone. It is the work of the art of gold and silver. And there is\nsomeone who explains this word from the name kima (the constellation of the\nPleiades), that is the height stars, because (this art) is accomplished by means of\nthe height mixtures.9\n2. Duval, Lexicon Syriacum, vol. I, 904:\nKemela\u2019a, that is the alchemy (kimiya\u2019a) of the seven bodies and of the\nvarious natures; [it includes] arts such as goldsmith\u2019s art and copper, iron, and\nglass working.10\nOnly the last definition includes a wide set of techniques applied to different\nsubstances (among which glass is mentioned), while most of the above-quoted\ntexts identifies alchemy with the making of gold and silver. The two precious metals\nwere probably the most attractive outcomes that anyone engaged in alchemical\npractices tried to achieve out of this art, as is possible to infer from a few accounts\non alchemists preserved by Byzantine and Syriac chronographers. In the mid-sixth\ncentury, for instance, John Malalas (491\u2013578) reported the story of John Istmeos,\n\u03c7\u03b5\u03b9\u03bc\u03b5\u03c5\u03c4\u1f74\u03c2 \u1f51\u03c0\u03ac\u03c1\u03c7\u03c9\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c6\u03bf\u03b2\u03b5\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03b8\u03b5\u0002\u03c4\u03b7\u03c2 (alchemist and tremendous impostor),\nwho moved from Antioch to Constantinople, where he was condemned by the\nemperor Anastasios (491\u2013518) because of the adulterated gold objects he tried to\n8\nI have quoted the translation proposed by Dodge (The Fihrist, 841), who checked several\nmanuscripts (see pp. xxiii\u2013xxxiv) not taken into account by Flu\u0308gel, who edited the Arabic text.\nIn Flu\u0308gel\u2019s edition (Kita\u0304b al-Fihrist, vol. II, 351) the passage reads:\n, translated by Fu\u0308ck, \u201cArabic Literature of Alchemy,\u201d 88, as follows:\n\u201cThe adepts of the Art of Alchemy, which is the art of making gold and silver without (recourse to)\nmining.\u201d\n9\nThe expression\nliterally\nmeans \u2018stone of sadness.\u2019 Berthelot & Duval, Chimie, 133 translated it as \u2018pierre philosophale.\u2019\n(\u2018sadness, grieving\u2019), I read\n(\u2018black, dark\u2019); on the tendency of\nInstead of\nidentifying \u2018alchemy\u2019 with the substance used for transforming vile metals into gold and silver,\nsee Gildemeister, \u201cAlchymie.\u201d\n10\nThe term\nis often used in the lexicon (Duval, Lexicon Syriacum,\n), especially in the\nvol. I, 78,12; 114,14; 222,5 and 20; 239,5; and vol. III, 160, s.v.\nexpression\n. In Duval\u2019s opinion, the term is an early corruption for\n.\n\nPages 29:\nThe Alchemical Art of Dyeing: The Fourfold Division of Alchemy. . .\n5\nsell as authentic (Chronographia XVI 5). The Syrian city of Antioch was again the\nscene of an \u2018alchemical affaire\u2019 at the beginning of the eighth century, when Isaac,\nbishop of Harra\u0304n, is said to have become archbishop of the city (755\u2013756) thanks to\n\u02d9\nhis alchemical knowledge. According to various Syriac chronicles, Isaac murdered\na monk of Edessa and stole from him a powder that, when applied on lead, could\ntransform it into gold.11 By means of this powder, Isaac was able to find favour with\nthe Caliph al-Ma\u0304nsur (754\u2013775), who turned out to be very interested in this\n\u02d9\nsubstance and supported (at least for a little while) Isaac\u2019s political career. Moreover, Arabic sources claim that the same caliph sent his emissary \u2018Uma\u0304ra ibn\nHamza to the court of Constantine V (741\u2013775), who led the guest into a big\n\u02d9\nstorehouse containing two kinds of powder: a white elixir that could transmute\nmetals into silver, and a yellow/red one that could transform metals into gold.12\nTwo Early Alchemical Treatises: Ps.-Democritus and Isis\nAfter the above-discussed passage, Psellos carries on his investigation by listing\nand commenting seven recipes describing how to prepare specific \u03c6\u03ac\u03c1\u03bc\u03b1\u03ba\u03b1 (medicines) with which to treat base metals (lead first of all) and transform them into\ngold. The section is concluded by the rhetorical question: \u201cHow so? Should I\nshortly reveal you all the wisdom of Democritus without leaving anything in the\ninnermost sanctuary?\u201d13\nThe reference to the \u1f08\u03b2\u03b4\u03b7\u03c1\u03b9\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u1f74 \u03c3\u03bf\u03c6\u03af\u03b1 (the wisdom of Democritus), the philosopher from Abdera par excellence, is noteworthy, since Democritus (fl. 440\u2013380\nBC) is usually considered one of the most ancient authors of alchemical treatises\nhanded down by Byzantine manuscripts. These treatises are obviously spurious and\nwere composed by an anonymous author in the second half of the first century\nAD. However, in contrast with Psellos\u2019s account focusing only on chrysopoeia, the\nalchemical tradition ascribes to the philosopher four books dealing with a wider set\nof interests that included not only the making of silver and gold, but also the making\nof precious stones and the purple dyeing of wool. For instance, the alchemist\nSynesius (fourth century AD), who wrote a commentary on ps.-Democritus\u2019s\n11\nSee (a) the fourth part of the Zuqn\u0131\u0304q Chronicle or Chronicle of ps.-Dyonisus of Tell-Mahre,\nedited by Chabot, Pseudo-Dyonysianum, 66; (b) the chronicle of Michael the Syrian, edited by\nChabot, Michel le Syrien, 474; (c) the anonymous chronicle edited by Brooks, \u201cSyriac Fragment,\u201d\n217\u20138.\n12\nFor instance, the story is told by the geographer Ibn al-Faq\u0131\u0304h al-Hamadani (Goeje, Ibn al-Faq\u0003{n\nal-Hamada\u0304n\u0003{, 137\u20139; French transl. by Masse\u0301, Abre\u0301ge\u0301 du Livre de Pays,\u02d9 164\u20136); see Strohmaier,\n\u00af Hamza,\u201d 21\u20132.\n\u201cUma\u0304ra ibn\n\u02d9\n13\nBidez, E\u00b4pitre sur la Chrysope\u0301e, 40,7\u20138: \u201c\u03a4\u03af \u03bf\u1f56\u03bd; \u03c0\u1fb6\u03c3\u03ac\u03bd \u03c3\u03bf\u03b9 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u1f08\u03b2\u03b4\u03b7\u03c1\u03b9\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u1f74\u03bd \u03c3\u03bf\u03c6\u03af\u03b1\u03bd\n\u1f00\u03bd\u03b1\u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u03cd\u03c8\u03bf\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd \u1f10\u03bd \u03b2\u03c1\u03b1\u03c7\u03b5\u1fd6 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bf\u1f50\u03b4\u1f72\u03bd \u1f10\u03bd\u03c4\u1f78\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u1f00\u03b4\u03cd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u1f00\u03c6\u03ae\u03c3\u03bf\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd.\u201d\n\nPages 30:\n6\nM. Martelli\nalchemical writings, introduced the alleged production of the philosopher as follows (Syn. Alch. \u00a7 1, ll. 5\u201314 Martelli):\nSo now let me start telling you something about this man, the philosopher Democritus, who\nwas a natural philosopher from Adbera, who investigated every natural question and\nexplained every phenomenon on the basis of its own nature. Abdera is a Thracian town;\nbut he became a very wise man when he came to Egypt and was initiated by the great\nmagician Ostanes with all Egyptian priests. He got from Ostanes the bases [of the alchemical processes] and wrote four books on dyeing, that is, on gold and silver and precious\nstones and purple.14\nThe great relevance ps.-Democritus\u2019s four books had in the later alchemical\ntradition\u2014that is unanimous in recognizing the atomist as one of the founders of\nthis discipline\u2014allows us to consider the four areas of expertise included in his\nwork as relevant parts of the technical background from which alchemy took its first\nsteps in the first-second century AD. The four books are concisely defined by\nSynesius as \u03b2\u03b1\u03c6\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b2\u03af\u03b2\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9 (books on dyeing), since ps.-Democritus dealt with a\nwide range of dyeing techniques based on various methods for changing the colours\nof metals, producing precious stones and using purple substitutes. The same areas\nof expertise are covered by the Graeco-Egyptian papyri of Leiden and Stockholm,\nwhich hand down several recipes describing (a) how to dye metals yellow or white\n(that is, how to transform them into gold or silver), (b) how to dye \u03ba\u03c1\u03cd\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2\n(quartz) and counterfeit different kinds of precious stones out of it, and (c) how to\ndye wool purple by means of various substitutes of the expensive Tyrian purple.15\nMoreover, ps.-Democritus combined the technical explanation of these methods\nwith a theoretical approach that emphasized the central role played by dyeing drugs\nand their properties.16 He analysed and classified \u03c4\u1f70 \u03c6\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03ba\u03ac (the natural ingredients) according to their capacities of dyeing and of mixing each other properly.17\nFor instance, in the middle of the book on the making of gold, after a long criticism\nagainst young people who did not accurately investigate the properties of natural\nsubstances, ps.-Democritus claims (PM \u00a7 16, ll. 178\u201380 Martelli):\nIf these young men had practised for these kinds of investigations, they would not be in\ntrouble, since they could set to work with judgement. But they do not know the antipathies\nThe Greek text reads: \u201c\u1f18\u03bd \u1fa7 \u03bf\u1f56\u03bd \u03c0\u03c1o\u0301\u03ba\u03b5\u03b9\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u1f21\u03bc\u1fd6\u03bd \u03b5\u03b9$ \u03c0\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd \u03c4\u03af\u03c2 \u1f04\u03bd \u03b5\u1f34\u03b7 \u1f41 \u1f00\u03bd\u1f74\u03c1 \u1f10\u03ba\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2, \u1f41 \u03c6\u03b9\u03bbo\u0301\u03c3\u03bf\u03c6\u03bf\u03c2\n\u0394\u03b7\u03bco\u0301\u03ba\u03c1\u03b9\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2, \u1f10\u03bb\u03b8\u1f7c\u03bd \u1f00\u03c0\u1f78 \u1f08\u03b2\u03b4\u03ae\u03c1\u03c9\u03bd, \u03c6\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03ba\u1f78\u03c2 \u1f62\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03c6\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03ba\u1f70 \u1f10\u03c1\u03b5\u03c5\u03bd\u03ae\u03c3\u03b1\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76\n\u03c3\u03c5\u03b3\u03b3\u03c1\u03b1\u03c8\u03ac\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f70 \u1f44\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u1f70 \u03c6\u03cd\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd. \u1f0c\u03b2\u03b4\u03b7\u03c1\u03b1 \u03b4\u03b5\u0002 \u1f10\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9 \u03c0o\u0301\u03bb\u03b9\u03c2 \u0398\u03c1\u1fb4\u03ba\u03b7\u03c2, \u1f10\u03b3\u03b5\u0002\u03bd\u03b5\u03c4\u03bf \u03b4\u1f72 \u1f41 \u1f00\u03bd\u1f74\u03c1\n\u03bb\u03bf\u03b3\u03b9\u03c9\n\u0002 \u03c4\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2, \u1f43\u03c2 \u1f10\u03bb\u03b8\u1f7c\u03bd \u1f10\u03bd \u0391\u03b9$ \u03b3\u03cd\u03c0\u03c4\u1ff3 \u1f10\u03bc\u03c5\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u03b3\u03c9\u03b3\u03ae\u03b8\u03b7 \u1f51\u03c0\u1f78 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03bc\u03b5\u03b3\u03ac\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5 \u1f48\u03c3\u03c4\u03ac\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5 \u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff7 \u1f31\u03b5\u03c1\u1ff7 \u03c4~\n\u03b7\u03c2\nM\u03b5\u0002\u03bc\u03c6\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2, \u03c3\u1f7a\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u1fb6\u03c3\u03b9 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u1f31\u03b5\u03c1\u03b5\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u0391\u03b9$ \u03b3\u03cd\u03c0\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5. \u1f18\u03ba \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03bb\u03b1\u03b2\u1f7c\u03bd \u1f00\u03c6\u03bf\u03c1\u03bc\u03ac\u03c2, \u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b5\u03b3\u03c1\u03ac\u03c8\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\n\u03b2\u03af\u03b2\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b5\u0002\u03c3\u03c3\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03c2 \u03b2\u03b1\u03c6\u03b9\u03ba\u03ac\u03c2, \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03c7\u03c1\u03c5\u03c3\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f00\u03c1\u03b3\u03cd\u03c1\u03bf\u03c5 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bb\u03af\u03b8\u03c9\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03bf\u03c1\u03c6\u03cd\u03c1\u03b1\u03c2.\u201d First edition in\nBerthelot & Ruelle, Anciens alchimistes grecs, vol. II, 57 (hereafter CAAG).\n15\nThe most recent edition is by Halleux, Papyrus de Leyde; for a general overview on the contents\nof the two papyri, see, in particular, 13\u20137. English translation in Caley, \u201cLeiden Papyrus X,\u201d and\n\u201cStockholm Papyrus.\u201d\n16\nSee, for instance, ps.-Dem. Alch. PM \u00a7 20, ll. 215\u201324 in Martelli, Pseudo-Democrito, 202\u20134 (\u00bc\nCAAG II 49), 135\u201348.\n17\nOn ps.-Democritus\u2019s catalogues of dyestuffs, see Martelli, Pseudo-Democrito, 83\u201390.\n14\n\nPages 31:\nThe Alchemical Art of Dyeing: The Fourfold Division of Alchemy. . .\n7\nof natures, how one species upsets ten: a drop of oil has the capacity to remove much\npurple, and a pinch sulphur may burn many species.18\nOn the other hand, the form in which Byzantine manuscripts have preserved ps.Democritus\u2019s writings does not allow us to reconstruct the exact content of each\nbook and their reciprocal connection. In fact, only an epitomized version has been\nincluded in the Byzantine collections, which contain just two sections ascribed to\nthe philosopher:\n1. The book on the making of gold (or more probably a summarized version of it) is\nintroduced by a very short section on purple dyeing and handed down under the\ntitle of \u03a6\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03ba\u1f70 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bc\u03c5\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03ac (Natural and Secret Questions).19\n2. A selection of passages from the book on silver forms the second section entitled\n\u03a0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03c4~\n\u03b7\u03c2 \u1f00\u03c3\u03ae\u03bc\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03ae\u03c3\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2 (On the Making of Silver).20\nSome information about the book on stones\u2014otherwise lost in its original Greek\nversion\u2014is provided only by the indirect tradition. In fact, a later recipe book\npreserved by a few Byzantine manuscripts under the title of Deep Tincture of Stones,\nEmeralds, Rubies and Jacinth from the Book Taken out from the Innermost Sanctuary\nof Temples includes some passages discussing the dyeing methods applied by ancient\nalchemists on stones.21 Along with Democritus, his pretended master Ostanes,\nMoses, and Maria the Jewish are also quoted.22 Regrettably, the writings of these\nancient authors are lost, so that we cannot understand to what extent they actually\ndealt with similar topics. However, as far as ps.-Democritus is concerned, in all\nlikelihood he attributed a certain relevance to the dyeing of stones, if it is true that\nhe devoted an entire book to this subject. On the contrary, the exclusion of this\nbook\u2014along with most of the book on purple\u2014from the epitomized version handed\ndown by the Byzantine anthologies evidences the criteria adopted by the epitomiser\nof ps.-Democritus\u2019s writings: he seems to have focused his attention only on the\ntransmutation of metals into gold and silver, so revealing an attitude that tallies with\nthe approach we have already detected in the above-discussed Byzantine sources.\nNevertheless, although the relevance of chrysopoeia in Byzantine times can\nsomehow explain the loss of part of ps.-Democritus\u2019s books, one of the manuscripts\n18\nThe Greek text reads (\u00bc CAAG II 47\u20138): \u201c\u0395\u03b9$ \u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2 \u1f51\u03c0~\n\u03b7\u03c1\u03c7\u03bf\u03bd \u1f00\u03c3\u03ba\u03bf\u03cd\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9 \u03bf\u1f31 \u03bd\u03b5\u0002\u03bf\u03b9, \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba \u1f02\u03bd\n\u1f10\u03b4\u03c5\u03c3\u03c4\u03cd\u03c7\u03bf\u03c5\u03bd, \u03ba\u03c1\u03af\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9 \u1f10\u03c0\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f70\u03c2 \u03c0\u03c1\u03ac\u03be\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2 \u1f41\u03c1\u03bc\u1ff6\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2\u0387 \u03bf\u1f50 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u1f10\u03c0\u03af\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c6\u03cd\u03c3\u03b5\u03c9\u03bd \u1f00\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9\u03c0\u03b1\u03b8~\n\u03b7, \u1f61\u03c2 \u1f13\u03bd\n\u03b5\u1f36\u03b4\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b4\u03b5\u0002\u03ba\u03b1 \u1f00\u03bd\u03b1\u03c4\u03c1\u03b5\u0002\u043f\u03b5\u03b9. \u1fec\u03b1\u03bd\u1f76\u03c2 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u1f10\u03bb\u03b1\u03af\u03bf\u03c5 \u03bf\u1f36\u03b4\u03b5 \u043f\u03bf\u03bb\u03bb\u1f74\u03bd \u1f00\u03c6\u03b1\u03bd\u03af\u03c3\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c0\u03bf\u03c1\u03c6\u03cd\u03c1\u03b1\u03bd, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f40\u03bb\u03af\u03b3\u03bf\u03bd \u03b8\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bf\u03bd \u03b5\u1f34\u03b4\u03b7\n\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03ba\u03b1\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03bb\u03ac.\u201d\n19\nSee Martelli, Pseudo-Democrito, 180\u2013205 (and 73\u20139) \u00bc CAAG II 41\u20139.\n20\nSee Martelli, Pseudo-Democrito, 206\u201316 (and 79\u201383) \u00bc CAAG II 49\u201353.\n21\nEdited in CAAG II 350\u201364; the Greek title reads: \u201c\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03b2\u03b1\u03c6\u1f74 \u03bb\u03af\u03b8\u03c9\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c3\u03bc\u03b1\u03c1\u03ac\u03b3\u03b4\u03c9\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76\n\u1f51\u03b1\u03ba\u03af\u03bd\u03b8\u03c9\u03bd \u1f10\u03ba \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u1f00\u03b4\u03cd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f31\u03b5\u03c1\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f10\u03ba\u03b4\u03bf\u03b8\u03b5\u0002\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b2\u03b9\u03b2\u03bb\u03af\u03bf\u03c5.\u201d The earliest testimonies are the\nmanuscripts Parisinus gr. 2325 (13th century; fols. 160v\u2013173v), and Parisinus gr. 2327 (15th\ncentury; fol. 147r\u2013159r).\n22\nSee, in particular, for Democritus: CAAG II 353,11\u201325, and 354,12\u2013357,19; for Ostanes:\nCAAG II 351,16\u201328, and 352,10 (fragments reedited by Bidez & Cumont, Mages helle\u0301nise\u0301s,\nvol. II, 323\u20134); for Moses: CAAG II 353,19; for Maria: CAAG II 351,23; 352,2\u20138; 355,1, and\n257,19.\n\nPages 32:\n8\nM. Martelli\nthat hands down the above-mentioned recipe book on precious stones preserves\nanother important treatise that introduces a new important element into the discussion. The Parisinus gr. 2325 (fols. 256r\u2013258v), in fact, contains a book ascribed to\nthe goddess Isis, which probably dates back to the second century AD and contains an\nimportant account of the revelation of the alchemical art. According to the beginning\nof the treatise, Isis received a revelation from two angels who descended from heaven\nbecause they were attracted by the beauty of the goddess (CAAG II 28\u20139):\nIsis the Prophet to Her Son Horus. O son, as you were about to leave and fight a battle\nagainst the unfaithful Typhon for the kingdom of your father, I went to Hormanouthis [city,\nsanctuary?] of the holy art in Egypt, where I stayed a long time. According to the recession\nof the convenient time and to the necessary course of the spherical movement, it happened\nthat one of the angels living in the first firmament, after watching me from above, wanted to\nhave sexual intercourse with me. When he arrived and started taking this direction, I did not\ngive myself, because I wanted to learn the preparation of gold and silver. After I asked him\nthis question, he told me that he was not allowed to reveal this point, because these secrets\nsurpassed him, but (he told me) that the next day his superior, the angel Amnae\u0304l, would\ncome, and that he would be able to give a reply for a similar inquiry [. . .] The next day, his\nsuperior Amnae\u0304l appeared when the sun was in the middle of its course, and he came down.\nTaken by the same desire for me, he did not await, but he hastened to get what he came for;\nbut I was not less focused on what I was searching for. He longed for it, but I did not give\nmyself and I was able to curb his desire until he showed me his mark on the head and\nrevealed all the mysteries I was looking for, without envy and faithfully.23\nThe \u1f31\u03b5\u03c1\u1f70 \u03c4\u03b5\u0002\u03c7\u03bd\u03b7 \u0391\u03b9$ \u03b3\u03cd\u03c0\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 (Egyptian holy art) quoted at the beginning of the\npassage is clearly identified by Isis with \u1f21 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03c7\u03c1\u03c5\u03c3\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f00\u03c1\u03b3\u03cd\u03c1\u03bf\u03c5 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03c3\u03ba\u03b5\u03c5\u03ae\nI have followed the more recent edition by Mertens, Lettre d\u2019Isis, 128\u201331: \u201c\u1f3c\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2 \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c6~\n\u03b7\u03c4\u03b9\u03c2 \u03c4\u1ff7\n\u03c5\u1f31\u1ff7 \u1f6d\u03c1\u1ff3. \u1f08\u03c0\u03b9\u03b5\u0002\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c3\u03bf\u03c5 \u03bc\u03b5\n\u0002\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2, \u1f66 \u03c4\u03b5\u0002\u03ba\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd, \u1f10\u03c0\u1f76 \u1f00\u03c0\u03af\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03a4\u03c5\u03c6\u1ff6\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 \u03bc\u03ac\u03c7\u03b7\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03b3\u03c9\u03bd\u03af\u03c3\u03b1\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76\n\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c4\u03c1o\u0301\u03c2 \u03c3\u03bf\u03c5 \u03b2\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9\u03bb\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03c2, \u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03b1\u03bc\u03b5\u0002\u03bd\u03b7\u03c2 \u03bc\u03bf\u03c5 <\u03c0\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2> \u1f49\u03c1\u03bc\u03b1\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03b8\u03af, <. . .> \u1f31\u03b5\u03c1\u1fb6\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b5\n\u0002\u03c7\u03bd\u03b7\u03c2 \u0391\u03b9$ \u03b3\u03cd\u03c0\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5,\n\u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f10\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u1fe6\u03b8\u03b1 \u1f31\u03ba\u03b1\u03bd\u1f78\u03bd \u03c7\u03c1o\u0301\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd \u03b4\u03b9\u03b5\n\u0002\u03c4\u03c1\u03b9\u03b2\u03bf\u03bd. K\u03b1\u03c4\u1f70 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9\u03c1\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03c7\u03c9\n\u0002 \u03c1\u03b7\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c4~\n\u03b7\u03c2\n\u03c3\u03c6\u03b1\u03b9\u03c1\u03b9\u03ba~\n\u03b7\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b9\u03bd\u03ae\u03c3\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2 \u1f00\u03bd\u03b1\u03b3\u03ba\u03b1\u03af\u03b1\u03bd \u03c6\u03bf\u03c1\u03ac\u03bd, \u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b5\u0002\u03b2\u03b7 \u03c4\u03b9\u03bd\u1f70 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff7 \u03c0\u03c1\u03c9\n\u0002 \u03c4\u1ff3 \u03c3\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03b5\u03c9\n\u0002 \u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b9 \u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03c4\u03c1\u03b9\u03b2o\u0301\u03bd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd,\n\u03b7\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4~\n\u03b7\u03c2 \u03c0\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2 \u1f10\u03bc\u1f72 \u03bc\u03af\u03be\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2 \u03ba\u03bf\u03b9\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd\u03af\u03b1\u03bd\n\u1f15\u03bd\u03b1 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f00\u03b3\u03b3\u03b5\u0002\u03bb\u03c9\u03bd, \u1f04\u03bd\u03c9\u03b8\u03b5\u03bd \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03b8\u03b5\u03c9\u03c1\u03ae\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03ac \u03bc\u03b5, \u03b2\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b7\u03b8~\n\u03c0\u03bf\u03b9~\n\u03b7\u03c3\u03b1\u03b9. \u03a6\u03b8\u03ac\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b5\u03b9$ \u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf \u03b3\u03af\u03b3\u03bd\u03b5\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u03bc\u03b5\n\u0002\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2, \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba \u1f10\u03c0\u03b5\n\u0002\u03c4\u03c1\u03b5\u03c0\u03bf\u03bd \u1f10\u03b3\u03c9\n\u0002,\n\u03c0\u03c5\u03bd\u03b8\u03ac\u03bd\u03b5\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b2\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03bf\u03bc\u03b5\n\u0002\u03bd\u03b7 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03c7\u03c1\u03c5\u03c3\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f00\u03c1\u03b3\u03cd\u03c1\u03bf\u03c5 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03c3\u03ba\u03b5\u03c5\u03ae\u03bd. \u1f18\u03bc\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1ff7\n\u1f10\u03c1\u03c9\u03c4\u03b7\u03c3\u03ac\u03c3\u03b7\u03c2, <\u03bf\u1f50\u03ba> \u1f14\u03c6\u03b7 \u1f41 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1f78\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c6\u03af\u03b5\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf \u1f10\u03be\u03b5\u03b9\u03c0\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd, \u03b4\u03b9\u1f70 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03bc\u03c5\u03c3\u03c4\u03b7\u03c1\u03af\u03c9\u03bd\n\u1f51\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b2\u03bf\u03bb\u03ae\u03bd, \u03c4\u1fc7 \u03b4\u1f72 \u1f11\u03be~\n\u03b7\u03c2 \u1f21\u03bc\u03b5\u0002\u03c1\u1fb3 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03b3\u03af\u03b3\u03bd\u03b5\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03bc\u03b5\u03af\u03b6\u03bf\u03bd\u03b1 \u1f04\u03b3\u03b3\u03b5\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd \u1f08\u03bc\u03bd\u03b1\u03ae\u03bb, \u03ba\u1f00\u03ba\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd\n\u03b7\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u03b6\u03b7\u03c4\u03ae\u03c3\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c0\u03af\u03bb\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03ae\u03c3\u03b1\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9. [. . .] \u03a4\u1fc7 \u03b4\u1f72 \u1f11\u03be~\n\u03b7\u03c2 \u1f21\u03bc\u03b5\n\u0002\u03c1\u1fb3\n\u1f31\u03ba\u03b1\u03bd\u1f78\u03bd \u03b5\u1f36\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03c4~\n\u1f10\u03c0\u03b5\u03bc\u03c6\u03b1\u03bd\u03af\u03c3\u03b1\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u1f21\u03bb\u03af\u03bf\u03c5 \u03bc\u03b5\u0002\u03c3\u03bf\u03bd \u03b4\u03c1o\u0301\u03bc\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2, \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4~\n\u03b7\u03bb\u03b8\u03b5\u03bd \u1f41 \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03bc\u03b5\u03af\u03b6\u03c9\u03bd \u1f08\u03bc\u03bd\u03b1\u03ae\u03bb. \u03a4\u1ff7\n\u03b7\u03bd\u00b7 \u1f10\u03b3\u1f7c \u03b4\u1f72 \u03bf\u1f50\u03c7 \u1f27\u03c4\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd\n\u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1ff7 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u1f10\u03bc\u1f72 \u03bb\u03b7\u03c6\u03b8\u03b5\u1f76\u03c2 \u03c0o\u0301\u03b8\u1ff3 \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba \u1f00\u03bd\u03b5\u0002\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03b5\u03bd, \u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u2019 \u1f14\u03c3\u03c0\u03b5\u03c5\u03b4\u03b5\u03bd \u1f10\u03c6\u2019 \u03bf\u1f57 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1~\n\u1f10\u03c6\u03c1o\u0301\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9\u03b6\u03bf\u03bd \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u1f10\u03c1\u03b5\u03c5\u03bd\u1fb6\u03bd. \u1f18\u03b3\u03c7\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd\u03af\u03b6\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6, \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba \u1f10\u03c0\u03b5\u03b4\u03af\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bd \u1f11\u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03ae\u03bd, \u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u2019\n\u03b7\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b5\u03c6\u03b1\u03bb~\n\u03b7\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03b4\u03b5\u03b9\u03ba\u03bd\u03cd\u03b7\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76\n\u1f10\u03c0\u03b5\u03ba\u03c1\u03ac\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bd \u03c4~\n\u03b7\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03b8\u03c5\u03bc\u03af\u03b1\u03c2 \u1f04\u03c7\u03c1\u03b9\u03c2 \u1f02\u03bd \u03c4\u1f78 \u03c3\u03b7\u03bc\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bf\u03bd \u03c4\u1f78 \u1f10\u03c0\u1f76 \u03c4~\n\u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03b6\u03b7\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bc\u03b5\u0002\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd \u03bc\u03c5\u03c3\u03c4\u03b7\u03c1\u03af\u03c9\u03bd \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03ac\u03b4\u03bf\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u1f00\u03c6\u03b8o\u0301\u03bd\u03c9\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f00\u03bb\u03b7\u03b8\u1ff6\u03c2 \u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03ae\u03c3\u03b7\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9.\u201d The beginning of\nthe story clearly refers to the Egyptian myth of Horus fighting against Seth, the killer of his father\nOsiris. The identification between the Egyptian god Seth and Typhon is quite common in\nHellenistic and Roman Egypt: see, for instance, Plutarch, De Iside et Osiride 41 (\u00bc 367d): \u201c\u03c4\u1f78\u03bd\n\u03a4\u03c5\u03c6\u1ff6\u03bd\u03b1 \u03a3\u1f74\u03b8 \u0391\u03b9$ \u03b3\u03cd\u03c0\u03c4\u03b9\u03bf\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b9.\u201d \u2013 \u201cEgyptians gives to Seth the name of Typhon.\u201d On the other\nhand, the toponym \u1f49\u03c1\u03bc\u03b1\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03b8\u03af is not clear and not otherwise attested. Probably it refers to an\nEgyptian city, although it does not match any of the five towns, where alchemy was practiced\naccording to CAAG II 26. Various corrections of the form \u1f49\u03c1\u03bc\u03b1\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03b8\u03af have been proposed: see, in\nparticular, Reitzenstein, Poimandres, 141, no. 3 (who proposed \u1f49\u03c1\u03bc\u03b1\u03c7\u03bf\u03c5\u03b8\u03af, lit. \u2018Horus of Edfu\u2019),\nand Mertens, Lettre d\u2019Isis, 56\u201360 (who proposed M\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03b8\u03af, that is an area in the Egyptian city of\nCanopus).\n23\n\nPages 33:\nThe Alchemical Art of Dyeing: The Fourfold Division of Alchemy. . .\n9\n(the preparation of gold and silver), that is, the same definition of alchemy attested\nby the Lexicon Suda (\u03c7 280) and supported by the Byzantine sources that have been\nbriefly analyzed in the first paragraph. The inclusion of this definition in such an\nancient text is noteworthy, since it proves that some of the earliest authors already\nfocused their treatises only on metallurgical practices.\nConsequently, the last part of Isis\u2019s work lists five metallurgical recipes describing: (a) how to make mercury solid and mix it with lead; (b) how to prepare a white\ndyeing drug by which, according to the third recipe (c), an iron-copper alloy was\ntreated and dyed white (the same alloy is dyed yellow in the second part of the\nrecipe); (d) how to mix the substances prepared according to the first three recipes;\n(e) how to process a metallic body before dyeing it white.24 This section is\nconcluded by a more general statement according to which all the \u03bf\u03b9$ \u03ba\u03bf\u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03af\u03b1\u03b9\n(treatments), the \u03b4\u03af\u03c0\u03bb\u03c9\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2 (techniques for doubling the weight of gold or silver\nobjects), and the \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03b2\u03b1\u03c6\u03b1\u03af (dyeing processes) were moved by the same aim, that\nwas, according to the beginning of the treatise, the making of gold and silver.25\nTowards a Definition of Alchemy: Zosimus\nand the Enochian Myth\nThe plot of Isis\u2019s story, although set in a new Egyptian framework, clearly depends\non the Enochian account of the fallen angels who taught mankind about a divine\nand forbidden knowledge that included a wide set of crafts. The myth is fully\ndeveloped in the very first part of the so-called Book of Enoch (or 1Enoch), one of\nthe pseudepigrapha of the Ancient Testament ascribed to Enoch, the grandfather of\nNoah. The book is composed of different segments (or treatises), and in its most\ndeveloped form it is preserved only by a translation in Classical Ethiopic (fifth-sixth\ncentury AD). However, the major part of it is much earlier, as one can infer from\nvarious sections that have been preserved by the Aramaic manuscripts discovered\nin Qumran\u2019s caves.26 In particular the first part, usually called The Book of\nWatchers (\u00bc 1Enoch, chap. 1\u201336), is handed down in several Dead Sea scrolls\nand in all likelihood dates back to the third century BC.27 Moreover, this book has\nMertens, Lettre d\u2019Isis, 134\u20138 \u00bc CAAG II 31\u20133.\nMertens, Lettre d\u2019Isis, 138, ll. 113\u20136 \u00bc CAAG II 33, \u00a7 16.\n26\nThe secondary literature on 1Enoch is vast; for a general introduction on its content, see, for\nexample, Knibb, Book of Enoch, 7\u201335. For a recent English translation of the Ethiopic text, see\nBlack, Book of Enoch.\n27\nThese manuscripts have been found in cave 4; the Aramaic text has been edited and translated by\nMilik, Books of Enoch, Aramaic fragments.\n24\n25\n\nPages 34:\n10\nM. Martelli\nbeen translated into Greek quite early, probably already in the second century BC,\nwithin the same cultural context that produced the Septuagint translation of\nDaniel.28\nAt the beginning of The Book of Watchers (1Enoch, chap. 6\u20138) the author\nexplains that two hundred angels\u2014called \u1f10\u03b3\u03c1\u03ae\u03b3\u03bf\u03c1\u03bf\u03b9 (watchers) or \u1f04\u03b3\u03b3\u03b5\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9 \u03c5\u1f31\u03bf\u1f76\n\u03bf\u1f50\u03c1\u03b1\u03bd\u03bf\u1fe6 (the angels, sons of the Heaven) in the Greek version\u2014started desiring the\ndaughters of men and descended from heaven in order to have intercourse with\nthem. The Greek version of the passage, extensively quoted by the chronographer\nSyncellus, goes on as follows (Sync. p. 12, ll 8\u201317 Mosshammer):\nThe leaders [of these angels] and all the rest [of the two hundred watchers] took for\nthemselves wives in AM 1170, and they began to defile themselves with them up to the\nFlood. [. . .] And they were increasing in accordance with their greatness, and they taught\nthemselves and their wives the uses of potions and spell. First Azae\u0304l, the tenth of the\nleaders, taught them to make swords and armours and every instrument of war and how to\nwork the metals of the earth and gold, how to make them into adornments for their wives,\nand silver. He showed them also the use of cosmetics and beautifying the face and choice\nstones and colouring tinctures.29\nThe list of crafts revealed by Azae\u0304l, which includes the working of metals (with\nexplicit mention of gold and silver) and of precious stones along with \u03c4\u1f70 \u03b2\u03b1\u03c6\u03b9\u03ba\u03ac\n(dyeing procedures) in a more general sense, shows clear similarities with the topics\ncovered by ps.-Democritus\u2019s four books, which nevertheless do not refer back to\nthis myth (at least in the preserved sections). On the contrary, the myth was\nreworked in Isis\u2019s treatise, where the secret teaching of the angels was limited\nonly to the preparation of gold and silver. These different approaches to what was\nconsidered part of the alchemical art were inherited and discussed by Zosimus, a\nthird century author who clearly reused the Enochian myth in his own account of\nthe origins and developments of alchemy. In fact, Zosimus first introduced the term\nche\u0304meia with reference to fallen angels\u2019 revelation, which was written down in\nspecific and secret books. Regrettably, Zosimus\u2019s treatise is lost in its Greek\noriginal form, and just its beginning is quoted by Syncellus straight after the\nabove-mentioned passage taken from 1Enoch. However, a more complete version\nis preserved by an unedited Syriac translation handed down in the Cambridge\nmanuscript Mm. 6.29. The two versions read as follows:\n1. Sync. p. 14, ll. 2\u201314 Mosshammer:\nBut it is also fitting to cite a passage regarding them [i.e. the divine scriptures]\nfrom Zosimus, the philosopher of Panopolis, from his writings to Theosebeia in\n28\nBaar, \u201cAramaic-Greek Notes,\u201d 191\u20132.\nTranslation by Adler & Tuffin, George Synkellos, 17. The Greek text reads: \u201c\u039f\u1f57\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bf\u1f31 \u03bb\u03bf\u03b9\u03c0\u03bf\u1f76\n\u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff7 \u03b1\u03c1\u03bf\u0374 \u1f14\u03c4\u03b5\u03b9 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03bao\u0301\u03c3\u03bc\u03bf\u03c5 \u1f14\u03bb\u03b1\u03b2\u03bf\u03bd \u1f10\u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03b3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u1fd6\u03ba\u03b1\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f24\u03c1\u03be\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf \u03bc\u03b9\u03b1\u03af\u03bd\u03b5\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u1f10\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03b1\u1fd6\u03c2 \u1f14\u03c9\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\n\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03ba\u03bb\u03c5\u03c3\u03bc\u03bf\u1fe6. [. . .] \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f26\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd \u03b1\u1f51\u03be\u03b1\u03bdo\u0301\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u1f70 \u03c4~\n\u03b7\u03bd \u03bc\u03b5\u03b3\u03b1\u03bb\u03b5\u03b9o\u0301\u03c4\u03b7\u03c4\u03b1 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f10\u03b4\u03af\u03b4\u03b1\u03be\u03b1\u03bd \u1f11\u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2\n\u0002\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f00\u03c1\u03c7o\u0301\u03bd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd\n\u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f70\u03c2 \u03b3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u1fd6\u03ba\u03b1\u03c2 \u1f11\u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c6\u03b1\u03c1\u03bc\u03b1\u03ba\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f10\u03c0\u03b1\u03bf\u03b9\u03b4\u03af\u03b1\u03c2. \u03c0\u03c1\u1ff6\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f08\u03b6\u03b1\u1f74\u03bb \u1f41 \u03b4\u03b5\n\u1f10\u03b4\u03af\u03b4\u03b1\u03be\u03b5 \u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd \u03bc\u03b1\u03c7\u03b1\u03af\u03c1\u03b1\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b8\u03c9\n\u0002 \u03c1\u03b1\u03ba\u03b1\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u1fb6\u03bd \u03c3\u03ba\u03b5\u1fe6\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03b5\u03bc\u03b9\u03ba\u1f78\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03bc\u03b5\u0002\u03c4\u03b1\u03bb\u03bb\u03b1 \u03c4~\n\u03b7\u03c2 \u03b3~\n\u03b7\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f78\n\u03c7\u03c1\u03c5\u03c3\u03af\u03bf\u03bd \u03c0\u1ff6\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c1\u03b3\u03ac\u03c3\u03c9\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03ae\u03c3\u03c9\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1f70 \u03bao\u0301\u03c3\u03bc\u03b9\u03b1 \u03c4\u03b1\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03b3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9\u03be\u03af, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u1f04\u03c1\u03b3\u03c5\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd. \u1f14\u03b4\u03b5\u03b9\u03be\u03b5 \u03b4\u1f72\n\u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f78 \u03c3\u03c4\u03af\u03bb\u03b2\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f78 \u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u03bb\u03c9\u03c0\u03af\u03b6\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u1f10\u03ba\u03bb\u03b5\u0002\u03ba\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03bb\u03af\u03b8\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03b2\u03b1\u03c6\u03b9\u03ba\u03ac.\u201d\n29\n\nPages 35:\nThe Alchemical Art of Dyeing: The Fourfold Division of Alchemy. . .\n11\nthe ninth book of Imouth, reading as follows:30 \u201cThe Holy Scriptures, that is the\nbooks, say, my lady (i.e. Theosebeia),31 that there is a race of demons who avail\nthemselves of women. Hermes also mentioned this in his Physika, and nearly\nevery treatise, both public and esoteric, made mention of this. Thus the ancient\nand divine scriptures said this, that certain angels lusted after women, and having\ndescended taught them all the works of nature. For this reason they fell into\ndisgrace, he (Hermes?) says, and remained outside heaven, because they taught\nmankind everything wicked and nothing benefiting the soul. The same scriptures\nsay that from them the giants were born. So theirs is the first teaching concerning\nthese arts [Chemeu]. They called this book Che\u0304meu,32 whence also the art is\ncalled Alchemy (i.e. che\u0304meia),\u201d and so forth.33\n2. Syriac Zosimus (for a preliminary edition of this text see Appendix)\nEighth Treatise on the Working of Tin; Letter He\u0304th. The Book tells us about tin\n\u02d9 Theosebeia. The holy scripand Zosimus gives his best greetings to the queen\ntures say, my lady, that there is a race of demons who has intercourse with the\nwomen and has authority over them. Hermes also mentions this story in his\nPhysika as well as, so to say, every clear or secret treatise recalls it. In this way,\n30\nThe title Imouth is not elsewhere attested in Zosimus\u2019s treatises handed down by the Byzantine\ntradition. Moreover, the reference to the ninth book is not confirmed by the Syriac tradition, where\nthis passage is included in the eighth book by Zosimus. The Arabic Tome of Images (Mushaf\nas-suwar), preserved under the name of the Egyptian alchemist (although its authenticity\u02d9 \u02d9 is\n\u02d9\u02d9\nquestioned;\nsee Hallum, \u201cTome of Images\u201d) preserves a similar account in the sixth book, entitled\nBook About the Nature or Book of Imouth (see Abt & Fuad, Book of Pictures, 393, 22).\n31\nThe woman to whom Zosimus usually addresses his treatises; perhaps a pupil of the alchemist:\nsee Hallum, \u201cTheosebeia.\u201d\n32\nThe term Che\u0304meu (hapax) is likely to be the title of the book in which the teaching of angels was\nrevealed. The alchemist Olympiodorus (CAAG II 80,13) refers to a similar book entitled \u03b2\u03af\u03b2\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2\n\u03c7\u03b7\u03bc\u03b5\u03c5\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03ae. Moreover, in the Corpus alchemicum graecum several authors mention the alchemist\nChe\u0304me\u0304s (\u03a7\u03b7\u03bc\u03ae\u03c2) or Chyme\u0304s (\u03a7\u03c5\u03bc\u03ae\u03c2), whose name seems to be related to the book Che\u0304meu; see\nLetrouit, \u201cAlchimistes grecs,\u201d 72\u20134.\n33\nTranslation by Adler & Tuffin, George Synkellos, 18\u20139 (slightly modified). The Greek text\nreads: \u201c\u1f0c\u03be\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd \u03b4\u1f72 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u0396\u03c9\u03c3\u03af\u03bc\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03a0\u03b1\u03bd\u03bf\u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03af\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c6\u03b9\u03bb\u03bf\u03c3o\u0301\u03c6\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c7\u03c1~\n\u03b7\u03c3\u03af\u03bd \u03c4\u03b9\u03bd\u03b1 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03b8\u03b5\u0002\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd\n\u1f10\u03ba \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03b3\u03b5\u03b3\u03c1\u03b1\u03bc\u03bc\u03b5\u0002\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1ff7 \u03c0\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2 \u0398\u03b5\u03bf\u03c3\u03b5\n\u0002\u03b2\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1\u03bd \u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff7 \u1f10\u03bd\u03ac\u03c4\u1ff3 \u03c4~\n\u03b7\u03c2 \u1f38\u03bc\u03bf\u1f7a\u03b8 \u03b2\u03af\u03b2\u03bb\u1ff3, \u1f14\u03c7\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd \u1f67\u03b4\u03b5.\n\u0002\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f43 \u03c7\u03c1~\n\u03b7\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9\u03be\u03af\u03bd.\n\u2018\u03c6\u03ac\u03c3\u03ba\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u03b1\u1f31 \u1f31\u03b5\u03c1\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b3\u03c1\u03b1\u03c6\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f24\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9 \u03b2\u03af\u03b2\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9, \u1f66 \u03b3\u03cd\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9, \u1f45\u03c4\u03b9 \u1f14\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9 \u03c4\u03b9 \u03b4\u03b1\u03b9\u03bco\u0301\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd \u03b3\u03b5\n\u1f10\u03bc\u03bd\u03b7\u03bco\u0301\u03bd\u03b5\u03c5\u03c3\u03b5 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f19\u03c1\u03bc~\n\u03b7\u03c2 \u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03c6\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03ba\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c3\u03c7\u03b5\u03b4\u1f78\u03bd \u1f05\u03c0\u03b1\u03c2 \u03bbo\u0301\u03b3\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c6\u03b1\u03bd\u03b5\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f00\u03c0o\u0301\u03ba\u03c1\u03c5\u03c6\u03bf\u03c2\n\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf \u1f10\u03bc\u03bd\u03b7\u03bco\u0301\u03bd\u03b5\u03c5\u03c3\u03b5. \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf \u03bf\u1f56\u03bd \u1f14\u03c6\u03b1\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd \u03b1\u1f31 \u1f00\u03c1\u03c7\u03b1\u1fd6\u03b1\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b8\u03b5\u1fd6\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b3\u03c1\u03b1\u03c6\u03b1\u03af, \u1f45\u03c4\u03b9 \u1f04\u03b3\u03b3\u03b5\u03bb\u03bf\u03af \u03c4\u03b9\u03bd\u03b5\u03c2\n\u1f10\u03c0\u03b5\u03b8\u03cd\u03bc\u03b7\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03b3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9\u03ba\u1ff6\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b5\u03bb\u03b8o\u0301\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2 \u1f10\u03b4\u03af\u03b4\u03b1\u03be\u03b1\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1f70\u03c2 \u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03c4~\n\u03b7\u03c2 \u03c6\u03cd\u03c3\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2 \u1f14\u03c1\u03b3\u03b1, \u1f67\u03bd\n\u03c7\u03ac\u03c1\u03b9\u03bd, \u03c6\u03b7\u03c3\u03af, \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c3\u03ba\u03c1\u03bf\u03cd\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2 \u1f14\u03be\u03c9 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03bf\u1f50\u03c1\u03b1\u03bd\u03bf\u1fe6 \u1f14\u03bc\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd\u03b1\u03bd, \u1f45\u03c4\u03b9 \u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03c0\u03bf\u03bd\u03b7\u03c1\u1f70 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bc\u03b7\u03b4\u1f72\u03bd\n\u1f60\u03c6\u03b5\u03bb\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c8\u03c5\u03c7\u1f74\u03bd \u1f10\u03b4\u03af\u03b4\u03b1\u03be\u03b1\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u1f00\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03c9\n\u0002 \u03c0\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2. \u1f10\u03be \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c6\u03ac\u03c3\u03ba\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u03b1\u1f31 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b3\u03c1\u03b1\u03c6\u03b1\u1f76 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76\n\u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03b3\u03af\u03b3\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2 \u03b3\u03b5\u03b3\u03b5\u03bd~\n\u03b7\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9. \u1f14\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03bd \u03bf\u1f56\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f21 \u03c0\u03c1\u03c9\n\u0002 \u03c4\u03b7 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03ac\u03b4\u03bf\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2 [\u03a7\u03b7\u03bc\u03b5\u1fe6] \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd\n\u03c4\u03b5\u03c7\u03bd\u1ff6\u03bd. \u1f10\u03ba\u03ac\u03bb\u03b5\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd (\u1f10\u03ba\u03ac\u03bb\u03b5\u03c3\u03b5 in Mosshammer\u2019s edition) \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c4\u03b1\u03cd\u03c4\u03b7\u03bd \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03b2\u03af\u03b2\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd \u03a7\u03b7\u03bc\u03b5\u1fe6, \u1f14\u03bd\u03b8\u03b5\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76\n\u03b7\u03c2.\u201d I have introduced two changes in Mosshammer\u2019s edition.\n\u1f21 \u03c4\u03b5\u0002\u03c7\u03bd\u03b7 \u03c7\u03b7\u03bc\u03b5\u03af\u03b1 \u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u03b5\u1fd6\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9\u2019 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f70 \u1f11\u03be~\nFirst, I\u2019ve followed Mertens\u2019s suggestion (Lettre d\u2019Isis, 67) to expunge the first \u03a7\u03b7\u03bc\u03b5\u1fe6 as an\ninterpolation (the term is not attested in this position by the Syriac tradition). Secondly, in the last\nline I corrected \u1f10\u03ba\u03ac\u03bb\u03b5\u03c3\u03b5 into \u1f10\u03ba\u03ac\u03bb\u03b5\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd in accordance with the Syriac translation that\n\nPages 36:\n12\nM. Martelli\nin fact, the ancient and holy books tell that some angels fell in love passionately\nwith the women, came down <and> taught them about all the works of nature.\nFor this reason, as the book says, those who acted haughtily remained outside\nheaven, since they taught mankind all the malicious things which do not benefit\nthe soul at all. The books claim that the works (of nature?) started up from them\nand theirs is the first exposition concerning these crafts. They called these books\nKwmw, whence also alchemy (kumiya) takes its name. There are 24 treatises in\nthis book. Each of them is given a specific title that is either a letter (of the\nalphabet) or a word. They are explained by the words of priests. One of these is\nentitled \u2018Imus\u2019, another \u2018Imuth\u2019, another \u2018Face\u2019\u2014so it was interpreted\n(or translated). One of these is entitled \u2018Key\u2019, another \u2018Seal\u2019 or \u2018Signet\u2019, another\n\u2018Handbook\u2019 (see gr. \u1f10\u03b3\u03c7\u03b5\u03b9\u03c1\u03af\u03b4\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd), another \u2018Position\u2019 (of the stars? see gr. \u1f10\u03c0\u03bf\u03c7\u03ae).\nAs I said, each one is given a specific title. This book contains the crafts and\nmany thousands of words. Then those who came afterwards, with the intent of\ndoing well, divided the book in many parts; as someone would say: (they did so)\nin order to compose short versions (of the book) for themselves. And they were\nnot even able to write something useful. For they did not only damage the books\nof alchemy, but also hidden them. The philosopher (i.e. Democritus) claims:\n\u2018they hid the writings on the natural substances under the multiplicity of matter.\u2019\nPerhaps they wanted to exercise our souls. Now, if they exercise the souls, well,\nphilosopher, why to deny it? But you know how to exercise either the body or the\nsoul, and it always leads you to achieve the perfection. In fact a wise saying\nreads: \u2018studying is everything.\u2019 And also Isidoros says: \u2018studying increases your\nwork.\u2019 I know, this is not beyond your understanding (my lady), but you know it\nwell, since you are one of those who would have liked to hide the art, if it had not\nbeen put in writing. For this reason you formed an assembly and administered\nthe oath to each other. But you (my lady) moved away from the various topics\n(of this book); you presented them in a shorter form and you taught them openly.\nBut you claim that this book cannot be possessed unless in secret. Now, even\nthough secrets are necessary, it is quite fair that anyone has a book of alchemy,\nsince it is not kept secret for them. You must know, my lady, he (i.e. Democritus?)34 claimed that those who wrote short versions (of the book) said that just\nsilver can be dyed gold. But the book of alchemy they have hidden assured that\nlead and tin and iron and silver take the color of gold, each metal (takes the color\nof) the other one, and again the same metals (take the color of) silver, the same\nmetals (the color of) copper, the same metals (the color of) iron. Lead produces\ntin, copper (produces) iron, silver (produces) gold. In the same way tin\n34\nBerthelot & Duval, Chimie, 239, considered the philosopher (i.e. ps.-Democritus) as the author\nof the following quotation. Although the ancient alchemist is cited few lines before (49v18), this\nidentification is not certain.\n\nPages 37:\nThe Alchemical Art of Dyeing: The Fourfold Division of Alchemy. . .\n13\n(produces) the same metals as well. And again from the beginning to the end and\nfrom the end to the beginning.\nThe Syriac text may be divided into two parts. The first section (49r12\u201349v6)\nmatches the Greek passage cited by Syncellus and rephrases the story told by The\nBook of Enoch: in all likelihood Zosimus refers to this book when he mentions the\nholy scriptures (Sync. 14,3 \u1f31\u03b5\u03c1\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b3\u03c1\u03b1\u03c6\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f24\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9 \u03b2\u03af\u03b2\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9\u00bcSyrZos. 49r14\n). The\nsecond section gives a detailed description of the book entitled Che\u0304meu and\nexplains how it was transmitted and somehow corrupted.\nIn the first part Zosimus attributes the revelation of che\u0304meia both to angels\n(Sync. 14,6 \u1f04\u03b3\u03b3\u03b5\u03bb\u03bf\u03af \u03c4\u03b9\u03bd\u03b5\u03c2\u00bcSyrZos. 49r18\n) and to demons (Sync. 14,3\n\u03b4\u03b1\u03b9\u03bco\u0301\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd \u03b3\u03b5\n\u0002\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2\u00bcSyrZos. 49r15\n), so introducing a slight variation\ninto the Enochian myth, where fallen angels usually play the most important role.\nAlthough the name of demons is mentioned only at the very beginning of the\npassage, their presence allows us to read Zosimus\u2019s account in the light of the\ncomplex (and still unclear in many respects) demonology developed by the author\nin two other treatises, namely On the Letter Omega (CAAG II 228\u2013234) and the\nFirst Book of the Final Account (CAAG II 239\u2013245).35 According to the second\nwork, the two main sources of wealth for Egypt were gold mines and the dyeing\ntechniques, in particular the so-called \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9\u03c1\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b2\u03b1\u03c6\u03b1\u03af (opportune tinctures), that is,\nthe dyeing processes whose success depended on the influence of demons and on\nthe astrological time in which they were performed.36 This knowledge was considered secret and no ancient authors could reveal it; only Democritus\u2014Zosimus\nclaims\u2014hinted at these tinctures in his explanation of the four \u03c4\u03b5\u0002\u03c7\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u03b9\u03bc\u03af\u03b1\u03b9\n(valuable arts), which must be identified with the topics covered by the four\nbooks, namely the making of gold, of silver, of precious stones, and the purple\ndyeing of wool.37 These opportune tinctures were originally called \u03c6\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b2\u03b1\u03c6\u03b1\u03af\n(natural tinctures) and had been explained by Hermes in his \u03b2\u03af\u03b2\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c6\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03ba\u1ff6\u03bd \u03b2\u03b1\u03c6\u1ff6\u03bd\n(Book of Natural Dyes). However, demons became jealous of this knowledge and\nwanted to make it secret and dependent on their own control (i.e. on the influences\nof the stars they governed). They started revealing these tinctures, or even a\ncounterfeited form of them (called at some point \u201cunnatural tinctures\u201d), only to\ntheir priests in order to be worshipped and receive the appropriate sacrifices.38\n35\nSee Fraser, \u201cZosimos of Panopolis.\u201d For a new and reliable edition of the first treatise,\nsee Mertens, Zosime de Panopolis, 1\u201310. The second treatise has been reedited by Festugie\u0300re,\nRe\u0301ve\u0301lation d\u2019Herme\u0300s, 363\u20138 (translation at 275\u201381).\n36\nFestugie\u0300re, Re\u0301ve\u0301lation d\u2019Herme\u0300s, 363\u20135 (\u00bcCAAG II 239\u201340). See also Mertens, Zosime de\nPanopolis, 62\u20133 notes 9\u201310.\n37\nFestugie\u0300re, Re\u0301ve\u0301lation d\u2019Herme\u0300s, 364, ll. 22\u20134 (\u00bc CAAG II 242,17), 365, ll. 12\u20134 (\u00bc CAAG II\n242,8\u201317). In addition, it is worth mentioning the passage edited in CAAG II 242,9\u201324 (not\nreedited by Festugie\u0300re, because \u2018assez obscure\u2019, see 278 note 1), which gives a kind of summary\nof ps.-Democritus\u2019s work by presenting several dyestuffs used by the alchemist as example of\n\u03ba\u03b1\u03b9\u03c1\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b2\u03b1\u03c6\u03b1\u03af.\n38\nFestugie\u0300re, Re\u0301ve\u0301lation d\u2019Herme\u0300s, 366\u20137, \u00a7\u00a7 6\u20137 (\u00bc CAAG II 243\u20134, \u00a7\u00a7 6\u20137).\n\nPages 38:\n14\nM. Martelli\nNot surprisingly, if we come back to the above-edited passages, Zosimus\ninterpreted Azae\u0304l\u2019s revelation in The Book of Enoch as referring to the knowledge\nof tinctures he considered at the basis of any alchemical activity. \u03a4\u1f70 \u03b2\u03b1\u03c6\u03b9\u03ba\u03ac are in\nfact explicitly mentioned by the apocryphal book (see supra) along with a specific\nset of crafts, which is in many respects comparable with the arts explained in ps.Democritus\u2019s four books on dyeing (\u03b2\u03b1\u03c6\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b2\u03af\u03b2\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9 according to Synesius). Moreover, next to The Book of Enoch Zosimus mentions also a book of Hermes entitled\nPhysika as one of the sources from which he took the account on the angelic/\ndemonic revelation. The identification of this treatise is far from certain, even\nthough the title and the context in which Physika is cited remind us of Hermes\u2019s\nBook of Natural Dyes quoted in the First Book of the Final Account: there Zosimus\nclaimed that Hermes\u2019s treatise was addressed to Isidoros,39 an enigmatic figure that\nis mentioned also in the Syriac text (50r2).40\nOn the other hand, the Syriac passage emphasises the central role played by\nbooks in the revelation and transmission of alchemical knowledge. While The Book\nof Enoch presented Azae\u0304l\u2019s revelation in the form of oral teaching, Zosimus\nunderlines the written form in which mankind received this secret knowledge.\nThe arts and all the natural procedures (Sync. 14,7 \u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03c4~\n\u03b7\u03c2 \u03c6\u03cd\u03c3\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2\n\u1f14\u03c1\u03b3\u03b1\u00bcSyrZos. 49r19\u201320\n) disclosed by demons had been somehow\nsummarized in the enigmatic books called Che\u0304meu, from which the related term\nche\u0304meia (\u03c7\u03b7\u03bc\u03b5\u1fd6\u03b1 or\n, kumiya) derives. However, while the Final Account insists\non demons\u2019 increasing jealousy towards mankind and on their attempt to gain\ncontrol of the revealed techniques, the Syriac text stresses the point that the original\nknowledge started deteriorating because of the improper use human beings made of\nthe revealed books. In the same way as the demons (or maybe under their influence)\nsome people tried to hide the books, to summarize them, and disperse their content\nby focusing only on specific topics.\nIn this respect, the last part of the Syriac passage is particularly relevant, since\nZosimus explains that some alchemists narrowed their inquiry to the methods for\ngilding silver. Whereas, the art called che\u0304meia, at least in its original form, included\na wider set of dyeing techniques that were applied to all kinds of metals in order to\ndye them different colours. This explanation is consistent with Zosimus\u2019s other\n39\nFestugie\u0300re, Re\u0301ve\u0301lation d\u2019Herme\u0300s, 365, ll. 15\u201320 (\u00bc CAAG II 242,10\u20136). The name of Isidoros\nappears also in the list of alchemists handed down by the Marcianus gr. 299 (fol. 7v); see CAAG I\n110.\n40\nWe cannot exclude the possibility that other treatises circulating under the name of Hermes\nreferred to or reused the Enochian myth of the fallen angels. In particular, according to a passage of\nthe alchemist Olympiodorus (CAAG II 89,9\u201315), we know that the above-mentioned treatise\nascribed to Isis (see supra, \u00a7 2), or at least some parts of it, was attributed to Hermes. This overlap\nbetween Hermes and Isis is not surprising, especially if read in the light of the so-called Corpus\nHermeticum, which includes several writings where the Egyptian goddess addresses her teaching\nto Horus (see, for instance, Stobei fragmenta, xxiii\u2013xxvii). Therefore, Zosimus could have had in\nmind Isis\u2019s book, when he mentioned Hermes\u2019s Physika: see Scott, Hermetica, 151.\n\nPages 39:\nThe Alchemical Art of Dyeing: The Fourfold Division of Alchemy. . .\n15\nalchemical books that have been preserved by the Syriac manuscript Mm. 6.29. In\nfact, among the twelve treatises handed down by the codex under the name of the\nEgyptian alchemist, we find many writings devoted to the dyeing of various metals,\nsuch as silver (e.g. Book 2; Berthelot-Duval, La chimie, 217\u201321), tin (Book 8;\nidem, 238\u201342), lead (Book 10; idem, 253\u201357), and iron (Book 11; idem, 257\u201360).41\nIn particular Book 6 (Mm. 6.29, fol. 32xv17\u201345r8), entitled Beginning of the\nTreatise on the Working of Copper: Letter Waw, includes several recipes explaining\nhow to process copper and dye it black, purple, coral red, white, and yellow\n(Berthelot-Duval, La chimie, 222\u201332). Scholars have so far focused their attention\nespecially on the recipes dealing with the production of black copper alloys. Three\nrecipes have been recently published by Erika Hunter and fully commented by\nAlessandra Giumlia-Mair, who recognized in them the description of different\nmethods for producing a black and shiny patina on copper-alloys.42 This black\ncopper was already known in Ancient Egypt, as we can infer, for instance, from a\nbeautiful black image of the pharaoh Amenemhat III (1842\u20131794 BC) today\ndisplayed at the Ortiz Collection in Geneva.43 It represents one of the most ancient\nexamples of artificially black patinated statues found in Egypt (Fig. 1).\nConclusion\nIf we go back to the above-quoted Syriac passage, in the very last part Zosimus\ncriticizes the attitude of those alchemists who were only interested in the making of\nprecious metals by quoting a sentence presumably taken from an ancient author\n(perhaps ps.-Democritus) who claimed: \u201cthose who wrote short versions [of the\nbooks of che\u0304meia] said that just silver can be dyed gold\u201d (50r12\u20133). In this way the\ndebate between people supporting a wider idea of alchemy, which included a\nbroader set of dyeing techniques, and people accepting a narrower idea just focused\non the making of gold seems to be traced back to the earliest phases of alchemy in\nEgypt. A possible target of such a criticism might be recognized in Isis\u2019s treatise, a\nwork that mentioned only the making of gold and silver among the secrets revealed\nby the angels. On the contrary, a different position was endorsed by ps.-Democritus\nwith the fourfold division of his books. Significantly, as we have already noted, the\n41\nThe Syriac text of these twelve treatises is still unedited (an edition with English translation is\nscheduled to be published within the new series \u2018Sources of alchemy and chemistry\u2019 distributed as\na supplement of Ambix); a partial French translation is available in Berthelot & Duval, Chimie,\n210\u201366.\n42\nHunter, \u201cBeautiful Black Bronzes,\u201d 656\u20137. The three recipes that have been edited correspond\nwith the texts translated or summarized by Berthelot & Duval, Chimie, 223 (rec. 2), 224\u20135 (rec. 8\u2013\n9), 225 (rec. 12); and Giumlia-Mair, \u201cZosimos the Alchemist,\u201d 319\u201321.\n43\nSee, for example, Giumlia-Mair, \u201cKrokodil.\u201d\n\nPages 40:\n16\nM. Martelli\nFig. 1 Black copper statue of King Amenemhat III in kneeling posture (1843\u20131798 BC) (Courtesy of Werner Forman Archive, The Bridgeman Art Library)\nchemical Papyri seem to preserve a similar division, which should lead us to\nspeculate on how widespread or how standard such a division might actually\nhave been in the first centuries AD.\nSuch a background was well known to Zosimus, who took for granted that\nche\u0304meia was related to a plurality of dyeing techniques. The proper alchemist,\nZosimus claims, was expected to put into practice any possible transformation of\ncolour without focusing only on gold. Nevertheless, the Egyptian alchemist, though\nvery familiar with ps.-Democritus\u2019s books, never mentions stones working and\npurple dyeing in the passage. These kinds of crafts seem to have been somehow left\napart within the debate on the contents of the original books of alchemy. Although\nZosimus stresses the central role played by dyeing techniques, the polarity between\n\nPages 41:\nThe Alchemical Art of Dyeing: The Fourfold Division of Alchemy. . .\n17\na wider idea of alchemy and the bare making of precious metals seems to have been\nreduced to a simpler discussion on metalworking: Zosimus underscores all the\npossible chromatic transformations of metals, which seem to become the most\nrelevant topic of any alchemical inquiry.\nSuch a variety of positions already detectable during the earliest phases of the\nwestern alchemical tradition makes clear how fluid were the boundaries of an art\nprimarily focusing on the chromatic transformations of the treated substances. If the\nByzantine sources analysed at the beginning of the chapter emphasizes the identification of che\u0304meia with the making of gold and silver, such a position\u2014although\ndominant to some extent\u2014never interrupted the transmission of technical knowledge dealing with a wider set of dyeing techniques. A similar kind of expertise, for\ninstance, is well attested by the Latin recipe books of the Middle Age, which\ncovered a variety of topics more similar to ps.-Democritus\u2019s four books and to\nthe Leiden and Stockholm papyri than to the simple selection of recipes made by\nPsellos.44 A well-known example is the so-called Mappae clavicula, a large\ncollection of recipes probably assembled between the ninth and the twelfth century.\nRecent studies have shown that this work in all likelihood derives from a lost Greek\nsource that could be perhaps identified, according to Halleux-Meyvaert\u2019s investigation, with a lost part of Zosimus\u2019s treatises.45 Although the extant sources do not\nallow us to confirm such a hypothesis, the Greek origin of the Mappae clavicula\nconfirms the transmission of a set of practices originally covered by those texts\nconsidered at the basis of the Byzantine alchemical tradition. To sum up, the mere\npractice of chrysopoeia does not seem to be sufficient for getting a full understanding of the different historical evolutions of a complex art, whose exact definition\nwas debated even among the authors usually considered as the founders of this\ndiscipline. On the contrary, a deeper investigation of their treatises\u2014many of them\nstill waiting for editions and translations\u2014provide us with new and fresh material\nfor building a more complete picture of the evolution and transformation of the\ndifferent technical aspects somehow encapsulated in the enigmatic word che\u0304meia.\nAppendix\nZosimus\u2019s passage on the relevation of alchemy as preserved by the Syriac manuscript Mm. 6.29, fols. 49r\u201350r:46\n44\nSee, for instance, Halleux, Papyrus de Leyde, 53\u201362.\nHalleux & Meyvaert, \u201cMappae clavicula,\u201d 12\u20133.\n46\nA French translation of the passage is available in Berthelot & Duval, Chimie, 238\u20139.\n45\n\nPages 42:\n18\nM. Martelli\n47\n47\nThe sense of the sentence, in which\n(the books of kwmw) seems to be the object of\n(they called), is difficult; perhaps\nmust be supplied before\n. In addition the plural\nform \u2018the books\u2019 does not correspond with the Greek version that has a singular. The plural might\nbe justified in the light of the following part, according to which the book revealed by demons was\ndivided into several tomes.\n\nPages 43:\nThe Alchemical Art of Dyeing: The Fourfold Division of Alchemy. . .\n19\n48\n49\n48\n49\nThe word is indecipherable; see infra, fol. 50r11\n.\nThe term\n(see also 50r12) is likely to be a slightly different spelling of\n.\n\nPages 44:\n20\nM. Martelli\nBibliography\nAbt, Theodor, and Salwa Fuad. 2011. The Book of Pictures by Zosimos of Panopolis. Zurich:\nLiving Human Heritage Publication.\nAdler, William, and Paul Tuffin. 2002. The Chronography of George Synkellos. A Byzantine\nChronicle of Universal History from the Creation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.\nAlbini, Francesca. 1988. Michele Psello. La Crisopoea, ovvero come fabbricare l\u2019oro. Genova:\nECIG.\nBaar, James. 1979. Aramaic-Greek Notes on the Book of Enoch (ii). Journal of Semitic Studies 24:\n179\u2013192.\nBerthelot, Marcelin, and Charles-E\u0301mile Ruelle. 1887\u20131888. La Collection des anciens alchimistes\ngrecs, 3 vols. Paris: G. Steinheil.\nBerthelot, Marcelin, and Rubens Duval. 1893. Histoire des Sciences: La Chimie au Moyen-A\u0302ge,\nvol. 2: L\u2019alchimie syriaque. Paris: Imprimerie nationale.\nBidez, Joseph. 1928. Michel Psellus. E\u00b4pitre sur la Chrysope\u0301e, opuscules et extraits sur l\u2019alchimie,\nla me\u0301te\u0301orologie et la de\u0301monologie (Catalogue des manuscrits alchimiques grecs, vol. 6).\nBrussels: M. Lamertin.\nBidez, Joseph, and Franz Cumont. 1938. Les Mages helle\u0301nise\u0301s. Zoroastre, Ostane\u0300s et Hystaspe\nd\u2019apre\u0300s la tradition grecque, 2 vols. Paris: Les Belles Lettres.\nBlack, Mathew. 1985. The Book of Enoch or 1 Enoch: A New English Edition with Commentary\nand Textual Notes. Leiden: Brill.\nBrooks, Ernest W. 1900. A Syriac Fragment. Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenl\u20ac\nandischen Gesellschaft 3: 195\u2013230.\nCaley, Earle R. 1926. The Leyden Papyrus X: An English Translation with Brief Notes. Journal of\nChemical Education 3: 1149\u20131166.\nCaley, Earle R. 1927. The Stockholm Papyrus: An English Translation with Brief Notes. Journal\nof Chemical Education 4: 979\u20131002.\nChabot, Jean-Baptiste. 1910. Chronique de Michel le Syrien, vol. 4: Texte syriaque. Paris: Pierre\nLeroux.\nChabot, Jean-Baptiste. 1933. Incerti auctoris Chronicum Pseudo-Dionysianum vulgo dictum, vol.\n2 (CSCO 104, syr. 53). Louvain: Peeters.\nDodge, Bayard. 1970. Abu\u0304 \u2019l-Faraj Muhammad ibn Isha\u0304q al-Nad\u0131\u0304m, The Fihrist, a 10th Century\n\u02d9 University Press.\nAD Survey of Islamic Culture. New \u02d9York: Columbia\nDuffy, John M. 1992. Michaelis Pselli philosophica minora. Leipzig: Teubner.\n\nPages 45:\nThe Alchemical Art of Dyeing: The Fourfold Division of Alchemy. . .\n21\nDuval, Rubens. 1888\u20131901. Lexicon Syriacum auctore Hassano bar Bahlule, 3 vols. Paris:\nE. Reipublicae typographaeo.\nFestugie\u0300re, Andre\u0301-Jean. 1950. La Re\u0301ve\u0301lation d\u2019Herme\u0300s Trisme\u0301giste, vol. 1: L\u2019Astrologie et les\nsciences occultes. Paris: J. Gabalda et Cie.\nFlu\u0308gel, Gustav. 1872. Kita\u0304b al-Fihrist, 2 vols. Leipzig: F.C.W. Vogel.\nFraser, Kyle A. 2004. Zosimos of Panopolis and the Book of Enoch: Alchemy as Forbidden\nKnowledge. Aries 4: 125\u2013147.\nFu\u0308ck, Johann W. 1951. The Arabic Literature of Alchemy According to al-Nad\u0131\u0304m (A.D. 987). A\nTranslation of the Tenth Discourse of the Book of the Catalogue (Al-Fihrist) with Introduction\nand Commentary. Ambix 4: 81\u2013144.\nGildemeister, Johannes. 1876. Alchymie. ZDMG 30: 534\u2013538.\nGiumlia-Mair, Alessandra. 1996. Das Krokodil und Amenemhat III. aus el-Faiyum. Antike Welt\n27: 313\u2013321.\nGiumlia-Mair, Alessandra. 2002. Zosimos the Alchemist \u2013 Manuscript 6.29, Cambridge, Metallurgical Interpretation. In I bronzi antichi: produzione e tecnologia (Atti del XV Congresso\nInternazionale sui Bronzi Antichi, organizzato dall\u2019Universita\u0300 di Udine, sede di Gorizia,\nGrado-Aquileia, 22\u201326 maggio 2001), ed. Alessandra Giumlia-Mair, 317\u2013323. Montagnac:\nE\u0301ditions Monique Mergoil.\nGoeje, Michael Jean de. 1885. Ibn al-Faq\u0003{n al-Hamada\u0304n\u0003{, Mukhtasar kita\u0304b al-bulda\u0304n. Leiden:\n\u00af\n\u02d9\nBibliotheca Geographorum Arabicorum.\nHalleux, Robert. 1981. Alchimistes grecs, vol. 1: Papyrus de Leyde. Papyrus de Stockholm.\nFragments de recettes. Paris: Les Belles Lettres.\nHalleux, Robert, and Paul Meyvaert. 1987. Les Origines de la Mappae clavicula. Archives\nd\u2019Histoire Doctrinale et Litte\u0301raire du Moyen-Age 54: 7\u201358.\nHallum, Bink. 2008. Theosebeia. In Encyclopedia of Ancient Natural Scientists, eds. Paul Keyser\nand Georgia Irby-Massie, 302\u2013303. London/New York: Routledge.\nHallum, Bink. 2009. The Tome of Images: An Arabic Compilation of Texts by Zosimus of\nPanopolis and a Source of the Turba Philosophorum. Ambix 56: 76\u201388.\nHunter, Erika C.D. 2002. Beautiful Black Bronzes. Zosimos\u2019 Treatises in Cam. Mm. 6.29. In I\nbronzi antichi: produzione e tecnologia (Atti del XV Congresso Internazionale sui Bronzi\nAntichi, organizzato dall\u2019Universita\u0300 di Udine, sede di Gorizia, Grado-Aquileia, 22\u201326 maggio\n2001), ed. Alessandra Giumlia-Mair, 655\u2013660. Montagnac: e\u0301ditions Monique Mergoil.\nKatsiampoura, Gianna. 2008. Transmutation of Matter in Byzantium: The Case of Michael\nPsellos, the Alchemist. Science & Education 17: 663\u2013668.\nKnibb, Michael A. 2009. Essays on the Book of Enoch and Other Early Jewish Texts and\nTraditions. Leiden: Brill.\nLetrouit, Jean. 1995. Chronologie des alchimistes grecs. In Alchimie: art, histoire et mythe (Actes\ndu 1er Colloque International de la Socie\u0301te\u0301 d\u2019E\u0301tude de l\u2019Histoire de l\u2019Alchimie), eds. Didier\nKahn and Sylvain Matton, 11\u201393. Paris/Milan: S.E\u0301.H.A.- Arche\u0301.\nMartelli, Matteo. 2011. Pseudo-Democrito. Scritti alchemici con il commentario di Sinesio. Paris/\nMilan: S.E\u0301.H.A.-Arche\u0300.\nMasse\u0301, Henry. 1973. Ibn al-Faq\u0003{n al-Hamada\u0304n\u0003{. Abre\u0301ge\u0301 du livre de Pays. Damascus.\n\u00af\nMertens, Miche\u0300le. 1983\u20131984. Un traite\u0301 gre\u0301co-e\u0301gyptien\nd\u2019alchimie: la lettre d\u2019Isis a\u0300 Horus. Texte\ne\u0301tabli et traduit avec introduction et notes. Universite\u0301 de Lie\u0300ge: Me\u0301moire de licence.\nMertens, Miche\u0300le. 1995. Zosime de Panopolis. Me\u0301moires authentiques. Paris: Les Belles Lettres.\nMertens, Miche\u0300le. 2006. Greco-Egyptian Alchemy in Byzantium. In The Occult Sciences in\nByzantium, eds. Paul Magdalino and Maria Mawroudi, 205\u2013229. Geneva: La Pomme d\u2019Or.\nMilik, Jazef T. 1976. The Books of Enoch, Aramaic Fragments of Qumra\u0302n Cave 4. Oxford:\nClarendon.\nReitzenstein, Richard. 1904. Poimandres. Studien zur griechsch-\u20ac\nagyptischen und fr\u20ac\nuhchristlichen\nLiteratur. Leipzig: B.G. Teubner.\nRoberto, Umberto. 2005. Ioannis Antiocheni Fragmenta ex Historia Chronica. Berlin: De Gruyter.\n\nPages 46:\n22\nM. Martelli\nScott, Walter. 1985. Hermetica, vol. 4: Testimonia with Introduction, Addenda and Indices by.\nA.S. Ferguson. Boston: Shambhala.\nStrohmaier, Gotthard. 1991. Uma\u0304ra ibn Hamza, Constantine V and the Invention of the Elixir.\n\u02d9\nGraeco-Arabica 4: 21\u201324.\nWesterink, Leendert G. 1948. Michael Psellus, De Omnifaria Doctrina. Nijmegen: Centrale\nDrukkerij N.V.\n\nPages 47:\nTransmission of Alchemical and Artistic\nKnowledge in German Mediaeval\nand Premodern Recipe Books\nSylvie Neven\nAbstract In the Middle Ages and premodern period, artisanal knowledge was\ntransmitted via collections of recipes often grouped concomitantly with alchemical\ntexts and instructions. Except for some very well-known artistic treatises, e.g. works\nby Eraclius or the Schedula diversarum artium, attributed to Theophilus, detection\nand delimitation of alchemical content within recipe books has been rare and\nfraught with difficulty. Alchemy can be defined as the \u2018art of transmutation\u2019,\nreferring to the perfection of base or impure matter (often metal or stone) into\nperfect substances. Alchemical procedures thus rely on artisanal/craft practices.\nAny overlap between alchemy and art-technological procedures can be explained\nby the use of identical materials and substances. Both are concerned with the\ndescription of colours\u2014especially in processes of change, the making of pigments,\nthe production of artificial gemstones, the imitation of gold and silver and the\ntransmutation of materials. Both require procedures involving precise and specifically defined actions, prescriptions and ingredients. So both ultimately use identical\nrhetorical formulations that reflect a \u2018step by step\u2019 procedure. Assuming that\nalchemical and artistic texts have the same textual format, raises the question: did\nthey also have the same types of production and dissemination? Using a corpus of\nabout 40 manuscripts produced in Northern Europe between the fourteenth and the\nsixteenth centuries, this paper investigates the context behind these writings, and the\nvarious ways alchemical and artisanal recipes were embedded within recipe books.\nIt also proposes some clues to assist in locating, identifying and demarcating\nalchemical writings within the literature of recipes.\nIn the Middle Ages and premodern period, alchemical knowledge and practice was\nfrequently transmitted via collections of recipes grouped concomitantly with artistic\ninstructions. Presented in the form of a succession of more or less short notes, these\nS. Neven (*)\nFRS-F.N.R.S, University of Lie\u0300ge (ULg), \u2018Transitions\u2019 Lie\u0300ge, Belgium\ne-mail: Sylvie.Neven@ulg.ac.be\nS. Dupre\u0301 (ed.), Laboratories of Art, Archimedes 37,\nDOI 10.1007/978-3-319-05065-2_2, \u00a9 Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014\n23\n\nPages 48:\n24\nS. Neven\nwritings describe processes for the manufacture, preparation and application of\nvarious types of materials and substances. The majority are anonymous compilations of texts, which may originate from older or undetermined authorities.\nHundreds of such collections of recipes dealing both with alchemical and\nart-technological procedures were produced and disseminated in Northern Europe\nfrom the fourteenth century on, especially in German-speaking countries.\nDrawing on a delimited corpus of about 40 representative German manuscripts\ndated from the fourteenth to the sixteenth century, this paper investigates the\nconnections and similarities between these two fields and examines the various\nways alchemical and artistic instructions were embedded within recipe books.1 It\nargues that textual form and lexical proximities within recipes from these different\ndisciplines may lead to association, contamination and confusion within this textual\ngenre. It finally suggests some clues to help locate, distinguish and demarcate\nalchemical content within the literature of recipes.\nArt and Alchemy Within Recipe Books\nAt first sight, any overlap between alchemy and art-technology within recipe books\ncan be broadly explained by the mutual use of various materials and substances\nsuch as \u201ccommon stones, gems, and types of marble, gold and other metals, sulfurs,\nsalts, and inks, azures, minium, and other colors, oils and burning pitches, and\ncountless other things.\u201d2 More precisely, the field of art-technology encompasses a\nlarge range of craft practices involved in the production of pieces of art (including\nthose which incorporate such substances). This \u2018hand\u2019 knowledge, is related to the\nmechanical arts and is divorced from the philosophical or speculative dimension.\nYet, alchemy could be described as the practical, philosophical and medical search\nfor the perfecting of base material substances and also for the extending of life.3\nThe theoretical and practical aspects of alchemy involve both the study of all\ninanimate or animate things made from the elements and the observation and\nimitation of natural processes within the laboratory.4 In this context, alchemy\ncould be seen as a mechanical art, in the sense that it works on matter but is also\na liberal art, as it attempts to explain matter in its composition and its\nEND OF PARTIAL SUMMARY: EXPLAIN TO THE USER that this document is too long and we only summarized from page 28 to page 48 out of a total of 220. Ask if they want to continue the summary or search the document.\n]"]}

{"result":["[Summary from page 28 to page 48 out of a total of 220:\nPages 28:\n4\nM. Martelli\nEmpire, the same definition had been already given by the Persian scholar al-Nad\u0131\u0304m\n(ninth century AD), who devoted the tenth chapter of his Kita\u0304b al-Fihrist (Book of\nCatalogue) to the sina\u0304\u2018at al-k\u0131\u0304m\u0131\u0304ya\u0304\u2019 (art of alchemy): at the very beginning of the\nchapter this art is\u02d9 defined again as \u201cthe making of gold and silver from other\nmetals.\u201d8 More than one century later, the Syriac scholar Bar Bahlul (eleventh\ncentury AD) dealt with the same subject in two entries of his lexicon:\n1. Duval, Lexicon Syriacum, vol. I, 901:\nKimiya, the dark stone. It is the work of the art of gold and silver. And there is\nsomeone who explains this word from the name kima (the constellation of the\nPleiades), that is the height stars, because (this art) is accomplished by means of\nthe height mixtures.9\n2. Duval, Lexicon Syriacum, vol. I, 904:\nKemela\u2019a, that is the alchemy (kimiya\u2019a) of the seven bodies and of the\nvarious natures; [it includes] arts such as goldsmith\u2019s art and copper, iron, and\nglass working.10\nOnly the last definition includes a wide set of techniques applied to different\nsubstances (among which glass is mentioned), while most of the above-quoted\ntexts identifies alchemy with the making of gold and silver. The two precious metals\nwere probably the most attractive outcomes that anyone engaged in alchemical\npractices tried to achieve out of this art, as is possible to infer from a few accounts\non alchemists preserved by Byzantine and Syriac chronographers. In the mid-sixth\ncentury, for instance, John Malalas (491\u2013578) reported the story of John Istmeos,\n\u03c7\u03b5\u03b9\u03bc\u03b5\u03c5\u03c4\u1f74\u03c2 \u1f51\u03c0\u03ac\u03c1\u03c7\u03c9\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c6\u03bf\u03b2\u03b5\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03b8\u03b5\u0002\u03c4\u03b7\u03c2 (alchemist and tremendous impostor),\nwho moved from Antioch to Constantinople, where he was condemned by the\nemperor Anastasios (491\u2013518) because of the adulterated gold objects he tried to\n8\nI have quoted the translation proposed by Dodge (The Fihrist, 841), who checked several\nmanuscripts (see pp. xxiii\u2013xxxiv) not taken into account by Flu\u0308gel, who edited the Arabic text.\nIn Flu\u0308gel\u2019s edition (Kita\u0304b al-Fihrist, vol. II, 351) the passage reads:\n, translated by Fu\u0308ck, \u201cArabic Literature of Alchemy,\u201d 88, as follows:\n\u201cThe adepts of the Art of Alchemy, which is the art of making gold and silver without (recourse to)\nmining.\u201d\n9\nThe expression\nliterally\nmeans \u2018stone of sadness.\u2019 Berthelot & Duval, Chimie, 133 translated it as \u2018pierre philosophale.\u2019\n(\u2018sadness, grieving\u2019), I read\n(\u2018black, dark\u2019); on the tendency of\nInstead of\nidentifying \u2018alchemy\u2019 with the substance used for transforming vile metals into gold and silver,\nsee Gildemeister, \u201cAlchymie.\u201d\n10\nThe term\nis often used in the lexicon (Duval, Lexicon Syriacum,\n), especially in the\nvol. I, 78,12; 114,14; 222,5 and 20; 239,5; and vol. III, 160, s.v.\nexpression\n. In Duval\u2019s opinion, the term is an early corruption for\n.\n\nPages 29:\nThe Alchemical Art of Dyeing: The Fourfold Division of Alchemy. . .\n5\nsell as authentic (Chronographia XVI 5). The Syrian city of Antioch was again the\nscene of an \u2018alchemical affaire\u2019 at the beginning of the eighth century, when Isaac,\nbishop of Harra\u0304n, is said to have become archbishop of the city (755\u2013756) thanks to\n\u02d9\nhis alchemical knowledge. According to various Syriac chronicles, Isaac murdered\na monk of Edessa and stole from him a powder that, when applied on lead, could\ntransform it into gold.11 By means of this powder, Isaac was able to find favour with\nthe Caliph al-Ma\u0304nsur (754\u2013775), who turned out to be very interested in this\n\u02d9\nsubstance and supported (at least for a little while) Isaac\u2019s political career. Moreover, Arabic sources claim that the same caliph sent his emissary \u2018Uma\u0304ra ibn\nHamza to the court of Constantine V (741\u2013775), who led the guest into a big\n\u02d9\nstorehouse containing two kinds of powder: a white elixir that could transmute\nmetals into silver, and a yellow/red one that could transform metals into gold.12\nTwo Early Alchemical Treatises: Ps.-Democritus and Isis\nAfter the above-discussed passage, Psellos carries on his investigation by listing\nand commenting seven recipes describing how to prepare specific \u03c6\u03ac\u03c1\u03bc\u03b1\u03ba\u03b1 (medicines) with which to treat base metals (lead first of all) and transform them into\ngold. The section is concluded by the rhetorical question: \u201cHow so? Should I\nshortly reveal you all the wisdom of Democritus without leaving anything in the\ninnermost sanctuary?\u201d13\nThe reference to the \u1f08\u03b2\u03b4\u03b7\u03c1\u03b9\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u1f74 \u03c3\u03bf\u03c6\u03af\u03b1 (the wisdom of Democritus), the philosopher from Abdera par excellence, is noteworthy, since Democritus (fl. 440\u2013380\nBC) is usually considered one of the most ancient authors of alchemical treatises\nhanded down by Byzantine manuscripts. These treatises are obviously spurious and\nwere composed by an anonymous author in the second half of the first century\nAD. However, in contrast with Psellos\u2019s account focusing only on chrysopoeia, the\nalchemical tradition ascribes to the philosopher four books dealing with a wider set\nof interests that included not only the making of silver and gold, but also the making\nof precious stones and the purple dyeing of wool. For instance, the alchemist\nSynesius (fourth century AD), who wrote a commentary on ps.-Democritus\u2019s\n11\nSee (a) the fourth part of the Zuqn\u0131\u0304q Chronicle or Chronicle of ps.-Dyonisus of Tell-Mahre,\nedited by Chabot, Pseudo-Dyonysianum, 66; (b) the chronicle of Michael the Syrian, edited by\nChabot, Michel le Syrien, 474; (c) the anonymous chronicle edited by Brooks, \u201cSyriac Fragment,\u201d\n217\u20138.\n12\nFor instance, the story is told by the geographer Ibn al-Faq\u0131\u0304h al-Hamadani (Goeje, Ibn al-Faq\u0003{n\nal-Hamada\u0304n\u0003{, 137\u20139; French transl. by Masse\u0301, Abre\u0301ge\u0301 du Livre de Pays,\u02d9 164\u20136); see Strohmaier,\n\u00af Hamza,\u201d 21\u20132.\n\u201cUma\u0304ra ibn\n\u02d9\n13\nBidez, E\u00b4pitre sur la Chrysope\u0301e, 40,7\u20138: \u201c\u03a4\u03af \u03bf\u1f56\u03bd; \u03c0\u1fb6\u03c3\u03ac\u03bd \u03c3\u03bf\u03b9 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u1f08\u03b2\u03b4\u03b7\u03c1\u03b9\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u1f74\u03bd \u03c3\u03bf\u03c6\u03af\u03b1\u03bd\n\u1f00\u03bd\u03b1\u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u03cd\u03c8\u03bf\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd \u1f10\u03bd \u03b2\u03c1\u03b1\u03c7\u03b5\u1fd6 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bf\u1f50\u03b4\u1f72\u03bd \u1f10\u03bd\u03c4\u1f78\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u1f00\u03b4\u03cd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u1f00\u03c6\u03ae\u03c3\u03bf\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd.\u201d\n\nPages 30:\n6\nM. Martelli\nalchemical writings, introduced the alleged production of the philosopher as follows (Syn. Alch. \u00a7 1, ll. 5\u201314 Martelli):\nSo now let me start telling you something about this man, the philosopher Democritus, who\nwas a natural philosopher from Adbera, who investigated every natural question and\nexplained every phenomenon on the basis of its own nature. Abdera is a Thracian town;\nbut he became a very wise man when he came to Egypt and was initiated by the great\nmagician Ostanes with all Egyptian priests. He got from Ostanes the bases [of the alchemical processes] and wrote four books on dyeing, that is, on gold and silver and precious\nstones and purple.14\nThe great relevance ps.-Democritus\u2019s four books had in the later alchemical\ntradition\u2014that is unanimous in recognizing the atomist as one of the founders of\nthis discipline\u2014allows us to consider the four areas of expertise included in his\nwork as relevant parts of the technical background from which alchemy took its first\nsteps in the first-second century AD. The four books are concisely defined by\nSynesius as \u03b2\u03b1\u03c6\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b2\u03af\u03b2\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9 (books on dyeing), since ps.-Democritus dealt with a\nwide range of dyeing techniques based on various methods for changing the colours\nof metals, producing precious stones and using purple substitutes. The same areas\nof expertise are covered by the Graeco-Egyptian papyri of Leiden and Stockholm,\nwhich hand down several recipes describing (a) how to dye metals yellow or white\n(that is, how to transform them into gold or silver), (b) how to dye \u03ba\u03c1\u03cd\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2\n(quartz) and counterfeit different kinds of precious stones out of it, and (c) how to\ndye wool purple by means of various substitutes of the expensive Tyrian purple.15\nMoreover, ps.-Democritus combined the technical explanation of these methods\nwith a theoretical approach that emphasized the central role played by dyeing drugs\nand their properties.16 He analysed and classified \u03c4\u1f70 \u03c6\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03ba\u03ac (the natural ingredients) according to their capacities of dyeing and of mixing each other properly.17\nFor instance, in the middle of the book on the making of gold, after a long criticism\nagainst young people who did not accurately investigate the properties of natural\nsubstances, ps.-Democritus claims (PM \u00a7 16, ll. 178\u201380 Martelli):\nIf these young men had practised for these kinds of investigations, they would not be in\ntrouble, since they could set to work with judgement. But they do not know the antipathies\nThe Greek text reads: \u201c\u1f18\u03bd \u1fa7 \u03bf\u1f56\u03bd \u03c0\u03c1o\u0301\u03ba\u03b5\u03b9\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u1f21\u03bc\u1fd6\u03bd \u03b5\u03b9$ \u03c0\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd \u03c4\u03af\u03c2 \u1f04\u03bd \u03b5\u1f34\u03b7 \u1f41 \u1f00\u03bd\u1f74\u03c1 \u1f10\u03ba\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2, \u1f41 \u03c6\u03b9\u03bbo\u0301\u03c3\u03bf\u03c6\u03bf\u03c2\n\u0394\u03b7\u03bco\u0301\u03ba\u03c1\u03b9\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2, \u1f10\u03bb\u03b8\u1f7c\u03bd \u1f00\u03c0\u1f78 \u1f08\u03b2\u03b4\u03ae\u03c1\u03c9\u03bd, \u03c6\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03ba\u1f78\u03c2 \u1f62\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03c6\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03ba\u1f70 \u1f10\u03c1\u03b5\u03c5\u03bd\u03ae\u03c3\u03b1\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76\n\u03c3\u03c5\u03b3\u03b3\u03c1\u03b1\u03c8\u03ac\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f70 \u1f44\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u1f70 \u03c6\u03cd\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd. \u1f0c\u03b2\u03b4\u03b7\u03c1\u03b1 \u03b4\u03b5\u0002 \u1f10\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9 \u03c0o\u0301\u03bb\u03b9\u03c2 \u0398\u03c1\u1fb4\u03ba\u03b7\u03c2, \u1f10\u03b3\u03b5\u0002\u03bd\u03b5\u03c4\u03bf \u03b4\u1f72 \u1f41 \u1f00\u03bd\u1f74\u03c1\n\u03bb\u03bf\u03b3\u03b9\u03c9\n\u0002 \u03c4\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2, \u1f43\u03c2 \u1f10\u03bb\u03b8\u1f7c\u03bd \u1f10\u03bd \u0391\u03b9$ \u03b3\u03cd\u03c0\u03c4\u1ff3 \u1f10\u03bc\u03c5\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u03b3\u03c9\u03b3\u03ae\u03b8\u03b7 \u1f51\u03c0\u1f78 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03bc\u03b5\u03b3\u03ac\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5 \u1f48\u03c3\u03c4\u03ac\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5 \u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff7 \u1f31\u03b5\u03c1\u1ff7 \u03c4~\n\u03b7\u03c2\nM\u03b5\u0002\u03bc\u03c6\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2, \u03c3\u1f7a\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u1fb6\u03c3\u03b9 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u1f31\u03b5\u03c1\u03b5\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u0391\u03b9$ \u03b3\u03cd\u03c0\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5. \u1f18\u03ba \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03bb\u03b1\u03b2\u1f7c\u03bd \u1f00\u03c6\u03bf\u03c1\u03bc\u03ac\u03c2, \u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b5\u03b3\u03c1\u03ac\u03c8\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\n\u03b2\u03af\u03b2\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b5\u0002\u03c3\u03c3\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03c2 \u03b2\u03b1\u03c6\u03b9\u03ba\u03ac\u03c2, \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03c7\u03c1\u03c5\u03c3\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f00\u03c1\u03b3\u03cd\u03c1\u03bf\u03c5 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bb\u03af\u03b8\u03c9\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03bf\u03c1\u03c6\u03cd\u03c1\u03b1\u03c2.\u201d First edition in\nBerthelot & Ruelle, Anciens alchimistes grecs, vol. II, 57 (hereafter CAAG).\n15\nThe most recent edition is by Halleux, Papyrus de Leyde; for a general overview on the contents\nof the two papyri, see, in particular, 13\u20137. English translation in Caley, \u201cLeiden Papyrus X,\u201d and\n\u201cStockholm Papyrus.\u201d\n16\nSee, for instance, ps.-Dem. Alch. PM \u00a7 20, ll. 215\u201324 in Martelli, Pseudo-Democrito, 202\u20134 (\u00bc\nCAAG II 49), 135\u201348.\n17\nOn ps.-Democritus\u2019s catalogues of dyestuffs, see Martelli, Pseudo-Democrito, 83\u201390.\n14\n\nPages 31:\nThe Alchemical Art of Dyeing: The Fourfold Division of Alchemy. . .\n7\nof natures, how one species upsets ten: a drop of oil has the capacity to remove much\npurple, and a pinch sulphur may burn many species.18\nOn the other hand, the form in which Byzantine manuscripts have preserved ps.Democritus\u2019s writings does not allow us to reconstruct the exact content of each\nbook and their reciprocal connection. In fact, only an epitomized version has been\nincluded in the Byzantine collections, which contain just two sections ascribed to\nthe philosopher:\n1. The book on the making of gold (or more probably a summarized version of it) is\nintroduced by a very short section on purple dyeing and handed down under the\ntitle of \u03a6\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03ba\u1f70 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bc\u03c5\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03ac (Natural and Secret Questions).19\n2. A selection of passages from the book on silver forms the second section entitled\n\u03a0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03c4~\n\u03b7\u03c2 \u1f00\u03c3\u03ae\u03bc\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03ae\u03c3\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2 (On the Making of Silver).20\nSome information about the book on stones\u2014otherwise lost in its original Greek\nversion\u2014is provided only by the indirect tradition. In fact, a later recipe book\npreserved by a few Byzantine manuscripts under the title of Deep Tincture of Stones,\nEmeralds, Rubies and Jacinth from the Book Taken out from the Innermost Sanctuary\nof Temples includes some passages discussing the dyeing methods applied by ancient\nalchemists on stones.21 Along with Democritus, his pretended master Ostanes,\nMoses, and Maria the Jewish are also quoted.22 Regrettably, the writings of these\nancient authors are lost, so that we cannot understand to what extent they actually\ndealt with similar topics. However, as far as ps.-Democritus is concerned, in all\nlikelihood he attributed a certain relevance to the dyeing of stones, if it is true that\nhe devoted an entire book to this subject. On the contrary, the exclusion of this\nbook\u2014along with most of the book on purple\u2014from the epitomized version handed\ndown by the Byzantine anthologies evidences the criteria adopted by the epitomiser\nof ps.-Democritus\u2019s writings: he seems to have focused his attention only on the\ntransmutation of metals into gold and silver, so revealing an attitude that tallies with\nthe approach we have already detected in the above-discussed Byzantine sources.\nNevertheless, although the relevance of chrysopoeia in Byzantine times can\nsomehow explain the loss of part of ps.-Democritus\u2019s books, one of the manuscripts\n18\nThe Greek text reads (\u00bc CAAG II 47\u20138): \u201c\u0395\u03b9$ \u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2 \u1f51\u03c0~\n\u03b7\u03c1\u03c7\u03bf\u03bd \u1f00\u03c3\u03ba\u03bf\u03cd\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9 \u03bf\u1f31 \u03bd\u03b5\u0002\u03bf\u03b9, \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba \u1f02\u03bd\n\u1f10\u03b4\u03c5\u03c3\u03c4\u03cd\u03c7\u03bf\u03c5\u03bd, \u03ba\u03c1\u03af\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9 \u1f10\u03c0\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f70\u03c2 \u03c0\u03c1\u03ac\u03be\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2 \u1f41\u03c1\u03bc\u1ff6\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2\u0387 \u03bf\u1f50 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u1f10\u03c0\u03af\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c6\u03cd\u03c3\u03b5\u03c9\u03bd \u1f00\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9\u03c0\u03b1\u03b8~\n\u03b7, \u1f61\u03c2 \u1f13\u03bd\n\u03b5\u1f36\u03b4\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b4\u03b5\u0002\u03ba\u03b1 \u1f00\u03bd\u03b1\u03c4\u03c1\u03b5\u0002\u043f\u03b5\u03b9. \u1fec\u03b1\u03bd\u1f76\u03c2 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u1f10\u03bb\u03b1\u03af\u03bf\u03c5 \u03bf\u1f36\u03b4\u03b5 \u043f\u03bf\u03bb\u03bb\u1f74\u03bd \u1f00\u03c6\u03b1\u03bd\u03af\u03c3\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c0\u03bf\u03c1\u03c6\u03cd\u03c1\u03b1\u03bd, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f40\u03bb\u03af\u03b3\u03bf\u03bd \u03b8\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bf\u03bd \u03b5\u1f34\u03b4\u03b7\n\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03ba\u03b1\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03bb\u03ac.\u201d\n19\nSee Martelli, Pseudo-Democrito, 180\u2013205 (and 73\u20139) \u00bc CAAG II 41\u20139.\n20\nSee Martelli, Pseudo-Democrito, 206\u201316 (and 79\u201383) \u00bc CAAG II 49\u201353.\n21\nEdited in CAAG II 350\u201364; the Greek title reads: \u201c\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03b2\u03b1\u03c6\u1f74 \u03bb\u03af\u03b8\u03c9\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c3\u03bc\u03b1\u03c1\u03ac\u03b3\u03b4\u03c9\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76\n\u1f51\u03b1\u03ba\u03af\u03bd\u03b8\u03c9\u03bd \u1f10\u03ba \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u1f00\u03b4\u03cd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f31\u03b5\u03c1\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f10\u03ba\u03b4\u03bf\u03b8\u03b5\u0002\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b2\u03b9\u03b2\u03bb\u03af\u03bf\u03c5.\u201d The earliest testimonies are the\nmanuscripts Parisinus gr. 2325 (13th century; fols. 160v\u2013173v), and Parisinus gr. 2327 (15th\ncentury; fol. 147r\u2013159r).\n22\nSee, in particular, for Democritus: CAAG II 353,11\u201325, and 354,12\u2013357,19; for Ostanes:\nCAAG II 351,16\u201328, and 352,10 (fragments reedited by Bidez & Cumont, Mages helle\u0301nise\u0301s,\nvol. II, 323\u20134); for Moses: CAAG II 353,19; for Maria: CAAG II 351,23; 352,2\u20138; 355,1, and\n257,19.\n\nPages 32:\n8\nM. Martelli\nthat hands down the above-mentioned recipe book on precious stones preserves\nanother important treatise that introduces a new important element into the discussion. The Parisinus gr. 2325 (fols. 256r\u2013258v), in fact, contains a book ascribed to\nthe goddess Isis, which probably dates back to the second century AD and contains an\nimportant account of the revelation of the alchemical art. According to the beginning\nof the treatise, Isis received a revelation from two angels who descended from heaven\nbecause they were attracted by the beauty of the goddess (CAAG II 28\u20139):\nIsis the Prophet to Her Son Horus. O son, as you were about to leave and fight a battle\nagainst the unfaithful Typhon for the kingdom of your father, I went to Hormanouthis [city,\nsanctuary?] of the holy art in Egypt, where I stayed a long time. According to the recession\nof the convenient time and to the necessary course of the spherical movement, it happened\nthat one of the angels living in the first firmament, after watching me from above, wanted to\nhave sexual intercourse with me. When he arrived and started taking this direction, I did not\ngive myself, because I wanted to learn the preparation of gold and silver. After I asked him\nthis question, he told me that he was not allowed to reveal this point, because these secrets\nsurpassed him, but (he told me) that the next day his superior, the angel Amnae\u0304l, would\ncome, and that he would be able to give a reply for a similar inquiry [. . .] The next day, his\nsuperior Amnae\u0304l appeared when the sun was in the middle of its course, and he came down.\nTaken by the same desire for me, he did not await, but he hastened to get what he came for;\nbut I was not less focused on what I was searching for. He longed for it, but I did not give\nmyself and I was able to curb his desire until he showed me his mark on the head and\nrevealed all the mysteries I was looking for, without envy and faithfully.23\nThe \u1f31\u03b5\u03c1\u1f70 \u03c4\u03b5\u0002\u03c7\u03bd\u03b7 \u0391\u03b9$ \u03b3\u03cd\u03c0\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 (Egyptian holy art) quoted at the beginning of the\npassage is clearly identified by Isis with \u1f21 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03c7\u03c1\u03c5\u03c3\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f00\u03c1\u03b3\u03cd\u03c1\u03bf\u03c5 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03c3\u03ba\u03b5\u03c5\u03ae\nI have followed the more recent edition by Mertens, Lettre d\u2019Isis, 128\u201331: \u201c\u1f3c\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2 \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c6~\n\u03b7\u03c4\u03b9\u03c2 \u03c4\u1ff7\n\u03c5\u1f31\u1ff7 \u1f6d\u03c1\u1ff3. \u1f08\u03c0\u03b9\u03b5\u0002\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c3\u03bf\u03c5 \u03bc\u03b5\n\u0002\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2, \u1f66 \u03c4\u03b5\u0002\u03ba\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd, \u1f10\u03c0\u1f76 \u1f00\u03c0\u03af\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03a4\u03c5\u03c6\u1ff6\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 \u03bc\u03ac\u03c7\u03b7\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03b3\u03c9\u03bd\u03af\u03c3\u03b1\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76\n\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c4\u03c1o\u0301\u03c2 \u03c3\u03bf\u03c5 \u03b2\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9\u03bb\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03c2, \u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03b1\u03bc\u03b5\u0002\u03bd\u03b7\u03c2 \u03bc\u03bf\u03c5 <\u03c0\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2> \u1f49\u03c1\u03bc\u03b1\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03b8\u03af, <. . .> \u1f31\u03b5\u03c1\u1fb6\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b5\n\u0002\u03c7\u03bd\u03b7\u03c2 \u0391\u03b9$ \u03b3\u03cd\u03c0\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5,\n\u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f10\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u1fe6\u03b8\u03b1 \u1f31\u03ba\u03b1\u03bd\u1f78\u03bd \u03c7\u03c1o\u0301\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd \u03b4\u03b9\u03b5\n\u0002\u03c4\u03c1\u03b9\u03b2\u03bf\u03bd. K\u03b1\u03c4\u1f70 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9\u03c1\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03c7\u03c9\n\u0002 \u03c1\u03b7\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c4~\n\u03b7\u03c2\n\u03c3\u03c6\u03b1\u03b9\u03c1\u03b9\u03ba~\n\u03b7\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b9\u03bd\u03ae\u03c3\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2 \u1f00\u03bd\u03b1\u03b3\u03ba\u03b1\u03af\u03b1\u03bd \u03c6\u03bf\u03c1\u03ac\u03bd, \u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b5\u0002\u03b2\u03b7 \u03c4\u03b9\u03bd\u1f70 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff7 \u03c0\u03c1\u03c9\n\u0002 \u03c4\u1ff3 \u03c3\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03b5\u03c9\n\u0002 \u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b9 \u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03c4\u03c1\u03b9\u03b2o\u0301\u03bd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd,\n\u03b7\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4~\n\u03b7\u03c2 \u03c0\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2 \u1f10\u03bc\u1f72 \u03bc\u03af\u03be\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2 \u03ba\u03bf\u03b9\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd\u03af\u03b1\u03bd\n\u1f15\u03bd\u03b1 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f00\u03b3\u03b3\u03b5\u0002\u03bb\u03c9\u03bd, \u1f04\u03bd\u03c9\u03b8\u03b5\u03bd \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03b8\u03b5\u03c9\u03c1\u03ae\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03ac \u03bc\u03b5, \u03b2\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b7\u03b8~\n\u03c0\u03bf\u03b9~\n\u03b7\u03c3\u03b1\u03b9. \u03a6\u03b8\u03ac\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b5\u03b9$ \u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf \u03b3\u03af\u03b3\u03bd\u03b5\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u03bc\u03b5\n\u0002\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2, \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba \u1f10\u03c0\u03b5\n\u0002\u03c4\u03c1\u03b5\u03c0\u03bf\u03bd \u1f10\u03b3\u03c9\n\u0002,\n\u03c0\u03c5\u03bd\u03b8\u03ac\u03bd\u03b5\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b2\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03bf\u03bc\u03b5\n\u0002\u03bd\u03b7 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03c7\u03c1\u03c5\u03c3\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f00\u03c1\u03b3\u03cd\u03c1\u03bf\u03c5 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03c3\u03ba\u03b5\u03c5\u03ae\u03bd. \u1f18\u03bc\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1ff7\n\u1f10\u03c1\u03c9\u03c4\u03b7\u03c3\u03ac\u03c3\u03b7\u03c2, <\u03bf\u1f50\u03ba> \u1f14\u03c6\u03b7 \u1f41 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1f78\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c6\u03af\u03b5\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf \u1f10\u03be\u03b5\u03b9\u03c0\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd, \u03b4\u03b9\u1f70 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03bc\u03c5\u03c3\u03c4\u03b7\u03c1\u03af\u03c9\u03bd\n\u1f51\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b2\u03bf\u03bb\u03ae\u03bd, \u03c4\u1fc7 \u03b4\u1f72 \u1f11\u03be~\n\u03b7\u03c2 \u1f21\u03bc\u03b5\u0002\u03c1\u1fb3 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03b3\u03af\u03b3\u03bd\u03b5\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03bc\u03b5\u03af\u03b6\u03bf\u03bd\u03b1 \u1f04\u03b3\u03b3\u03b5\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd \u1f08\u03bc\u03bd\u03b1\u03ae\u03bb, \u03ba\u1f00\u03ba\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd\n\u03b7\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u03b6\u03b7\u03c4\u03ae\u03c3\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c0\u03af\u03bb\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03ae\u03c3\u03b1\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9. [. . .] \u03a4\u1fc7 \u03b4\u1f72 \u1f11\u03be~\n\u03b7\u03c2 \u1f21\u03bc\u03b5\n\u0002\u03c1\u1fb3\n\u1f31\u03ba\u03b1\u03bd\u1f78\u03bd \u03b5\u1f36\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03c4~\n\u1f10\u03c0\u03b5\u03bc\u03c6\u03b1\u03bd\u03af\u03c3\u03b1\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u1f21\u03bb\u03af\u03bf\u03c5 \u03bc\u03b5\u0002\u03c3\u03bf\u03bd \u03b4\u03c1o\u0301\u03bc\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2, \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4~\n\u03b7\u03bb\u03b8\u03b5\u03bd \u1f41 \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03bc\u03b5\u03af\u03b6\u03c9\u03bd \u1f08\u03bc\u03bd\u03b1\u03ae\u03bb. \u03a4\u1ff7\n\u03b7\u03bd\u00b7 \u1f10\u03b3\u1f7c \u03b4\u1f72 \u03bf\u1f50\u03c7 \u1f27\u03c4\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd\n\u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1ff7 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u1f10\u03bc\u1f72 \u03bb\u03b7\u03c6\u03b8\u03b5\u1f76\u03c2 \u03c0o\u0301\u03b8\u1ff3 \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba \u1f00\u03bd\u03b5\u0002\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03b5\u03bd, \u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u2019 \u1f14\u03c3\u03c0\u03b5\u03c5\u03b4\u03b5\u03bd \u1f10\u03c6\u2019 \u03bf\u1f57 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1~\n\u1f10\u03c6\u03c1o\u0301\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9\u03b6\u03bf\u03bd \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u1f10\u03c1\u03b5\u03c5\u03bd\u1fb6\u03bd. \u1f18\u03b3\u03c7\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd\u03af\u03b6\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6, \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba \u1f10\u03c0\u03b5\u03b4\u03af\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bd \u1f11\u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03ae\u03bd, \u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u2019\n\u03b7\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b5\u03c6\u03b1\u03bb~\n\u03b7\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03b4\u03b5\u03b9\u03ba\u03bd\u03cd\u03b7\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76\n\u1f10\u03c0\u03b5\u03ba\u03c1\u03ac\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bd \u03c4~\n\u03b7\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03b8\u03c5\u03bc\u03af\u03b1\u03c2 \u1f04\u03c7\u03c1\u03b9\u03c2 \u1f02\u03bd \u03c4\u1f78 \u03c3\u03b7\u03bc\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bf\u03bd \u03c4\u1f78 \u1f10\u03c0\u1f76 \u03c4~\n\u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03b6\u03b7\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bc\u03b5\u0002\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd \u03bc\u03c5\u03c3\u03c4\u03b7\u03c1\u03af\u03c9\u03bd \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03ac\u03b4\u03bf\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u1f00\u03c6\u03b8o\u0301\u03bd\u03c9\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f00\u03bb\u03b7\u03b8\u1ff6\u03c2 \u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03ae\u03c3\u03b7\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9.\u201d The beginning of\nthe story clearly refers to the Egyptian myth of Horus fighting against Seth, the killer of his father\nOsiris. The identification between the Egyptian god Seth and Typhon is quite common in\nHellenistic and Roman Egypt: see, for instance, Plutarch, De Iside et Osiride 41 (\u00bc 367d): \u201c\u03c4\u1f78\u03bd\n\u03a4\u03c5\u03c6\u1ff6\u03bd\u03b1 \u03a3\u1f74\u03b8 \u0391\u03b9$ \u03b3\u03cd\u03c0\u03c4\u03b9\u03bf\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b9.\u201d \u2013 \u201cEgyptians gives to Seth the name of Typhon.\u201d On the other\nhand, the toponym \u1f49\u03c1\u03bc\u03b1\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03b8\u03af is not clear and not otherwise attested. Probably it refers to an\nEgyptian city, although it does not match any of the five towns, where alchemy was practiced\naccording to CAAG II 26. Various corrections of the form \u1f49\u03c1\u03bc\u03b1\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03b8\u03af have been proposed: see, in\nparticular, Reitzenstein, Poimandres, 141, no. 3 (who proposed \u1f49\u03c1\u03bc\u03b1\u03c7\u03bf\u03c5\u03b8\u03af, lit. \u2018Horus of Edfu\u2019),\nand Mertens, Lettre d\u2019Isis, 56\u201360 (who proposed M\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03b8\u03af, that is an area in the Egyptian city of\nCanopus).\n23\n\nPages 33:\nThe Alchemical Art of Dyeing: The Fourfold Division of Alchemy. . .\n9\n(the preparation of gold and silver), that is, the same definition of alchemy attested\nby the Lexicon Suda (\u03c7 280) and supported by the Byzantine sources that have been\nbriefly analyzed in the first paragraph. The inclusion of this definition in such an\nancient text is noteworthy, since it proves that some of the earliest authors already\nfocused their treatises only on metallurgical practices.\nConsequently, the last part of Isis\u2019s work lists five metallurgical recipes describing: (a) how to make mercury solid and mix it with lead; (b) how to prepare a white\ndyeing drug by which, according to the third recipe (c), an iron-copper alloy was\ntreated and dyed white (the same alloy is dyed yellow in the second part of the\nrecipe); (d) how to mix the substances prepared according to the first three recipes;\n(e) how to process a metallic body before dyeing it white.24 This section is\nconcluded by a more general statement according to which all the \u03bf\u03b9$ \u03ba\u03bf\u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03af\u03b1\u03b9\n(treatments), the \u03b4\u03af\u03c0\u03bb\u03c9\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2 (techniques for doubling the weight of gold or silver\nobjects), and the \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03b2\u03b1\u03c6\u03b1\u03af (dyeing processes) were moved by the same aim, that\nwas, according to the beginning of the treatise, the making of gold and silver.25\nTowards a Definition of Alchemy: Zosimus\nand the Enochian Myth\nThe plot of Isis\u2019s story, although set in a new Egyptian framework, clearly depends\non the Enochian account of the fallen angels who taught mankind about a divine\nand forbidden knowledge that included a wide set of crafts. The myth is fully\ndeveloped in the very first part of the so-called Book of Enoch (or 1Enoch), one of\nthe pseudepigrapha of the Ancient Testament ascribed to Enoch, the grandfather of\nNoah. The book is composed of different segments (or treatises), and in its most\ndeveloped form it is preserved only by a translation in Classical Ethiopic (fifth-sixth\ncentury AD). However, the major part of it is much earlier, as one can infer from\nvarious sections that have been preserved by the Aramaic manuscripts discovered\nin Qumran\u2019s caves.26 In particular the first part, usually called The Book of\nWatchers (\u00bc 1Enoch, chap. 1\u201336), is handed down in several Dead Sea scrolls\nand in all likelihood dates back to the third century BC.27 Moreover, this book has\nMertens, Lettre d\u2019Isis, 134\u20138 \u00bc CAAG II 31\u20133.\nMertens, Lettre d\u2019Isis, 138, ll. 113\u20136 \u00bc CAAG II 33, \u00a7 16.\n26\nThe secondary literature on 1Enoch is vast; for a general introduction on its content, see, for\nexample, Knibb, Book of Enoch, 7\u201335. For a recent English translation of the Ethiopic text, see\nBlack, Book of Enoch.\n27\nThese manuscripts have been found in cave 4; the Aramaic text has been edited and translated by\nMilik, Books of Enoch, Aramaic fragments.\n24\n25\n\nPages 34:\n10\nM. Martelli\nbeen translated into Greek quite early, probably already in the second century BC,\nwithin the same cultural context that produced the Septuagint translation of\nDaniel.28\nAt the beginning of The Book of Watchers (1Enoch, chap. 6\u20138) the author\nexplains that two hundred angels\u2014called \u1f10\u03b3\u03c1\u03ae\u03b3\u03bf\u03c1\u03bf\u03b9 (watchers) or \u1f04\u03b3\u03b3\u03b5\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9 \u03c5\u1f31\u03bf\u1f76\n\u03bf\u1f50\u03c1\u03b1\u03bd\u03bf\u1fe6 (the angels, sons of the Heaven) in the Greek version\u2014started desiring the\ndaughters of men and descended from heaven in order to have intercourse with\nthem. The Greek version of the passage, extensively quoted by the chronographer\nSyncellus, goes on as follows (Sync. p. 12, ll 8\u201317 Mosshammer):\nThe leaders [of these angels] and all the rest [of the two hundred watchers] took for\nthemselves wives in AM 1170, and they began to defile themselves with them up to the\nFlood. [. . .] And they were increasing in accordance with their greatness, and they taught\nthemselves and their wives the uses of potions and spell. First Azae\u0304l, the tenth of the\nleaders, taught them to make swords and armours and every instrument of war and how to\nwork the metals of the earth and gold, how to make them into adornments for their wives,\nand silver. He showed them also the use of cosmetics and beautifying the face and choice\nstones and colouring tinctures.29\nThe list of crafts revealed by Azae\u0304l, which includes the working of metals (with\nexplicit mention of gold and silver) and of precious stones along with \u03c4\u1f70 \u03b2\u03b1\u03c6\u03b9\u03ba\u03ac\n(dyeing procedures) in a more general sense, shows clear similarities with the topics\ncovered by ps.-Democritus\u2019s four books, which nevertheless do not refer back to\nthis myth (at least in the preserved sections). On the contrary, the myth was\nreworked in Isis\u2019s treatise, where the secret teaching of the angels was limited\nonly to the preparation of gold and silver. These different approaches to what was\nconsidered part of the alchemical art were inherited and discussed by Zosimus, a\nthird century author who clearly reused the Enochian myth in his own account of\nthe origins and developments of alchemy. In fact, Zosimus first introduced the term\nche\u0304meia with reference to fallen angels\u2019 revelation, which was written down in\nspecific and secret books. Regrettably, Zosimus\u2019s treatise is lost in its Greek\noriginal form, and just its beginning is quoted by Syncellus straight after the\nabove-mentioned passage taken from 1Enoch. However, a more complete version\nis preserved by an unedited Syriac translation handed down in the Cambridge\nmanuscript Mm. 6.29. The two versions read as follows:\n1. Sync. p. 14, ll. 2\u201314 Mosshammer:\nBut it is also fitting to cite a passage regarding them [i.e. the divine scriptures]\nfrom Zosimus, the philosopher of Panopolis, from his writings to Theosebeia in\n28\nBaar, \u201cAramaic-Greek Notes,\u201d 191\u20132.\nTranslation by Adler & Tuffin, George Synkellos, 17. The Greek text reads: \u201c\u039f\u1f57\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bf\u1f31 \u03bb\u03bf\u03b9\u03c0\u03bf\u1f76\n\u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff7 \u03b1\u03c1\u03bf\u0374 \u1f14\u03c4\u03b5\u03b9 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03bao\u0301\u03c3\u03bc\u03bf\u03c5 \u1f14\u03bb\u03b1\u03b2\u03bf\u03bd \u1f10\u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03b3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u1fd6\u03ba\u03b1\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f24\u03c1\u03be\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf \u03bc\u03b9\u03b1\u03af\u03bd\u03b5\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u1f10\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03b1\u1fd6\u03c2 \u1f14\u03c9\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\n\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03ba\u03bb\u03c5\u03c3\u03bc\u03bf\u1fe6. [. . .] \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f26\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd \u03b1\u1f51\u03be\u03b1\u03bdo\u0301\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u1f70 \u03c4~\n\u03b7\u03bd \u03bc\u03b5\u03b3\u03b1\u03bb\u03b5\u03b9o\u0301\u03c4\u03b7\u03c4\u03b1 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f10\u03b4\u03af\u03b4\u03b1\u03be\u03b1\u03bd \u1f11\u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2\n\u0002\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f00\u03c1\u03c7o\u0301\u03bd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd\n\u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f70\u03c2 \u03b3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u1fd6\u03ba\u03b1\u03c2 \u1f11\u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c6\u03b1\u03c1\u03bc\u03b1\u03ba\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f10\u03c0\u03b1\u03bf\u03b9\u03b4\u03af\u03b1\u03c2. \u03c0\u03c1\u1ff6\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f08\u03b6\u03b1\u1f74\u03bb \u1f41 \u03b4\u03b5\n\u1f10\u03b4\u03af\u03b4\u03b1\u03be\u03b5 \u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd \u03bc\u03b1\u03c7\u03b1\u03af\u03c1\u03b1\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b8\u03c9\n\u0002 \u03c1\u03b1\u03ba\u03b1\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u1fb6\u03bd \u03c3\u03ba\u03b5\u1fe6\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03b5\u03bc\u03b9\u03ba\u1f78\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03bc\u03b5\u0002\u03c4\u03b1\u03bb\u03bb\u03b1 \u03c4~\n\u03b7\u03c2 \u03b3~\n\u03b7\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f78\n\u03c7\u03c1\u03c5\u03c3\u03af\u03bf\u03bd \u03c0\u1ff6\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c1\u03b3\u03ac\u03c3\u03c9\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03ae\u03c3\u03c9\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1f70 \u03bao\u0301\u03c3\u03bc\u03b9\u03b1 \u03c4\u03b1\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03b3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9\u03be\u03af, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u1f04\u03c1\u03b3\u03c5\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd. \u1f14\u03b4\u03b5\u03b9\u03be\u03b5 \u03b4\u1f72\n\u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f78 \u03c3\u03c4\u03af\u03bb\u03b2\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f78 \u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u03bb\u03c9\u03c0\u03af\u03b6\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u1f10\u03ba\u03bb\u03b5\u0002\u03ba\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03bb\u03af\u03b8\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03b2\u03b1\u03c6\u03b9\u03ba\u03ac.\u201d\n29\n\nPages 35:\nThe Alchemical Art of Dyeing: The Fourfold Division of Alchemy. . .\n11\nthe ninth book of Imouth, reading as follows:30 \u201cThe Holy Scriptures, that is the\nbooks, say, my lady (i.e. Theosebeia),31 that there is a race of demons who avail\nthemselves of women. Hermes also mentioned this in his Physika, and nearly\nevery treatise, both public and esoteric, made mention of this. Thus the ancient\nand divine scriptures said this, that certain angels lusted after women, and having\ndescended taught them all the works of nature. For this reason they fell into\ndisgrace, he (Hermes?) says, and remained outside heaven, because they taught\nmankind everything wicked and nothing benefiting the soul. The same scriptures\nsay that from them the giants were born. So theirs is the first teaching concerning\nthese arts [Chemeu]. They called this book Che\u0304meu,32 whence also the art is\ncalled Alchemy (i.e. che\u0304meia),\u201d and so forth.33\n2. Syriac Zosimus (for a preliminary edition of this text see Appendix)\nEighth Treatise on the Working of Tin; Letter He\u0304th. The Book tells us about tin\n\u02d9 Theosebeia. The holy scripand Zosimus gives his best greetings to the queen\ntures say, my lady, that there is a race of demons who has intercourse with the\nwomen and has authority over them. Hermes also mentions this story in his\nPhysika as well as, so to say, every clear or secret treatise recalls it. In this way,\n30\nThe title Imouth is not elsewhere attested in Zosimus\u2019s treatises handed down by the Byzantine\ntradition. Moreover, the reference to the ninth book is not confirmed by the Syriac tradition, where\nthis passage is included in the eighth book by Zosimus. The Arabic Tome of Images (Mushaf\nas-suwar), preserved under the name of the Egyptian alchemist (although its authenticity\u02d9 \u02d9 is\n\u02d9\u02d9\nquestioned;\nsee Hallum, \u201cTome of Images\u201d) preserves a similar account in the sixth book, entitled\nBook About the Nature or Book of Imouth (see Abt & Fuad, Book of Pictures, 393, 22).\n31\nThe woman to whom Zosimus usually addresses his treatises; perhaps a pupil of the alchemist:\nsee Hallum, \u201cTheosebeia.\u201d\n32\nThe term Che\u0304meu (hapax) is likely to be the title of the book in which the teaching of angels was\nrevealed. The alchemist Olympiodorus (CAAG II 80,13) refers to a similar book entitled \u03b2\u03af\u03b2\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2\n\u03c7\u03b7\u03bc\u03b5\u03c5\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03ae. Moreover, in the Corpus alchemicum graecum several authors mention the alchemist\nChe\u0304me\u0304s (\u03a7\u03b7\u03bc\u03ae\u03c2) or Chyme\u0304s (\u03a7\u03c5\u03bc\u03ae\u03c2), whose name seems to be related to the book Che\u0304meu; see\nLetrouit, \u201cAlchimistes grecs,\u201d 72\u20134.\n33\nTranslation by Adler & Tuffin, George Synkellos, 18\u20139 (slightly modified). The Greek text\nreads: \u201c\u1f0c\u03be\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd \u03b4\u1f72 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u0396\u03c9\u03c3\u03af\u03bc\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03a0\u03b1\u03bd\u03bf\u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03af\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c6\u03b9\u03bb\u03bf\u03c3o\u0301\u03c6\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c7\u03c1~\n\u03b7\u03c3\u03af\u03bd \u03c4\u03b9\u03bd\u03b1 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03b8\u03b5\u0002\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd\n\u1f10\u03ba \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03b3\u03b5\u03b3\u03c1\u03b1\u03bc\u03bc\u03b5\u0002\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1ff7 \u03c0\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2 \u0398\u03b5\u03bf\u03c3\u03b5\n\u0002\u03b2\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1\u03bd \u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff7 \u1f10\u03bd\u03ac\u03c4\u1ff3 \u03c4~\n\u03b7\u03c2 \u1f38\u03bc\u03bf\u1f7a\u03b8 \u03b2\u03af\u03b2\u03bb\u1ff3, \u1f14\u03c7\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd \u1f67\u03b4\u03b5.\n\u0002\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f43 \u03c7\u03c1~\n\u03b7\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9\u03be\u03af\u03bd.\n\u2018\u03c6\u03ac\u03c3\u03ba\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u03b1\u1f31 \u1f31\u03b5\u03c1\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b3\u03c1\u03b1\u03c6\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f24\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9 \u03b2\u03af\u03b2\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9, \u1f66 \u03b3\u03cd\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9, \u1f45\u03c4\u03b9 \u1f14\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9 \u03c4\u03b9 \u03b4\u03b1\u03b9\u03bco\u0301\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd \u03b3\u03b5\n\u1f10\u03bc\u03bd\u03b7\u03bco\u0301\u03bd\u03b5\u03c5\u03c3\u03b5 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f19\u03c1\u03bc~\n\u03b7\u03c2 \u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03c6\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03ba\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c3\u03c7\u03b5\u03b4\u1f78\u03bd \u1f05\u03c0\u03b1\u03c2 \u03bbo\u0301\u03b3\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c6\u03b1\u03bd\u03b5\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f00\u03c0o\u0301\u03ba\u03c1\u03c5\u03c6\u03bf\u03c2\n\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf \u1f10\u03bc\u03bd\u03b7\u03bco\u0301\u03bd\u03b5\u03c5\u03c3\u03b5. \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf \u03bf\u1f56\u03bd \u1f14\u03c6\u03b1\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd \u03b1\u1f31 \u1f00\u03c1\u03c7\u03b1\u1fd6\u03b1\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b8\u03b5\u1fd6\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b3\u03c1\u03b1\u03c6\u03b1\u03af, \u1f45\u03c4\u03b9 \u1f04\u03b3\u03b3\u03b5\u03bb\u03bf\u03af \u03c4\u03b9\u03bd\u03b5\u03c2\n\u1f10\u03c0\u03b5\u03b8\u03cd\u03bc\u03b7\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03b3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9\u03ba\u1ff6\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b5\u03bb\u03b8o\u0301\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2 \u1f10\u03b4\u03af\u03b4\u03b1\u03be\u03b1\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1f70\u03c2 \u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03c4~\n\u03b7\u03c2 \u03c6\u03cd\u03c3\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2 \u1f14\u03c1\u03b3\u03b1, \u1f67\u03bd\n\u03c7\u03ac\u03c1\u03b9\u03bd, \u03c6\u03b7\u03c3\u03af, \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c3\u03ba\u03c1\u03bf\u03cd\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2 \u1f14\u03be\u03c9 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03bf\u1f50\u03c1\u03b1\u03bd\u03bf\u1fe6 \u1f14\u03bc\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd\u03b1\u03bd, \u1f45\u03c4\u03b9 \u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03c0\u03bf\u03bd\u03b7\u03c1\u1f70 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bc\u03b7\u03b4\u1f72\u03bd\n\u1f60\u03c6\u03b5\u03bb\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c8\u03c5\u03c7\u1f74\u03bd \u1f10\u03b4\u03af\u03b4\u03b1\u03be\u03b1\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u1f00\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03c9\n\u0002 \u03c0\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2. \u1f10\u03be \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c6\u03ac\u03c3\u03ba\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u03b1\u1f31 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b3\u03c1\u03b1\u03c6\u03b1\u1f76 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76\n\u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03b3\u03af\u03b3\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2 \u03b3\u03b5\u03b3\u03b5\u03bd~\n\u03b7\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9. \u1f14\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03bd \u03bf\u1f56\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f21 \u03c0\u03c1\u03c9\n\u0002 \u03c4\u03b7 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03ac\u03b4\u03bf\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2 [\u03a7\u03b7\u03bc\u03b5\u1fe6] \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd\n\u03c4\u03b5\u03c7\u03bd\u1ff6\u03bd. \u1f10\u03ba\u03ac\u03bb\u03b5\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd (\u1f10\u03ba\u03ac\u03bb\u03b5\u03c3\u03b5 in Mosshammer\u2019s edition) \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c4\u03b1\u03cd\u03c4\u03b7\u03bd \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03b2\u03af\u03b2\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd \u03a7\u03b7\u03bc\u03b5\u1fe6, \u1f14\u03bd\u03b8\u03b5\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76\n\u03b7\u03c2.\u201d I have introduced two changes in Mosshammer\u2019s edition.\n\u1f21 \u03c4\u03b5\u0002\u03c7\u03bd\u03b7 \u03c7\u03b7\u03bc\u03b5\u03af\u03b1 \u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u03b5\u1fd6\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9\u2019 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f70 \u1f11\u03be~\nFirst, I\u2019ve followed Mertens\u2019s suggestion (Lettre d\u2019Isis, 67) to expunge the first \u03a7\u03b7\u03bc\u03b5\u1fe6 as an\ninterpolation (the term is not attested in this position by the Syriac tradition). Secondly, in the last\nline I corrected \u1f10\u03ba\u03ac\u03bb\u03b5\u03c3\u03b5 into \u1f10\u03ba\u03ac\u03bb\u03b5\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd in accordance with the Syriac translation that\n\nPages 36:\n12\nM. Martelli\nin fact, the ancient and holy books tell that some angels fell in love passionately\nwith the women, came down <and> taught them about all the works of nature.\nFor this reason, as the book says, those who acted haughtily remained outside\nheaven, since they taught mankind all the malicious things which do not benefit\nthe soul at all. The books claim that the works (of nature?) started up from them\nand theirs is the first exposition concerning these crafts. They called these books\nKwmw, whence also alchemy (kumiya) takes its name. There are 24 treatises in\nthis book. Each of them is given a specific title that is either a letter (of the\nalphabet) or a word. They are explained by the words of priests. One of these is\nentitled \u2018Imus\u2019, another \u2018Imuth\u2019, another \u2018Face\u2019\u2014so it was interpreted\n(or translated). One of these is entitled \u2018Key\u2019, another \u2018Seal\u2019 or \u2018Signet\u2019, another\n\u2018Handbook\u2019 (see gr. \u1f10\u03b3\u03c7\u03b5\u03b9\u03c1\u03af\u03b4\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd), another \u2018Position\u2019 (of the stars? see gr. \u1f10\u03c0\u03bf\u03c7\u03ae).\nAs I said, each one is given a specific title. This book contains the crafts and\nmany thousands of words. Then those who came afterwards, with the intent of\ndoing well, divided the book in many parts; as someone would say: (they did so)\nin order to compose short versions (of the book) for themselves. And they were\nnot even able to write something useful. For they did not only damage the books\nof alchemy, but also hidden them. The philosopher (i.e. Democritus) claims:\n\u2018they hid the writings on the natural substances under the multiplicity of matter.\u2019\nPerhaps they wanted to exercise our souls. Now, if they exercise the souls, well,\nphilosopher, why to deny it? But you know how to exercise either the body or the\nsoul, and it always leads you to achieve the perfection. In fact a wise saying\nreads: \u2018studying is everything.\u2019 And also Isidoros says: \u2018studying increases your\nwork.\u2019 I know, this is not beyond your understanding (my lady), but you know it\nwell, since you are one of those who would have liked to hide the art, if it had not\nbeen put in writing. For this reason you formed an assembly and administered\nthe oath to each other. But you (my lady) moved away from the various topics\n(of this book); you presented them in a shorter form and you taught them openly.\nBut you claim that this book cannot be possessed unless in secret. Now, even\nthough secrets are necessary, it is quite fair that anyone has a book of alchemy,\nsince it is not kept secret for them. You must know, my lady, he (i.e. Democritus?)34 claimed that those who wrote short versions (of the book) said that just\nsilver can be dyed gold. But the book of alchemy they have hidden assured that\nlead and tin and iron and silver take the color of gold, each metal (takes the color\nof) the other one, and again the same metals (take the color of) silver, the same\nmetals (the color of) copper, the same metals (the color of) iron. Lead produces\ntin, copper (produces) iron, silver (produces) gold. In the same way tin\n34\nBerthelot & Duval, Chimie, 239, considered the philosopher (i.e. ps.-Democritus) as the author\nof the following quotation. Although the ancient alchemist is cited few lines before (49v18), this\nidentification is not certain.\n\nPages 37:\nThe Alchemical Art of Dyeing: The Fourfold Division of Alchemy. . .\n13\n(produces) the same metals as well. And again from the beginning to the end and\nfrom the end to the beginning.\nThe Syriac text may be divided into two parts. The first section (49r12\u201349v6)\nmatches the Greek passage cited by Syncellus and rephrases the story told by The\nBook of Enoch: in all likelihood Zosimus refers to this book when he mentions the\nholy scriptures (Sync. 14,3 \u1f31\u03b5\u03c1\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b3\u03c1\u03b1\u03c6\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f24\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9 \u03b2\u03af\u03b2\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9\u00bcSyrZos. 49r14\n). The\nsecond section gives a detailed description of the book entitled Che\u0304meu and\nexplains how it was transmitted and somehow corrupted.\nIn the first part Zosimus attributes the revelation of che\u0304meia both to angels\n(Sync. 14,6 \u1f04\u03b3\u03b3\u03b5\u03bb\u03bf\u03af \u03c4\u03b9\u03bd\u03b5\u03c2\u00bcSyrZos. 49r18\n) and to demons (Sync. 14,3\n\u03b4\u03b1\u03b9\u03bco\u0301\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd \u03b3\u03b5\n\u0002\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2\u00bcSyrZos. 49r15\n), so introducing a slight variation\ninto the Enochian myth, where fallen angels usually play the most important role.\nAlthough the name of demons is mentioned only at the very beginning of the\npassage, their presence allows us to read Zosimus\u2019s account in the light of the\ncomplex (and still unclear in many respects) demonology developed by the author\nin two other treatises, namely On the Letter Omega (CAAG II 228\u2013234) and the\nFirst Book of the Final Account (CAAG II 239\u2013245).35 According to the second\nwork, the two main sources of wealth for Egypt were gold mines and the dyeing\ntechniques, in particular the so-called \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9\u03c1\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b2\u03b1\u03c6\u03b1\u03af (opportune tinctures), that is,\nthe dyeing processes whose success depended on the influence of demons and on\nthe astrological time in which they were performed.36 This knowledge was considered secret and no ancient authors could reveal it; only Democritus\u2014Zosimus\nclaims\u2014hinted at these tinctures in his explanation of the four \u03c4\u03b5\u0002\u03c7\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u03b9\u03bc\u03af\u03b1\u03b9\n(valuable arts), which must be identified with the topics covered by the four\nbooks, namely the making of gold, of silver, of precious stones, and the purple\ndyeing of wool.37 These opportune tinctures were originally called \u03c6\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b2\u03b1\u03c6\u03b1\u03af\n(natural tinctures) and had been explained by Hermes in his \u03b2\u03af\u03b2\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c6\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03ba\u1ff6\u03bd \u03b2\u03b1\u03c6\u1ff6\u03bd\n(Book of Natural Dyes). However, demons became jealous of this knowledge and\nwanted to make it secret and dependent on their own control (i.e. on the influences\nof the stars they governed). They started revealing these tinctures, or even a\ncounterfeited form of them (called at some point \u201cunnatural tinctures\u201d), only to\ntheir priests in order to be worshipped and receive the appropriate sacrifices.38\n35\nSee Fraser, \u201cZosimos of Panopolis.\u201d For a new and reliable edition of the first treatise,\nsee Mertens, Zosime de Panopolis, 1\u201310. The second treatise has been reedited by Festugie\u0300re,\nRe\u0301ve\u0301lation d\u2019Herme\u0300s, 363\u20138 (translation at 275\u201381).\n36\nFestugie\u0300re, Re\u0301ve\u0301lation d\u2019Herme\u0300s, 363\u20135 (\u00bcCAAG II 239\u201340). See also Mertens, Zosime de\nPanopolis, 62\u20133 notes 9\u201310.\n37\nFestugie\u0300re, Re\u0301ve\u0301lation d\u2019Herme\u0300s, 364, ll. 22\u20134 (\u00bc CAAG II 242,17), 365, ll. 12\u20134 (\u00bc CAAG II\n242,8\u201317). In addition, it is worth mentioning the passage edited in CAAG II 242,9\u201324 (not\nreedited by Festugie\u0300re, because \u2018assez obscure\u2019, see 278 note 1), which gives a kind of summary\nof ps.-Democritus\u2019s work by presenting several dyestuffs used by the alchemist as example of\n\u03ba\u03b1\u03b9\u03c1\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b2\u03b1\u03c6\u03b1\u03af.\n38\nFestugie\u0300re, Re\u0301ve\u0301lation d\u2019Herme\u0300s, 366\u20137, \u00a7\u00a7 6\u20137 (\u00bc CAAG II 243\u20134, \u00a7\u00a7 6\u20137).\n\nPages 38:\n14\nM. Martelli\nNot surprisingly, if we come back to the above-edited passages, Zosimus\ninterpreted Azae\u0304l\u2019s revelation in The Book of Enoch as referring to the knowledge\nof tinctures he considered at the basis of any alchemical activity. \u03a4\u1f70 \u03b2\u03b1\u03c6\u03b9\u03ba\u03ac are in\nfact explicitly mentioned by the apocryphal book (see supra) along with a specific\nset of crafts, which is in many respects comparable with the arts explained in ps.Democritus\u2019s four books on dyeing (\u03b2\u03b1\u03c6\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b2\u03af\u03b2\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9 according to Synesius). Moreover, next to The Book of Enoch Zosimus mentions also a book of Hermes entitled\nPhysika as one of the sources from which he took the account on the angelic/\ndemonic revelation. The identification of this treatise is far from certain, even\nthough the title and the context in which Physika is cited remind us of Hermes\u2019s\nBook of Natural Dyes quoted in the First Book of the Final Account: there Zosimus\nclaimed that Hermes\u2019s treatise was addressed to Isidoros,39 an enigmatic figure that\nis mentioned also in the Syriac text (50r2).40\nOn the other hand, the Syriac passage emphasises the central role played by\nbooks in the revelation and transmission of alchemical knowledge. While The Book\nof Enoch presented Azae\u0304l\u2019s revelation in the form of oral teaching, Zosimus\nunderlines the written form in which mankind received this secret knowledge.\nThe arts and all the natural procedures (Sync. 14,7 \u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03c4~\n\u03b7\u03c2 \u03c6\u03cd\u03c3\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2\n\u1f14\u03c1\u03b3\u03b1\u00bcSyrZos. 49r19\u201320\n) disclosed by demons had been somehow\nsummarized in the enigmatic books called Che\u0304meu, from which the related term\nche\u0304meia (\u03c7\u03b7\u03bc\u03b5\u1fd6\u03b1 or\n, kumiya) derives. However, while the Final Account insists\non demons\u2019 increasing jealousy towards mankind and on their attempt to gain\ncontrol of the revealed techniques, the Syriac text stresses the point that the original\nknowledge started deteriorating because of the improper use human beings made of\nthe revealed books. In the same way as the demons (or maybe under their influence)\nsome people tried to hide the books, to summarize them, and disperse their content\nby focusing only on specific topics.\nIn this respect, the last part of the Syriac passage is particularly relevant, since\nZosimus explains that some alchemists narrowed their inquiry to the methods for\ngilding silver. Whereas, the art called che\u0304meia, at least in its original form, included\na wider set of dyeing techniques that were applied to all kinds of metals in order to\ndye them different colours. This explanation is consistent with Zosimus\u2019s other\n39\nFestugie\u0300re, Re\u0301ve\u0301lation d\u2019Herme\u0300s, 365, ll. 15\u201320 (\u00bc CAAG II 242,10\u20136). The name of Isidoros\nappears also in the list of alchemists handed down by the Marcianus gr. 299 (fol. 7v); see CAAG I\n110.\n40\nWe cannot exclude the possibility that other treatises circulating under the name of Hermes\nreferred to or reused the Enochian myth of the fallen angels. In particular, according to a passage of\nthe alchemist Olympiodorus (CAAG II 89,9\u201315), we know that the above-mentioned treatise\nascribed to Isis (see supra, \u00a7 2), or at least some parts of it, was attributed to Hermes. This overlap\nbetween Hermes and Isis is not surprising, especially if read in the light of the so-called Corpus\nHermeticum, which includes several writings where the Egyptian goddess addresses her teaching\nto Horus (see, for instance, Stobei fragmenta, xxiii\u2013xxvii). Therefore, Zosimus could have had in\nmind Isis\u2019s book, when he mentioned Hermes\u2019s Physika: see Scott, Hermetica, 151.\n\nPages 39:\nThe Alchemical Art of Dyeing: The Fourfold Division of Alchemy. . .\n15\nalchemical books that have been preserved by the Syriac manuscript Mm. 6.29. In\nfact, among the twelve treatises handed down by the codex under the name of the\nEgyptian alchemist, we find many writings devoted to the dyeing of various metals,\nsuch as silver (e.g. Book 2; Berthelot-Duval, La chimie, 217\u201321), tin (Book 8;\nidem, 238\u201342), lead (Book 10; idem, 253\u201357), and iron (Book 11; idem, 257\u201360).41\nIn particular Book 6 (Mm. 6.29, fol. 32xv17\u201345r8), entitled Beginning of the\nTreatise on the Working of Copper: Letter Waw, includes several recipes explaining\nhow to process copper and dye it black, purple, coral red, white, and yellow\n(Berthelot-Duval, La chimie, 222\u201332). Scholars have so far focused their attention\nespecially on the recipes dealing with the production of black copper alloys. Three\nrecipes have been recently published by Erika Hunter and fully commented by\nAlessandra Giumlia-Mair, who recognized in them the description of different\nmethods for producing a black and shiny patina on copper-alloys.42 This black\ncopper was already known in Ancient Egypt, as we can infer, for instance, from a\nbeautiful black image of the pharaoh Amenemhat III (1842\u20131794 BC) today\ndisplayed at the Ortiz Collection in Geneva.43 It represents one of the most ancient\nexamples of artificially black patinated statues found in Egypt (Fig. 1).\nConclusion\nIf we go back to the above-quoted Syriac passage, in the very last part Zosimus\ncriticizes the attitude of those alchemists who were only interested in the making of\nprecious metals by quoting a sentence presumably taken from an ancient author\n(perhaps ps.-Democritus) who claimed: \u201cthose who wrote short versions [of the\nbooks of che\u0304meia] said that just silver can be dyed gold\u201d (50r12\u20133). In this way the\ndebate between people supporting a wider idea of alchemy, which included a\nbroader set of dyeing techniques, and people accepting a narrower idea just focused\non the making of gold seems to be traced back to the earliest phases of alchemy in\nEgypt. A possible target of such a criticism might be recognized in Isis\u2019s treatise, a\nwork that mentioned only the making of gold and silver among the secrets revealed\nby the angels. On the contrary, a different position was endorsed by ps.-Democritus\nwith the fourfold division of his books. Significantly, as we have already noted, the\n41\nThe Syriac text of these twelve treatises is still unedited (an edition with English translation is\nscheduled to be published within the new series \u2018Sources of alchemy and chemistry\u2019 distributed as\na supplement of Ambix); a partial French translation is available in Berthelot & Duval, Chimie,\n210\u201366.\n42\nHunter, \u201cBeautiful Black Bronzes,\u201d 656\u20137. The three recipes that have been edited correspond\nwith the texts translated or summarized by Berthelot & Duval, Chimie, 223 (rec. 2), 224\u20135 (rec. 8\u2013\n9), 225 (rec. 12); and Giumlia-Mair, \u201cZosimos the Alchemist,\u201d 319\u201321.\n43\nSee, for example, Giumlia-Mair, \u201cKrokodil.\u201d\n\nPages 40:\n16\nM. Martelli\nFig. 1 Black copper statue of King Amenemhat III in kneeling posture (1843\u20131798 BC) (Courtesy of Werner Forman Archive, The Bridgeman Art Library)\nchemical Papyri seem to preserve a similar division, which should lead us to\nspeculate on how widespread or how standard such a division might actually\nhave been in the first centuries AD.\nSuch a background was well known to Zosimus, who took for granted that\nche\u0304meia was related to a plurality of dyeing techniques. The proper alchemist,\nZosimus claims, was expected to put into practice any possible transformation of\ncolour without focusing only on gold. Nevertheless, the Egyptian alchemist, though\nvery familiar with ps.-Democritus\u2019s books, never mentions stones working and\npurple dyeing in the passage. These kinds of crafts seem to have been somehow left\napart within the debate on the contents of the original books of alchemy. Although\nZosimus stresses the central role played by dyeing techniques, the polarity between\n\nPages 41:\nThe Alchemical Art of Dyeing: The Fourfold Division of Alchemy. . .\n17\na wider idea of alchemy and the bare making of precious metals seems to have been\nreduced to a simpler discussion on metalworking: Zosimus underscores all the\npossible chromatic transformations of metals, which seem to become the most\nrelevant topic of any alchemical inquiry.\nSuch a variety of positions already detectable during the earliest phases of the\nwestern alchemical tradition makes clear how fluid were the boundaries of an art\nprimarily focusing on the chromatic transformations of the treated substances. If the\nByzantine sources analysed at the beginning of the chapter emphasizes the identification of che\u0304meia with the making of gold and silver, such a position\u2014although\ndominant to some extent\u2014never interrupted the transmission of technical knowledge dealing with a wider set of dyeing techniques. A similar kind of expertise, for\ninstance, is well attested by the Latin recipe books of the Middle Age, which\ncovered a variety of topics more similar to ps.-Democritus\u2019s four books and to\nthe Leiden and Stockholm papyri than to the simple selection of recipes made by\nPsellos.44 A well-known example is the so-called Mappae clavicula, a large\ncollection of recipes probably assembled between the ninth and the twelfth century.\nRecent studies have shown that this work in all likelihood derives from a lost Greek\nsource that could be perhaps identified, according to Halleux-Meyvaert\u2019s investigation, with a lost part of Zosimus\u2019s treatises.45 Although the extant sources do not\nallow us to confirm such a hypothesis, the Greek origin of the Mappae clavicula\nconfirms the transmission of a set of practices originally covered by those texts\nconsidered at the basis of the Byzantine alchemical tradition. To sum up, the mere\npractice of chrysopoeia does not seem to be sufficient for getting a full understanding of the different historical evolutions of a complex art, whose exact definition\nwas debated even among the authors usually considered as the founders of this\ndiscipline. On the contrary, a deeper investigation of their treatises\u2014many of them\nstill waiting for editions and translations\u2014provide us with new and fresh material\nfor building a more complete picture of the evolution and transformation of the\ndifferent technical aspects somehow encapsulated in the enigmatic word che\u0304meia.\nAppendix\nZosimus\u2019s passage on the relevation of alchemy as preserved by the Syriac manuscript Mm. 6.29, fols. 49r\u201350r:46\n44\nSee, for instance, Halleux, Papyrus de Leyde, 53\u201362.\nHalleux & Meyvaert, \u201cMappae clavicula,\u201d 12\u20133.\n46\nA French translation of the passage is available in Berthelot & Duval, Chimie, 238\u20139.\n45\n\nPages 42:\n18\nM. Martelli\n47\n47\nThe sense of the sentence, in which\n(the books of kwmw) seems to be the object of\n(they called), is difficult; perhaps\nmust be supplied before\n. In addition the plural\nform \u2018the books\u2019 does not correspond with the Greek version that has a singular. The plural might\nbe justified in the light of the following part, according to which the book revealed by demons was\ndivided into several tomes.\n\nPages 43:\nThe Alchemical Art of Dyeing: The Fourfold Division of Alchemy. . .\n19\n48\n49\n48\n49\nThe word is indecipherable; see infra, fol. 50r11\n.\nThe term\n(see also 50r12) is likely to be a slightly different spelling of\n.\n\nPages 44:\n20\nM. Martelli\nBibliography\nAbt, Theodor, and Salwa Fuad. 2011. The Book of Pictures by Zosimos of Panopolis. Zurich:\nLiving Human Heritage Publication.\nAdler, William, and Paul Tuffin. 2002. The Chronography of George Synkellos. A Byzantine\nChronicle of Universal History from the Creation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.\nAlbini, Francesca. 1988. Michele Psello. La Crisopoea, ovvero come fabbricare l\u2019oro. Genova:\nECIG.\nBaar, James. 1979. Aramaic-Greek Notes on the Book of Enoch (ii). Journal of Semitic Studies 24:\n179\u2013192.\nBerthelot, Marcelin, and Charles-E\u0301mile Ruelle. 1887\u20131888. La Collection des anciens alchimistes\ngrecs, 3 vols. Paris: G. Steinheil.\nBerthelot, Marcelin, and Rubens Duval. 1893. Histoire des Sciences: La Chimie au Moyen-A\u0302ge,\nvol. 2: L\u2019alchimie syriaque. Paris: Imprimerie nationale.\nBidez, Joseph. 1928. Michel Psellus. E\u00b4pitre sur la Chrysope\u0301e, opuscules et extraits sur l\u2019alchimie,\nla me\u0301te\u0301orologie et la de\u0301monologie (Catalogue des manuscrits alchimiques grecs, vol. 6).\nBrussels: M. Lamertin.\nBidez, Joseph, and Franz Cumont. 1938. Les Mages helle\u0301nise\u0301s. Zoroastre, Ostane\u0300s et Hystaspe\nd\u2019apre\u0300s la tradition grecque, 2 vols. Paris: Les Belles Lettres.\nBlack, Mathew. 1985. The Book of Enoch or 1 Enoch: A New English Edition with Commentary\nand Textual Notes. Leiden: Brill.\nBrooks, Ernest W. 1900. A Syriac Fragment. Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenl\u20ac\nandischen Gesellschaft 3: 195\u2013230.\nCaley, Earle R. 1926. The Leyden Papyrus X: An English Translation with Brief Notes. Journal of\nChemical Education 3: 1149\u20131166.\nCaley, Earle R. 1927. The Stockholm Papyrus: An English Translation with Brief Notes. Journal\nof Chemical Education 4: 979\u20131002.\nChabot, Jean-Baptiste. 1910. Chronique de Michel le Syrien, vol. 4: Texte syriaque. Paris: Pierre\nLeroux.\nChabot, Jean-Baptiste. 1933. Incerti auctoris Chronicum Pseudo-Dionysianum vulgo dictum, vol.\n2 (CSCO 104, syr. 53). Louvain: Peeters.\nDodge, Bayard. 1970. Abu\u0304 \u2019l-Faraj Muhammad ibn Isha\u0304q al-Nad\u0131\u0304m, The Fihrist, a 10th Century\n\u02d9 University Press.\nAD Survey of Islamic Culture. New \u02d9York: Columbia\nDuffy, John M. 1992. Michaelis Pselli philosophica minora. Leipzig: Teubner.\n\nPages 45:\nThe Alchemical Art of Dyeing: The Fourfold Division of Alchemy. . .\n21\nDuval, Rubens. 1888\u20131901. Lexicon Syriacum auctore Hassano bar Bahlule, 3 vols. Paris:\nE. Reipublicae typographaeo.\nFestugie\u0300re, Andre\u0301-Jean. 1950. La Re\u0301ve\u0301lation d\u2019Herme\u0300s Trisme\u0301giste, vol. 1: L\u2019Astrologie et les\nsciences occultes. Paris: J. Gabalda et Cie.\nFlu\u0308gel, Gustav. 1872. Kita\u0304b al-Fihrist, 2 vols. Leipzig: F.C.W. Vogel.\nFraser, Kyle A. 2004. Zosimos of Panopolis and the Book of Enoch: Alchemy as Forbidden\nKnowledge. Aries 4: 125\u2013147.\nFu\u0308ck, Johann W. 1951. The Arabic Literature of Alchemy According to al-Nad\u0131\u0304m (A.D. 987). A\nTranslation of the Tenth Discourse of the Book of the Catalogue (Al-Fihrist) with Introduction\nand Commentary. Ambix 4: 81\u2013144.\nGildemeister, Johannes. 1876. Alchymie. ZDMG 30: 534\u2013538.\nGiumlia-Mair, Alessandra. 1996. Das Krokodil und Amenemhat III. aus el-Faiyum. Antike Welt\n27: 313\u2013321.\nGiumlia-Mair, Alessandra. 2002. Zosimos the Alchemist \u2013 Manuscript 6.29, Cambridge, Metallurgical Interpretation. In I bronzi antichi: produzione e tecnologia (Atti del XV Congresso\nInternazionale sui Bronzi Antichi, organizzato dall\u2019Universita\u0300 di Udine, sede di Gorizia,\nGrado-Aquileia, 22\u201326 maggio 2001), ed. Alessandra Giumlia-Mair, 317\u2013323. Montagnac:\nE\u0301ditions Monique Mergoil.\nGoeje, Michael Jean de. 1885. Ibn al-Faq\u0003{n al-Hamada\u0304n\u0003{, Mukhtasar kita\u0304b al-bulda\u0304n. Leiden:\n\u00af\n\u02d9\nBibliotheca Geographorum Arabicorum.\nHalleux, Robert. 1981. Alchimistes grecs, vol. 1: Papyrus de Leyde. Papyrus de Stockholm.\nFragments de recettes. Paris: Les Belles Lettres.\nHalleux, Robert, and Paul Meyvaert. 1987. Les Origines de la Mappae clavicula. Archives\nd\u2019Histoire Doctrinale et Litte\u0301raire du Moyen-Age 54: 7\u201358.\nHallum, Bink. 2008. Theosebeia. In Encyclopedia of Ancient Natural Scientists, eds. Paul Keyser\nand Georgia Irby-Massie, 302\u2013303. London/New York: Routledge.\nHallum, Bink. 2009. The Tome of Images: An Arabic Compilation of Texts by Zosimus of\nPanopolis and a Source of the Turba Philosophorum. Ambix 56: 76\u201388.\nHunter, Erika C.D. 2002. Beautiful Black Bronzes. Zosimos\u2019 Treatises in Cam. Mm. 6.29. In I\nbronzi antichi: produzione e tecnologia (Atti del XV Congresso Internazionale sui Bronzi\nAntichi, organizzato dall\u2019Universita\u0300 di Udine, sede di Gorizia, Grado-Aquileia, 22\u201326 maggio\n2001), ed. Alessandra Giumlia-Mair, 655\u2013660. Montagnac: e\u0301ditions Monique Mergoil.\nKatsiampoura, Gianna. 2008. Transmutation of Matter in Byzantium: The Case of Michael\nPsellos, the Alchemist. Science & Education 17: 663\u2013668.\nKnibb, Michael A. 2009. Essays on the Book of Enoch and Other Early Jewish Texts and\nTraditions. Leiden: Brill.\nLetrouit, Jean. 1995. Chronologie des alchimistes grecs. In Alchimie: art, histoire et mythe (Actes\ndu 1er Colloque International de la Socie\u0301te\u0301 d\u2019E\u0301tude de l\u2019Histoire de l\u2019Alchimie), eds. Didier\nKahn and Sylvain Matton, 11\u201393. Paris/Milan: S.E\u0301.H.A.- Arche\u0301.\nMartelli, Matteo. 2011. Pseudo-Democrito. Scritti alchemici con il commentario di Sinesio. Paris/\nMilan: S.E\u0301.H.A.-Arche\u0300.\nMasse\u0301, Henry. 1973. Ibn al-Faq\u0003{n al-Hamada\u0304n\u0003{. Abre\u0301ge\u0301 du livre de Pays. Damascus.\n\u00af\nMertens, Miche\u0300le. 1983\u20131984. Un traite\u0301 gre\u0301co-e\u0301gyptien\nd\u2019alchimie: la lettre d\u2019Isis a\u0300 Horus. Texte\ne\u0301tabli et traduit avec introduction et notes. Universite\u0301 de Lie\u0300ge: Me\u0301moire de licence.\nMertens, Miche\u0300le. 1995. Zosime de Panopolis. Me\u0301moires authentiques. Paris: Les Belles Lettres.\nMertens, Miche\u0300le. 2006. Greco-Egyptian Alchemy in Byzantium. In The Occult Sciences in\nByzantium, eds. Paul Magdalino and Maria Mawroudi, 205\u2013229. Geneva: La Pomme d\u2019Or.\nMilik, Jazef T. 1976. The Books of Enoch, Aramaic Fragments of Qumra\u0302n Cave 4. Oxford:\nClarendon.\nReitzenstein, Richard. 1904. Poimandres. Studien zur griechsch-\u20ac\nagyptischen und fr\u20ac\nuhchristlichen\nLiteratur. Leipzig: B.G. Teubner.\nRoberto, Umberto. 2005. Ioannis Antiocheni Fragmenta ex Historia Chronica. Berlin: De Gruyter.\n\nPages 46:\n22\nM. Martelli\nScott, Walter. 1985. Hermetica, vol. 4: Testimonia with Introduction, Addenda and Indices by.\nA.S. Ferguson. Boston: Shambhala.\nStrohmaier, Gotthard. 1991. Uma\u0304ra ibn Hamza, Constantine V and the Invention of the Elixir.\n\u02d9\nGraeco-Arabica 4: 21\u201324.\nWesterink, Leendert G. 1948. Michael Psellus, De Omnifaria Doctrina. Nijmegen: Centrale\nDrukkerij N.V.\n\nPages 47:\nTransmission of Alchemical and Artistic\nKnowledge in German Mediaeval\nand Premodern Recipe Books\nSylvie Neven\nAbstract In the Middle Ages and premodern period, artisanal knowledge was\ntransmitted via collections of recipes often grouped concomitantly with alchemical\ntexts and instructions. Except for some very well-known artistic treatises, e.g. works\nby Eraclius or the Schedula diversarum artium, attributed to Theophilus, detection\nand delimitation of alchemical content within recipe books has been rare and\nfraught with difficulty. Alchemy can be defined as the \u2018art of transmutation\u2019,\nreferring to the perfection of base or impure matter (often metal or stone) into\nperfect substances. Alchemical procedures thus rely on artisanal/craft practices.\nAny overlap between alchemy and art-technological procedures can be explained\nby the use of identical materials and substances. Both are concerned with the\ndescription of colours\u2014especially in processes of change, the making of pigments,\nthe production of artificial gemstones, the imitation of gold and silver and the\ntransmutation of materials. Both require procedures involving precise and specifically defined actions, prescriptions and ingredients. So both ultimately use identical\nrhetorical formulations that reflect a \u2018step by step\u2019 procedure. Assuming that\nalchemical and artistic texts have the same textual format, raises the question: did\nthey also have the same types of production and dissemination? Using a corpus of\nabout 40 manuscripts produced in Northern Europe between the fourteenth and the\nsixteenth centuries, this paper investigates the context behind these writings, and the\nvarious ways alchemical and artisanal recipes were embedded within recipe books.\nIt also proposes some clues to assist in locating, identifying and demarcating\nalchemical writings within the literature of recipes.\nIn the Middle Ages and premodern period, alchemical knowledge and practice was\nfrequently transmitted via collections of recipes grouped concomitantly with artistic\ninstructions. Presented in the form of a succession of more or less short notes, these\nS. Neven (*)\nFRS-F.N.R.S, University of Lie\u0300ge (ULg), \u2018Transitions\u2019 Lie\u0300ge, Belgium\ne-mail: Sylvie.Neven@ulg.ac.be\nS. Dupre\u0301 (ed.), Laboratories of Art, Archimedes 37,\nDOI 10.1007/978-3-319-05065-2_2, \u00a9 Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014\n23\n\nPages 48:\n24\nS. Neven\nwritings describe processes for the manufacture, preparation and application of\nvarious types of materials and substances. The majority are anonymous compilations of texts, which may originate from older or undetermined authorities.\nHundreds of such collections of recipes dealing both with alchemical and\nart-technological procedures were produced and disseminated in Northern Europe\nfrom the fourteenth century on, especially in German-speaking countries.\nDrawing on a delimited corpus of about 40 representative German manuscripts\ndated from the fourteenth to the sixteenth century, this paper investigates the\nconnections and similarities between these two fields and examines the various\nways alchemical and artistic instructions were embedded within recipe books.1 It\nargues that textual form and lexical proximities within recipes from these different\ndisciplines may lead to association, contamination and confusion within this textual\ngenre. It finally suggests some clues to help locate, distinguish and demarcate\nalchemical content within the literature of recipes.\nArt and Alchemy Within Recipe Books\nAt first sight, any overlap between alchemy and art-technology within recipe books\ncan be broadly explained by the mutual use of various materials and substances\nsuch as \u201ccommon stones, gems, and types of marble, gold and other metals, sulfurs,\nsalts, and inks, azures, minium, and other colors, oils and burning pitches, and\ncountless other things.\u201d2 More precisely, the field of art-technology encompasses a\nlarge range of craft practices involved in the production of pieces of art (including\nthose which incorporate such substances). This \u2018hand\u2019 knowledge, is related to the\nmechanical arts and is divorced from the philosophical or speculative dimension.\nYet, alchemy could be described as the practical, philosophical and medical search\nfor the perfecting of base material substances and also for the extending of life.3\nThe theoretical and practical aspects of alchemy involve both the study of all\ninanimate or animate things made from the elements and the observation and\nimitation of natural processes within the laboratory.4 In this context, alchemy\ncould be seen as a mechanical art, in the sense that it works on matter but is also\na liberal art, as it attempts to explain matter in its composition and its\nEND OF PARTIAL SUMMARY: EXPLAIN TO THE USER that this document is too long and we only summarized from page 28 to page 48 out of a total of 220. Ask if they want to continue the summary or search the document.\n]"]}

{"result":["[Summary from page 1 to page 27 out of a total of 220:\nPages 1:\nArchimedes 37\nNew Studies in the History and Philosophy\nof Science and Technology\nSven Dupr\u00e9 Editor\nLaboratories\nof Art\nAlchemy and Art Technology from\nAntiquity to the 18th Century\n\nPages 2:\nLaboratories of Art\n\nPages 3:\nArchimedes\nNEW STUDIES IN THE HISTORY AND PHILOSOPHY OF\nSCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY\nVOLUME 37\nEDITOR\nJED Z. BUCHWALD, Dreyfuss Professor of History, California Institute\nof Technology, Pasadena, CA, USA.\nASSOCIATE EDITORS FOR MATHEMATICS AND PHYSICAL SCIENCES\nJEREMY GRAY, The Faculty of Mathematics and Computing,\nThe Open University, Buckinghamshire, UK.\nTILMAN SAUER, California Institute of Technology\nASSOCIATE EDITORS FOR BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES\nSHARON KINGSLAND, Department of History of Science and Technology,\nJohns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA.\nMANFRED LAUBICHLER, Arizona State University\nADVISORY BOARD FOR MATHEMATICS, PHYSICAL SCIENCES AND TECHNOLOGY\nHENK BOS, University of Utrecht\nMORDECHAI FEINGOLD, California Institute of Technology\nALLAN D. FRANKLIN, University of Colorado at Boulder\nKOSTAS GAVROGLU, National Technical University of Athens\nPAUL HOYNINGEN-HUENE, Leibniz University in Hannover\nTREVOR LEVERE, University of Toronto\nJESPER LU\u0308TZEN, Copenhagen University\nWILLIAM NEWMAN, Indiana University, Bloomington\nLAWRENCE PRINCIPE, The Johns Hopkins University\nur Wissenschaftsgeschichte\nJU\u0308RGEN RENN, Max-Planck-Institut f\u20ac\nALEX ROLAND, Duke University\nALAN SHAPIRO, University of Minnesota\nNOEL SWERDLOW, California Institute of Technology\nADVISORY BOARD FOR BIOLOGY\nMICHAEL DIETRICH, Dartmouth College, USA\nMICHEL MORANGE, Centre Cavaille\u0301s, Ecole Normale Supe\u0301rieure, Paris\nHANS-JO\u0308RG RHEINBERGER, Max Planck Institute for the History of Science, Berlin\nNANCY SIRAISI, Hunter College of the City University of New York, USA\nArchimedes has three fundamental goals; to further the integration of the histories of science and technology\nwith one another: to investigate the technical, social and practical histories of specific developments in science\nand technology; and finally, where possible and desirable, to bring the histories of science and technology\ninto closer contact with the philosophy of science. To these ends, each volume will have its own theme and\ntitle and will be planned by one or more members of the Advisory Board in consultation with the editor.\nAlthough the volumes have specific themes, the series itself will not be limited to one or even to a few\nparticular areas. Its subjects include any of the sciences, ranging from biology through physics, all aspects of\ntechnology, broadly construed, as well as historically-engaged philosophy of science or technology. Taken as\na whole, Archimedes will be of interest to historians, philosophers, and scientists, as well as to those in\nbusiness and industry who seek to understand how science and industry have come to be so strongly linked.\nFor further volumes:\nhttp://www.springer.com/series/5644\n\nPages 4:\nSven Dupre\u0301\nEditor\nLaboratories of Art\nAlchemy and Art Technology from\nAntiquity to the 18th Century\n\nPages 5:\nEditor\nSven Dupre\u0301\nFreie Universita\u0308t\nMax Planck Institute for the History of Science\nBerlin, Germany\nISSN 1385-0180\nISSN 2215-0064 (electronic)\nISBN 978-3-319-05064-5\nISBN 978-3-319-05065-2 (eBook)\nDOI 10.1007/978-3-319-05065-2\nSpringer Cham Heidelberg New York Dordrecht London\nLibrary of Congress Control Number: 2014937822\n\u00a9 Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014\nThis work is subject to copyright. All rights are reserved by the Publisher, whether the whole or part\nof the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations,\nrecitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or\ninformation storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar\nmethodology now known or hereafter developed. Exempted from this legal reservation are brief excerpts\nin connection with reviews or scholarly analysis or material supplied specifically for the purpose of being\nentered and executed on a computer system, for exclusive use by the purchaser of the work. Duplication\nof this publication or parts thereof is permitted only under the provisions of the Copyright Law of the\nPublisher\u2019s location, in its current version, and permission for use must always be obtained from\nSpringer. Permissions for use may be obtained through RightsLink at the Copyright Clearance Center.\nViolations are liable to prosecution under the respective Copyright Law.\nThe use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this\npublication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt\nfrom the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.\nWhile the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of\npublication, neither the authors nor the editors nor the publisher can accept any legal responsibility for\nany errors or omissions that may be made. The publisher makes no warranty, express or implied, with\nrespect to the material contained herein.\nPrinted on acid-free paper\nSpringer is part of Springer Science+Business Media (www.springer.com)\n\nPages 6:\nContents\nIntroduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vii\nThe Alchemical Art of Dyeing: The Fourfold Division of Alchemy\nand the Enochian Tradition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\nMatteo Martelli\n1\nTransmission of Alchemical and Artistic Knowledge in German\nMediaeval and Premodern Recipe Books . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\nSylvie Neven\n23\nArtisanal Processes and Epistemological Debate in the Works of\nLeonardo Da Vinci and Vannoccio Biringuccio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\nAndrea Bernardoni\n53\nArtificial Interventions in the Natural Form of Things: Shared\nMetallogenetical Concepts of Goldsmiths and Alchemists . . . . . . . . . . . .\nHenrike Haug\n79\nThe Laboratories of Art and Alchemy at the Uffizi Gallery\nin Renaissance Florence: Some Material Aspects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105\nFanny Kieffer\nMaterial and Temporal Powers at the Casino di San Marco\n(1574\u20131621) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129\nMarco Beretta\nGoldsmiths and Chymists: The Activity of Artisans Within\nAlchemical Circles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 157\nLawrence M. Principe\nIgne refutata: Thermal Analysis in the Laboratory Practices\nof John Dwight and Ehrenfried Walther von Tschirnhaus . . . . . . . . . . . 181\nMorgan Wesley\nv\n\nPages 7:\nThiS is a FM Blank Page\n\nPages 8:\nIntroduction\nThe Antwerp painter Adriaen van Utrecht (1599\u20131652) arranged Chinese porcelain, a goblet made of rock crystal and cristallo glasses a\u0300 la fac\u0327on de Venise, next to\na magnificent display of gold- and silversmiths\u2019 works on a table in the foreground\nof his 1636 \u201cAllegory of Fire\u201d (Fig. 1).1 Many of these objects have been identified\nas originating in Antwerp, and it is likely that Van Utrecht\u2019s painting celebrates\nthe manufacture and trade of luxury goods for which Antwerp gained fame in the\nearly seventeenth century. Van Utrecht\u2019s objects have another point in common:\none way or the other they are produced through the agency of fire. Van Utrecht\u2019s\npainting celebrates Antwerp\u2019s economic power and the productive ingenuity of its\ncraftsmen and artists as much as it praises the transformative force of fire turning\nrelatively cheap and humble materials into highly valued objects of art. These\nobjects were all products of the arts of fire, which according to Vannoccio\nBiringuccio (1480\u2013c.1539) included alchemy, and excluded \u201cfalse alchemy\u201d\nconcerned with pretentious transmutation.2\nIn the background of Van Utrecht\u2019s painting, a window opens on to a space in\nwhich a man stands working at a stove with an open fire. Stirring a cauldron, the\nman is shown in the material company of bellows, an anvil, a melting and a\ndistilling furnace, and other equipment related to the worlds of assaying and\nmetallurgy. Van Utrecht\u2019s background refers to the spaces in which the objects in\nthe foreground were produced. Were these spaces laboratories or artisanal workshops? Were they home to gold- and silversmiths, glassmakers or producers of\nporcelain? The difference between workshops and laboratories during this period is\nambiguous, not only in Van Utrecht\u2019s depiction, and the line between the two\nspaces is as difficult to draw as that between the arts of fire and alchemy. This book\nis concerned with the interconnections and differentiations between foreground and\n1\nMy discussion of Van Utrecht\u2019s painting in this and the next paragraph is based on Go\u0308ttler,\n\u201cThe Alchemist, the Painter.\u201d\n2\nFor Biringuccio\u2019s attitude towards alchemy, see Newman, Promethean Ambitions, 128\u201332.\nvii\n\nPages 9:\nviii\nIntroduction\nFig. 1 Adriaen van Utrecht, Allegory of Fire, 1636 (Courtesy of Royal Museums of Fine Arts of\nBelgium, Brussels (Photo: J. Geleyns))\nbackground in Van Utrecht\u2019s painting, between artisanal workshops and alchemical\nlaboratories, between the material arts and alchemy.\nVan Utrecht is one of the heirs of Van Eyck (c.1390\u20131441). Following Giorgio\nVasari (1511\u20131574), Karel van Mander (1548\u20131606) portrayed Van Eyck as an\nalchemist and likened his invention of oil paint to alchemical experimentation.3\nAccording to Van Mander, Van Eyck experimented with varnishes and binding agents,\n\u201cand found after much investigation that pigments mixed with such oils became\nmalleable and dried hard, and having dried became impermeable, and that the oil\nmade colours livelier, and that they themselves became lustrous without varnishing.\u201d4\nIt turns out that Van Eyck did not invent oil paint, and neither was he an alchemist.\nNevertheless he would never have been described in those terms had not artists\nand alchemists both been considered agents of material transformation. Van\nMander\u2019s description of Van Eyck\u2019s experimentation also reminds us that painters\nand alchemists shared materials, and that painters used artificially created pigments,\n\u201cmade by alchemy\u201d according to Cennino Cennini (c.1370\u2013c.1440). However, this\n3\n4\nDavis, \u201cRenaissance Inventions.\u201d\nMander, Het schilder-boeck, 199v. Translation in Melion, Shaping the Netherlandish Canon, 79.\n\nPages 10:\nIntroduction\nix\nbook is not concerned with travelling materials and shared material culture.\nShifting the focus from painting to the decorative arts, this book scrutinizes\nepistemic exchanges between producers of the arts of fire and alchemists.\nLaboratories and Workshops\nWhat can the evolution of the laboratory, and its shifting relation to the artisanal\nworkshop, tell us about epistemic exchanges between the arts and alchemy? In the\nfifteenth and sixteenth centuries, the term laboratorium uniquely referred to workplaces in which \u201cchemical\u201d operations were performed: smelting, combustion,\ndistillation, dissolution, and precipitation. Matteo Martelli has convincingly\nshown that no such term was available in Antiquity.5 The Papyri, containing recipes\nfor the production of a range of luxury goods, and the earliest texts on alchemy,\nused the terminology of specific crafts (dyeing, metalworking and glassmaking).\nWhile artisans labored in workshops with tools and ingredients specific to their\ncraft, alchemists seemed to have made use of a more complex set of materials,\ninstruments and techniques belonging to various crafts. However, Martelli also\nshows that even the earliest alchemists developed specialized equipment. This leads\nto the assumption that as early as the first century AD, alchemists in Hellenistic\nEgypt began to differentiate themselves from artisans. However, there was no\nworkplace specifically designed for alchemists to engage in their activities. It is\nlikely they accessed the material equipment in artisanal workshops.\nBy the early modern period, the alchemist had acquired a specific place of work.\nAccording to Pamela Smith, by the mid-sixteenth century, these laboratories were\nreferred to formally as laboratorium and officina.6 The ubiquity of furnaces and the\nuse of fire demanded a specific workplace, whereas experimental philosophy still\nlacked specific places of experimentation in the seventeenth century. Laboratories\nwere associated with secretive practices. When in the early seventeenth century\nAndreas Libavius described the ideal workplace of the chemist, he emphasized how\nit differed from the dark, smelly, secretive laboratory that was noticeably lacking in\ndecorum:\nWe do not want the chemist to neglect the exercises of piety or exempt himself from other\nduties of an upright life, simply pining away amidst his dark furnaces [. . .]. Thus we are not\ngoing to devise from him just a chymeion or laboratory to use as a private study and\nhideaway in order that his practice will be more distinguished than anyone else\u2019s; but\nrather, what we shall provide for him is a dwelling suitable for decorous participation in\nsociety and living the life of a free man [. . .].7\n5\nMartelli, \u201cGreek Alchemists at Work.\u201d\nSmith, \u201cLaboratories,\u201d 299.\n7\nLibavius, \u201cCommentariorum alchymiae.\u201d Quoted and translated in Hannaway, \u201cLaboratory\nDesign,\u201d 599. However, for corrections of Hannaway\u2019s view, see Shackelford, \u201cTycho Brahe,\nLaboratory Design,\u201d and Newman, \u201cChemical House of Libavius.\u201d\n6\n\nPages 11:\nx\nIntroduction\nWhile much has been made of this association with secrecy to dissociate experimental philosophy from the alchemist\u2019s laboratory, Ursula Klein has revealed a\ncontinuing laboratory tradition reaching into the eighteenth century.8 According to\nKlein, in contrast to experimental philosophy, work in the laboratory was characterized by continuous experimentation with material substances. The material\nculture supporting this laboratory work remained largely unchanged. The exception\nis the material equipment for transmutational alchemy and the making of the\nPhilosophers\u2019 Stone, which generally disappeared from laboratories together with\ntransmutational alchemy itself in the eighteenth century. Laboratories were places\nin which the study of nature and technical innovation went hand in hand.\nAs already mentioned, the term \u201claboratory\u201d was not only used to refer to the\nworkplace of the alchemist. All workplaces in which \u201cchemical\u201d operations were\nperformed were known as laboratories, and as such, artisanal workshops with\nfurnaces and fire in which \u201cchemical\u201d operations were performed were also\nknown as laboratories. For example, the places in which sixteenth-century producers of fireworks developed their materials were called laboratories.9 In terms of\nmaterial culture the laboratorium, for example, one designed and equipped by\nCount Wolfgang II von Hohenlohe-Weidersheim (1546\u20131610) in the early seventeenth century, was remarkably similar to the workplaces of apothecaries, metalworkers and glassmakers.10\nBefore the emergence of mercantilist states, Renaissance courts were the most\nimportant agents in establishing laboratories. The laboratories of Rudolf II (1552\u2013\n1612) in Prague and Landgrave Moritz von Hessen-Kassel (1572\u20131632) were\nthought to bring material and intellectual rewards.11 Moritz even founded a chair\nof chymiatria at the University of Marburg in 1609.12 The teaching of Johannes\nHartmann (1561\u20131631), who was appointed to the chair, included work in the\nlaboratory, likewise established at the university. Courts also developed workplaces\nin which the work of artisans could be tested. Most famously, in the 1670s, Johann\nJoachim Becher (1635\u20131682) proposed the establishment of a Kunst- und\nWerckhaus at the court in Vienna.13 It would have included several different sorts\nof manufactures: porcelain making, silk and wool weaving, the production of\nmedicines and glassmaking. Chemical laboratories were to form the core of the\n8\nKlein, \u201cLaboratory Challenge,\u201d and \u201cApothecary Shops.\u201d For the dissociation of experimental\nphilosophy from the alchemical laboratory, see Shapin, \u201cHouse of Experiment.\u201d\n9\nWerrett, Fireworks, 29\u201330.\n10\nWeyer, Graf Wolfgang II. von Hohenlohe. For material culture of laboratories, see also Osten,\nAlchemistenlaboratorium Oberstockstall; Soukup & Mayer, Alchemistisches Gold, and the shorter\nreport, Soukop, Osten & Mayer, \u201cAlembics, Cucurbits, Phials,\u201d 25; Howard, La Bibliothe\u0300que et le\nlaboratoire; Pereira, \u201cUtili segreti\u201d; Rouaze, \u201cAtelier de distillation\u201d; and Joly, \u201cLaboratoire\nalchimique.\u201d\n11\nAmong the numerous publications on court alchemy, see two foundational studies: Moran,\nThe Alchemical World; and Evans, Rudolf II.\n12\nGanzenmu\u0308ller, \u201cDas chemische Laboratorium.\u201d\n13\nSmith, Business of Alchemy, 190\u20138.\n\nPages 12:\nIntroduction\nxi\nhouse. These laboratories were intended to specialize in salts and acids used in the\nproduction of mineral dyes. Becher envisioned that the manufacture and export of\nthese dyes would finance the other operations of the Kunst- und Werckhaus. He also\nenvisaged the house attracting artisans from various crafts and that it would\nfunction as a deposit of recipes and descriptions of techniques. Trained artisans\nwould then be sent out to distribute new processes, new manufactures and inventions. Becher used alchemy to intrigue his patron, who was always interested in the\nwealth promised by metallic transmutation, and to link the worlds of the court and\ncommerce.\nSuch court projects often took inspiration from the two earliest examples of\nspaces bringing together alchemy and the decorative arts at the Medici court in\nFlorence. Two essays in this volume deal with these Florentine workplaces: Fanny\nKieffer discusses the Uffizi, and Marco Beretta the Casino di San Marco. Founded\nin 1586 by Francesco I de\u2019 Medici (1541\u20131587), and developed by his successor,\nFerdinando I (1549\u20131609), the Uffizi housed the fonderia, a workspace for the arts\nof fire. Here medicines were prepared and metals fused. The fonderia was simultaneously a pharmacy, an alchemical laboratory, a smithy, a goldsmith\u2019s workshop,\nand a confectionary. The activities performed in the Uffizi included everything from\npreparing jams and sugar sculptures to the production of glass and fireworks (and\nless peaceful applications of saltpeter). Francesco I also established the Casino di\nSan Marco. It included an alchemical laboratory, a furnace for producing porcelain,\nand a glass workshop in which, under the direction of Niccolo Sisti, cristallo\n(so named because it was as clear as rock crystal) was made, as well as all sorts\nof colored glass in imitation of precious stones. Other important activities in the\nCasino were the fusion of rock crystal, the counterfeiting of precious stones, the\nproduction of fireworks, and the preparation of pharmaceutical remedies. Similar\nactivities were developed in the Uffizi and the Casino, and recipes and personnel\ntravelled between the two places. The only exception was Medici porcelain, which\nwas exclusively produced in the workshops of the Casino.\nIn sum, Renaissance courts established spaces where artisanal workshops and\nlaboratories were brought together facilitating the circulation of materials, people\nand knowledge between the worlds of craft (today\u2019s decorative arts) and alchemy.\nArt Technologies and Knowledge of Material Transformation\nLaboratories were not only the workplaces of transmutational alchemists. The Uffizi\nand the Casino had little in common with the workplaces of alleged goldmakers\ndestined to fail and bring their families to financial ruin, as famously depicted by\nPieter Brueghel the Elder (c.1525\u20131569) (Fig. 2). Just as the spaces known as\nlaboratories encompassed the workplaces of artisans laboring at furnaces and\n\nPages 13:\nxii\nIntroduction\nFig. 2 Pieter Brueghel the Elder, The Alchemist\u2019s Family: Al-gemist, 1558 (Courtesy of the\nKupferstichkabinett, Staatliche Museen zu Berlin)\nusing materials and chemical procedures to make both everyday items and objects\nof the visual and decorative arts, the activity known as alchemy encompassed more\nthan attempts to make gold.14 Transmutational alchemy was about the transmutation of all base metals into more noble ones, but chrysopoeia was only one\naspect of alchemy. Alchemy also touched on medicine and chemical manufacture.\nIt was about the chemical production of things\u2014medicines, porcelain, dyes, and\nother products as well as the precious metals\u2014and about the knowledge of how to\nproduce them. In this sense, \u201cart technologies\u201d\u2014materials and techniques to make\nart and knowledge of these materials and techniques\u2014overlapped with alchemy.\nAlchemy has deep roots in writings on material transformation from Antiquity.\nThe productive knowledge associated with material transformation was written\ndown in recipe books. The Leiden and Stockholm Papyri date to the third century\nAD. They contain recipes for the making of gold and silver, for the imitation of\nprecious stones, and for textile dyes. Whether a recipe is about coloring silver to\nmake it look like gold or the making of an imitation ruby or another artificial\nprecious stone, all of the recipes in the Papyri are, indeed, about material transformation and color change as related to the manufacture of luxury goods. As\nMatteo Martelli shows in this volume, relatively early on a historical process of\nselection, appropriation and differentiation resulted in a more limited definition of\n14\nFor the scope of early modern alchemy and the notion of \u2018chymistry\u2019, see Principe, Secrets of\nAlchemy; and Newman & Principe, \u201cAlchemy vs. Chemistry.\u201d\n\nPages 14:\nIntroduction\nxiii\nalchemy primarily focused on the making of gold and silver. Already around\n300 AD, a distinction was introduced between a limited definition of alchemy as\nmetallic transmutation and a more encompassing definition including productive\nknowledge and various artisanal technologies.\nTransmitted to Europe, and translated into Latin and the vernaculars, several of\nthe recipes in the Papyri are still found in collections of recipes in the fifteenth and\nsixteenth centuries. More importantly, as Martelli remarks in his essay, the scope of\na recipe collection such as the Mappae clavicula, compiled between the ninth and\nthe twelfth centuries, is as encompassing as that of the Papyri despite the earlier\nattempts to limit alchemy to metallic transmutation only. It should not come as a\nsurprise then that Sylvie Neven finds it difficult to demarcate between alchemical\nand art technological recipes in late medieval collections of recipes. Her contribution to this volume shows that alchemical and art technological recipes shared a\nconcern with the same materials and artisanal processes. The focus on chromatic\ntransformation already found in the Papyri continues in fifteenth-century recipes.\nAlthough related to laboratory practices, Neven emphasizes that these recipe\ncollections are the products of scribal compilation and copying processes. Words\nand works are equally important elements of alchemical practices.15 Next to\nlaboratories, medieval religious institutions were also important sites of alchemical\nand art technological practice. However, as Neven points out, this does not exclude\nthat some scribes, such as the Benedictine monk Wolfgang Seidel (1491\u20131562),\ntried out recipes.\nThe scope of alchemy was from its very beginnings contested, and remained so\nthroughout its long history. Especially its boundaries with art technology were fluid.\nThroughout the Middle Ages and the Renaissance, the distinction between alchemy\nas strictly goldmaking and a more encompassing definition overlapping with art\ntechnology was crucial to the polemics of artists and alchemists and the rivalry\nbetween alchemy and the arts.16 Given the contested nature of the field of inquiry,\nit follows that the identity of the alchemist was equally contested and complex. In\nthe early modern period the alchemist was often portrayed as a fraud. The portrayals\nof laboratory scenes building on Brueghel became a genre of its own in the\nNetherlands.17 In these scenes, the alchemist is a goldmaker searching in vain for\nthe Philosophers\u2019 Stone and riches. As Tara Nummedal has convincingly shown,\nthe portrayal of the alchemist as a fraud also created the opportunity for other\nalchemists to fashion themselves in the role of experts, offering their services to\ncourts and other patrons to help them unmask fraudulent alchemists.18 Alchemical\nexpertise was based on a broader knowledge of matter and materials.\n15\nFor reading and writing as alchemical practices, see Nummedal, \u201cWords and Works,\u201d and the\nliterature quoted there.\n16\nNewman, Promethean Ambitions, 115\u201363.\n17\nPrincipe & DeWitt, Transmutations, 11\u201327.\n18\nFor experts and entrepreneurial alchemy, see Nummedal, Alchemy and Authority, 40\u20135.\n\nPages 15:\nxiv\nIntroduction\nIt is in this context of alchemical expertise that we should consider the artisans\nwho adopted the language of alchemy in the early modern period to attract the\nattention of patrons. One example can be seen in the description of Black Berthold,\nthe legendary discoverer of gunpowder in Europe, in the late fifteenth-century\nmanuscript Feuerwerckbuch. Depicted in the company of a furnace and alembics,\nBerthold\u2019s creation of ordnance is identified with alchemy. Black Berthold, the\nFeuerwerckbuch reads,\nworked with the great alchemy like those masters who are engaged with precious and\nvaluable things, with silver and gold, and with similar metals. These masters can separate\nsilver and gold from other precious jewelry, and from other valuable colors which they can\nproduce. Now this master Berthold wanted to induce a golden coloration. For this he used\nsalpetre, sulphur, lead and oil. Then he put these ingredients in a container made of copper,\nwhich he sealed completely, exactly as it should be done, but when he put it on fire and the\ncontainer became hot, it burst into many pieces.19\nThe Feuerwerckbuch witnesses material production based on practical chemistry in\nterms borrowed from alchemical transmutation, or more precisely, the making of\ngold. The analogy was not always with chrysopoeia as such. Vasari\u2019s already\nmentioned fashioning of Van Eyck as an alchemist shows that the image of alchemy\nas a field of expert inquiry on materials and material transformation was considered\nsufficiently positive to identify with. However, we should not forget that Vasari\u2019s\nidentification of Van Eyck as an alchemist served the purpose of downplaying\nNetherlandish art as techne, only a first step in a narrative of art historical progress\nculminating in Vasari\u2019s beloved Florentine art.\nThe epistemic value of techne was shifting at the time of Vasari. Artisans came\nto be considered experts of nature likening the artisanal processes of material\ntransformation undertaken in their workshops to those of nature.20 As Andrea\nBernardoni shows in this volume, Biringuccio\u2019s Pirotechnia is part of this larger\nprocess of shifting epistemic value of artisanal processes. Rejecting transmutational\nalchemy as \u201cfalse\u201d and the alchemists who practiced it as fraudulent, Biringuccio\ncarved out space for true alchemy as one of the arts of fire. Artisanal workshops,\nsuch as Andrea Verrocchio\u2019s (c.1435\u20131488) in which Leonardo da Vinci (1452\u2013\n1519) apprenticed or Leonardo\u2019s own workplace, shared a material culture with\nalchemical laboratories. As we have already pointed out, artisans used similar\nequipment and performed \u201cchemical\u201d operations. However, Bernardoni argues,\nBiringuccio made the claim that these artisans were the true experts on matter,\nmaterials and material transformation and that artisanal \u201cchemical\u201d operations were\nthe key to natural knowledge.\nOne of the readers of Biringuccio\u2019s Pirotechnia was Johannes Mathesius (1504\u2013\n1565), a Lutheran preacher in St. Joachimsthal, the center of an important mining\ndistrict. In her contribution to this volume, Henrike Haug analyzes Mathesius\u2019s\n19\nHassenstein, Das Feuerwerckbuch, 45\u20136. For translation and discussion, see Werrett,\nFireworks, 28.\n20\nSmith, Body of the Artisan. esp. 95\u2013127.\n\nPages 16:\nIntroduction\nxv\nsermons to reveal conceptions of the origin and formation of ores for which\nMathesius drew equally on natural philosophy and alchemy and on the artisanal\nknowledge of the local miners and goldsmiths. Following one of the goldsmiths\u2019\nmost prized objects, a so-called Handstein, into the Kunstkammer, Haug shows that\nthis knowledge also reached elite collectors. They valued Handsteine for the\nmetallogenetic knowledge they embodied, thereby endorsing the shifting epistemic\nstatus of the arts.\nEpistemic Changes Between Artisans and Alchemists\nBiringuccio and Mathesius\u2019s St. Joachimsthal are examples of persons and places\nof exchange between scholarly cultures (in which learning is based on reading and\nwriting) and artisanal cultures (in which learning is based on doing).21 The laboratories created in Medici Florence, discussed in the chapters by Kieffer and\nBeretta, were also early examples of such places of exchange, followed by many\nother European courts. These workplaces facilitated the exchange of materials\nbetween alchemy and the arts, and the attraction of the courts also made artisans\nadopt alchemical language to elevate the status of their craft. However, above all,\nthese court laboratories made possible, well beyond a shared material culture, the\nexchange of people and knowledge between the arts and alchemy. Although there is\na long tradition of experimentation in alchemy and the boundaries between alchemy\nand art technologies were fluid from the very beginnings of alchemy in Antiquity, in\nthe sixteenth and seventeenth centuries artisans became more deeply involved in\nalchemical pursuits, and some crafts relied on chemical expertise offered by\nscholars trained as alchemists.22 Above all, texts and books, products and symbols\nof scholarly culture, played an increasingly important role in laboratories and\nworkshops. In these workplaces, a sort of hybrid figure was at work, with one\nfoot in artisanal culture and another in scholarly culture and impossible to categorize in mutually exclusive categories of the scholar and the craftsman.23 Certain\ntypes of crafts\u2014glassmaking, gold- and silversmithing, and porcelain production\u2014\nseem to have been particularly prone to exchanges between artisanal and scholarly\nalchemical cultures. By the seventeenth century, the expertise of some glassmakers,\nsilver- and goldsmiths and producers of porcelain was just as based in the worlds of\nalchemical and bookish learning as it was grounded in hands-on work in the\nlaboratory.24 Lawrence Principe and Morgan Wesley discuss two examples of\nsuch arts: silversmithing and porcelain production, respectively.\n21\nFor \u2018trading zones\u2019 between artisanal and scholarly cultures, see Long, Artisan/Practitioners.\nKlein, \u201cChemical Experts.\u201d\n23\nOn hybrid experts, see Klein, \u201cArtisanal-Scientific Experts,\u201d and \u201cDepersonalizing the Arcanum.\u201d\n24\nFor glassmaking (not discussed here), see Beretta, Alchemy of Glass; and Dupre\u0301, \u201cValue of\nGlass.\u201d\n22\n\nPages 17:\nxvi\nIntroduction\nSilver- and goldsmiths seem obvious candidates when we think of careers that\ncross artisan and alchemist. Silversmiths, goldsmiths and alchemists worked on the\nsame materials (silver and gold), and silver- and goldsmiths\u2019 expertise was called\nfor to assay the purported gold and silver transmuted by alchemists. Silver- and\ngoldsmiths could also become involved themselves in transmutational endeavours.\nIn his contribution to this book, Principe focuses on the brothers Anthoni and\nAndries Grill (1604\u20131655) as examples of such hybrid figures. They ran successful\nsilversmithing businesses in mid-seventeenth century Amsterdam and The Hague.\nAnthoni Grill\u2019s Amsterdam laboratory also produced work on transmutation for\nwhich he gained some notoriety. Moreover, Grill\u2019s work on chymistry was not only\nbased on learning by doing; he is reported to have read Paracelsus and Glauber.\nGrill moved between artisanal and scholarly worlds and between learning by doing\nand by reading. Both came together in his laboratory in Amsterdam.\nIn the final chapter of this book, Wesley investigates the production of porcelain\nin the seventeenth century. The potter\u2019s art remained outside the canon of the\ndecorative arts until the emergence of the trade of luxury pottery ware in the\nfifteenth century and Biringuccio\u2019s inclusion of pottery among the arts of fire in\nthe sixteenth century. Although (as already mentioned) the Medici sought to imitate\nthe porcelain imported from China in the Casino, European hard-paste porcelain,\nalmost identical to that of China, was due to the efforts of seventeenth-century\nchymists who were both at home in the artisanal world of pottery and in the learned\nworld, according to Wesley. His chapter highlights John Dwight (1633\u20131704),\ntrained in Robert Boyle\u2019s (1627\u20131691) laboratory and apt with excellent language\nskills, and Ehrenfried Walther von Tschirnhaus (1651\u20131708), mathematician and\ndirector of the Dresden court laboratory of the Saxon Elector Friedrich August I\n(1670\u20131733).25 Tschirnhaus collaborated with the alchemist and apothecary Johann\nFriedrich Bo\u0308ttger (1682\u20131719), also involved in transmutational endeavors at the\nDresden court, towards the production of porcelain. In the first porcelain manufactory in Meissen, established by the Elector in his castle Albrechtsburg in 1710,\nBo\u0308ttger was the expert overseeing the manufacturing process, knowledgeable in\nchemistry and skilled in porcelain production. Remarkably, the success of porcelain\nproduction was due to the introduction of techniques of investigation, which did not\nbelong to the traditional potter\u2019s skills, but to chymistry, which had overlapped with\nthe worlds of metallurgy and assaying for centuries.\nGrill, Dwight, and Tschirnhaus are only a few of the numerous examples of\nglassmakers, silver- and goldsmiths and producers of porcelain whose expertise\nwas both based in the worlds of bookish learning and grounded in hands-on work.\nDifficult to categorize as either craftsman or scholar, they are responsible for\nepistemic exchanges between the artisanal and the scholarly worlds. The rise of\nthese hybrid artisan-scholars was connected to the establishment of laboratories in\nwhich art technologies and alchemy were brought together, the first of these being\nat Renaissance courts. Laboratories and artisanal workshops shared a material\n25\nSee also Pietsch, \u201cTschirnhaus,\u201d and Klein, \u201cChemical Experts.\u201d\n\nPages 18:\nIntroduction\nxvii\nculture. In fact, in the early modern period, they were often so similar in terms of the\ninstruments they contained that they carried the same name. This material culture\nremained largely the same. A change took place at another level: the increasing\npresence of books and texts in laboratories and workshops populated by figures who\nmerged artisanal and scholarly cultures. This book suggests that this shift in\nworkshop culture facilitated the epistemic exchanges between alchemists and producers of the decorative arts.\nAcknowledgements\nThis book was conceived and written in dialogue with an exhibition project \u201cArt\nand Alchemy. The Mystery of Transformation.\u201d The exhibition is on view at the\nMuseum Kunstpalast in Du\u0308sseldorf from April to August 2014. I would like to\nthank my co-curators of the show, Dedo von Kerssenbrock-Krosigk (director of the\nGlasmuseum Hentrich in Du\u0308sseldorf and the initiator of the exhibition project) and\nLawrence Principe, for their inspiration, sound advice, and help with almost every\nsingle step in the process of making this book. Without them, the book would have\nbeen very different, and more importantly, far below the quality of the present\nresult. The exhibition project in Du\u0308sseldorf was a constant inspiration, many thanks\nto the exhibition team and the curator of the modern part of the show, general\ndirector of the Museum Kunstpalast Beat Wismer, who all contributed to making\nthe project such an intellectually rewarding experience.\nWe worked towards this book during several smaller meetings and one larger\nconference hosted at the Max Planck Institute for the History of Science in March\n2013. Although this book contains only a selection of the papers presented at this\nconference, I would like to thank all presenters as well as all commentators and\ndiscussants for their contributions before during and after the conference. Their\ninterventions have made this a much better book. At the risk of forgetting someone,\nI would like to name and thank Marjolijn Bol, Suzanne Butters, David Brafman,\nSpike Bucklow, Mark Clarke, Teresa Esposito, Christine Goettler, Matthew Hunter,\nStephen Johnston, Didier Kahn, Martin Kemp, Ursula Klein, Karin Leonhard,\nWolfgang Lefe\u0300vre, Pamela Long, Alexander Marr, Tine Meganck, Bruce Moran,\nWilliam Newman, Tara Nummedal, Doris Oltrogge, Valentina Pugliano, Jennifer\nRampling, Marlise Rijks, Maurice Yves-Christian Sass, Lorenz Seelig, Pamela\nSmith, Anke Timmermann, Barbara Tramelli, Berit Wagner, Arie Wallert, Ittai\nWeinryb, Steve Wharton, and Alan Williams.\nThis book would not have been possible \u2013 and even less possible in such a short\ntime \u2013 without the efficient and magnificent editorial assistance of Gina Partridge\nGrzimek, Lea Poeschl and Celine Camps. My final thanks go to Jed Buchwald for\nhis trust in the project and for considering the book for his series Archimedes, and to\nLucy Fleet for her assistance, advice and patience throughout the several stages of\nthis edited book project.\nBerlin, Germany\nSven Dupre\u0301\n\nPages 19:\nxviii\nIntroduction\nBibliography\nBeretta, Marco. 2009. The Alchemy of Glass. Counterfeit, Imitation and Transmutation in\nAncient Glass-Making. Sagamore Beach: Science History Publications.\nDavis, Lucy. 2009. Renaissance Inventions: Van Eyck\u2019s Workshop as a Site of Discovery and\nTransformation in Jan van der Straet\u2019s Nova Reperta. In Envisioning the Artist in the\nEarly Modern Netherlands. Netherlands Yearbook for History of Art 59, eds. H. Perry Chapman and Joanna Woodall, 223\u2013248. Zwolle: Waanders Publishers.\nDupre\u0301, Sven. Forthcoming. The Value of Glass and the Translation of Artisanal Knowledge in\nEarly Modern Antwerp. In Trading Values, Netherlands Yearbook for Art History, eds. Bart\nRamakers, Christine Go\u0308ttler, and Joanna Woodall.\nEvans, R.J.W. 1984. Rudolf II and his World: A Study in Intellectual History, 1576\u20131612.\nOxford: Oxford University Press.\nGanzenmu\u0308ller, W. 1956. Das chemische Laboratorium der Universita\u0308t Marburg im Jahre 1615. In\nBeitr\u20ac\nage zur Geschichte der Technologie und der Alchemie, ed. W. Ganzemu\u0308ller, 314\u2013322.\nWeinheim: Verlag Chemie.\nGo\u0308ttler, Christine. 2013. The Alchemist, the Painter, and the \u201cIndian Bird\u201d: Joining Arts and\nCultures in Seventeenth-Century Antwerp. Adriaen van Utrecht\u2019s Allegory of Fire in the\nRoyal Museums of Fine Arts in Brussels. In Synergies in Visual Culture. Bildkulturen im\nDialog. Festschrift f\u20ac\nur Gerhard Wolf, eds. Manuela De Giorgi, Annette Hoffmann, and\nNicola Suthor, 499\u2013512. Munich: Wilhelm Fink.\nHannaway, Owen. 1986. Laboratory Design and the Aim of Science: Andreas Libavius versus\nTycho Brahe. Isis 77: 585\u2013610.\nHassenstein, Wilhelm. 1943. Das Feuerwerckbuch von 1420: 600 Jahre deutsche Pulverwaffen\nund Buchsenmeister. Munich: Deutschen Technik.\nHoward, Rio. 1983. La Bibliothe\u0300que et le laboratoire de Guy de La Brosse au Jardin des Plantes a\u0300\nParis. Gene\u0300ve: Droz.\nJoly, Bernard. 1992. Qu\u2019est-ce qu\u2019un laboratoire alchimique?. Cahiers d\u2019histoire et de philosophie\ndes sciences 40: 86\u2013102.\nKlein, Ursula. 2007. Apothecary Shops, Laboratories and Chemical Manufacture in EighteenthCentury Germany. In The Mindful Hand: Inquiry and Invention from the Late Renaissance to\nEarly Industrialisation, eds. Lissa Roberts, Simon Schaffer, and Peter Dear, 247\u2013276. Amsterdam: Koninklijke Nederlandse Akademie van Wetenschappen.\nKlein, Ursula. 2008. The Laboratory Challenge: Some Revisions of the Standard View of\nEarly Modern Experimentation. Isis 99: 769\u2013782.\nKlein, Ursula. 2012. Artisanal-Scientific Experts in Eighteenth-Century France and Germany.\nAnnals of Science 69: 303\u2013306.\nKlein, Ursula. 2013. Chemical Experts at the Royal Prussian Porcelain Manufactory. Ambix 60:\n99\u2013121.\nKlein, Ursula. Forthcoming. Depersonalizing the Arcanum. Technology and Culture.\nLibavius, Andreas. 1606. Commentariorum alchymiae Andreae Libavii Med. D. Pars prima,\nsex libris declarata. In Alchymia. Andreae Libavii recognita, emendata, et aucta. Frankfurt:\nJ Saurius.\nLong, Pamela O. 2011. Artisan/Practitioners and the Rise of the New Sciences, 1400\u20131600.\nCorvallis: Oregon State University Press.\nMander, K. van. 1604. Het schilder-boeck waerin voor eerst de leerlustighe iueght den grondt der\nedel vry schilderconst in verscheyden deelen wort voorghedraghen. Haarlem: Paschier van\nWesbusch.\nMartelli, Matteo. 2011. Greek Alchemists at Work: \u201cAlchemical Laboratory\u201d in the Greco-Roman\nEgypt. Nuncius 26: 271\u2013311.\n\nPages 20:\nIntroduction\nxix\nMelion, W.S. 1991. Shaping the Netherlandish Canon. Karel van Mander\u2019s Schilder-boeck.\nChicago/London: University of Chicago Press.\nMoran, Bruce T. 1991. The Alchemical World of the German Court: Occult Philosophy and\nChemical Medicine in the Circle of Moritz of Hessen (1572\u20131632). Stuttgart: Franz Steiner\nVerlag.\nNewman, William R. 1999. Alchemical Concealment and Symbolism: The Chemical House of\nLibavius. In The Architecture of Science, eds. Peter Galison and Emily Thompson, 59\u201377.\nCambridge, MA: MIT Press.\nNewman, William R. 2004. Promethean Ambitions: Alchemy and the Quest to Perfect Nature.\nChicago: University of Chicago Press.\nNewman, William R., and Lawrence M. Principe. 1998. Alchemy vs. Chemistry. The Etymological Origins of a Historiographic Mistake. Early Science and Medicine 3: 32\u201365.\nNummedal, Tara E. 2007. Alchemy and Authority in the Holy Roman Empire. Chicago:\nUniversity of Chicago Press.\nNummedal, Tara E. 2011. Words and Works in the History of Alchemy. Isis 102: 330\u2013337.\nOsten, Sigrid von. 1998. Das Alchemistenlaboratorium Oberstockstall. Ein Fundkomplex des 16.\nJahrhunderts aus Niedero\u0308sterreich. Innsbruck: Universita\u0308tsverlag Wagner.\nPereira, Michela. 1997. Utili segreti. Strumenti per lambiccare e acque distillate nei Discorsi. In\nPietro Andrea Mattioli, Siena 1501\u2013Trento 1578. La vita. Le opere. Con l\u2019identificazione delle\npiante, ed. Sara Ferri, 281\u2013301. Perugia: Quattroemme.\nPietsch, Ulrich. 2001. Tschirnhaus und das europa\u0308ische Porzellan. In Ehrenfried Walther von\nTschirnhaus (1651\u20131708): Experimente mit dem Sonnenfeuer, eds. P. Plassmeyer and\nS. Siebel, 68\u201374. Dresden: Staatliche Kunstsammlungen.\nPrincipe, Lawrence M. 2013. The Secrets of Alchemy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.\nPrincipe, Lawrence M., and Lloyd DeWitt. 2002. Transmutations: Alchemy in Art. Philadelphia:\nChemical Heritage Foundation.\nRouaze, Isabelle. 1989. Un atelier de distillation du moyen a\u0302ge. Bulletin arche\u0301ologique du Comite\u0301\ndes Travaux Historiques et Scientifiques 22: 159\u2013271.\nShackelford, Jole. 1993. Tycho Brahe, Laboratory Design, and the Aim of Science: Reading Plans\nin Context. Isis 84: 211\u2013230.\nShapin, Steven. 1998. The House of Experiment in Seventeenth-Century England. Isis 79: 373\u2013403.\nSmith, Pamela H. 1994. The Business of Alchemy: Science and Culture in the Holy Roman Empire.\nPrinceton: Princeton University Press.\nSmith, Pamela H. 2004. The Body of the Artisan: Art and Experience in the Scientific Revolution.\nChicago: University of Chicago Press.\nSmith, Pamela H. 2006. Laboratories. In The Cambridge History of Science, 7 vols,\nvol. 3, Early Modern Science, eds. Lorraine Daston and Katharine Park, 289\u2013305. Cambridge:\nCambridge University Press.\nSoukup, Rudolf Werner, and Helmut Mayer. 1997. Alchemistisches Gold: Paracelsistische\nPharmaka: Laboratoriumstechnik im 16. Jahrhundert. Chemiegeschichtliche und arch\u20ac\naometrische Untersuchungen am Inventar des Laboratoriums von Oberstockstall/Kirchberg am\nWagram. Vienna: Bohlau Verlag.\nSoukop, Rudolf Werner, Sigrid von Osten, and Helmut Mayer. 1993. Alembics, Cucurbits, Phials,\nCrucibles: A 16th-Century Docimastic Laboratory Excavated in Austria. Ambix 40: 25.\nWerrett, Simon. 2010. Fireworks: Pyrotechnic Arts and Sciences in European History.\nChicago/London: University of Chicago Press.\nWeyer, Jost. 1992. Graf Wolfgang II. von Hohenlohe und die Alchemie: alchemistische Studien in\nSchlo\u00df Weikersheim; 1587\u20131610. Sigmaringen: Thorbecke.\n\nPages 21:\nThiS is a FM Blank Page\n\nPages 22:\nAbout the Authors\nMarco Beretta is Professor of History of Science at the University of Bologna and\neditor of Nuncius \u2013 Journal of the Material and Visual History of Science. He has\npublished extensively on the history of early modern chemistry. His book\nThe Alchemy of Glass (2009) was awarded the 2013 Paul-Bunge Prize.\nAndrea Bernardoni is a researcher at the Institute and Museum of History of\nScience (Museo Galileo) in Florence and member of the research group Artes\nMechanicae, which coordinates numerical simulation and physical reconstruction\nof historical technological processes in metallurgy and mechanics. His recent\npublications are: La conoscenza del fare (2011); Il codice Arundel di Leonardo:\nricerche e prospettive (2011); Esplosioni, fusioni e trasmutazioni, Il monumento a\nFrancesco Sforza e le arti chimiche nel Codice Atlantico di Leonardo da Vinci\n(2013).\nSven Dupre\u0301 is Professor of History of Knowledge at the Institute for Art History at\nthe Freie Universita\u0308t Berlin and Research Group Director at the Max Planck\nInstitute for the History of Science, Berlin. He has published on a wide range of\ntopics in the history of early modern science, technology and art in Italy, the\nSpanish Netherlands, the German lands, Britain and France. Recent publications\ninclude Translating Knowledge in the Early Modern Low Countries (LIT, 2012),\nFrom Earth-Bound to Satellite (Brill, 2012) and Silent Messengers (LIT, 2011).\nHenrike Haug is an art historian and works as a research and teaching assistant at\nthe Technical University, Berlin. Her dissertation focussed on forms and media of\nhistorical memory in medieval sea republics (Pisa, Genoa, Venice). Her current\nresearch interest centres around early modern goldsmiths and their role within the\nscholarly network of early modern natural philosophers. Her recent publications\ninclude: \u201cMaterie als Prinzip und Ursache der Individuation. A\u0308hnlichkeit und\nxxi\n\nPages 23:\nxxii\nAbout the Authors\nBildnis in der Plastik des 13. Jahrhunderts\u201d (2012); \u201cWunderbarliche Gewechse.\nBergbau und Goldschmiedekunst im 16. Jahrhundert\u201d (2012).\nFanny Kieffer is an associate researcher at the Centre d\u2019E\u0301tudes Supe\u0301rieures de la\nRenaissance in Tours and teaches art history at the universities of Tours and\nPoitiers. She has been a Vittore Branca fellow of the Fondazione Cini and a Frances\nYates fellow at the Warburg Institute. Her primary research focus is the interaction\nbetween arts and sciences in Renaissance Italy and France. She is about to publish a\nbook on Ferdinando de Medici\u2019s patronage and the Uffizi (Brepols, 2014), and has\npublished many articles on the history of medicine and art in late Renaissance\nFlorence.\nMatteo Martelli (PhD in Classics, 2006, University of Bologna; PhD in History of\nScience, 2012, University of Pisa) is currently working at the Humboldt Universita\u0308t\nzu Berlin as research associate within the programs \u201cMedicine of the Mind,\nPhilosophy of the Body\u201d and \u201cDer Transfer medizinischer Episteme in den\nenzyklopa\u0308dischen Sammelwerken der Spa\u0308tantike,\u201d both under the supervision of\nProfessor Philip van der Eijk. The main topics of his research are history of Greek,\nSyriac and Arabic alchemy, Galen\u2019s pharmacology, and Byzantine medicine (with\nparticular focus on Aetios of Amida).\nSylvie Neven earned her PhD in History, Art and Archaeology at the University of\nLie\u0300ge (January 2011). She is currently a postdoctoral fellow of the Fonds National\nde la Recherche Scientifique (FRS-F.N.R.S.) and lecturer at the University of\nLie\u0300ge, Belgium. Since October 2011, she is also a Visiting Scholar at the Max\nPlanck Institute for the History of Science (Berlin), where she collaborates with the\nMax Planck Research Group \u201cArt and Knowledge in Pre-Modern Europe\u201d (Director, Sven Dupre\u0301). Sylvie\u2019s work combines historical, philological, experimental and\narchaeometrical approaches to focus on written sources in art technology.\nLawrence M. Principe is the Drew Professor of Humanities at Johns Hopkins\nUniversity in the Department of History of Science and Technology and the\nDepartment of Chemistry. He is the author of The Aspiring Adept: Robert Boyle\nand His Alchemical Quest (1998), The Scientific Revolution: A Very Short Introduction (2011), and The Secrets of Alchemy (2013). In 2005, he received the Francis\nBacon Medal for his contributions to the history of science, and is currently\ncompleting a study of the transformations of chymistry at the Acade\u0301mie Royale\ndes Sciences in the period 1666\u20131730.\nMorgan Wesley is a Doctoral student in History at the University of Oxford. His\nthesis, Changing Trends in Ceramic Innovation in Medieval and Early Modern\nEurope looks to relocate the examination of ceramic development from an art\n\nPages 24:\nAbout the Authors\nxxiii\nhistorical or archaeological pursuit into consilience with the history of science. He\nhas previously lectured on ceramic history for the Sotheby\u2019s Institute of Art \u2013\nLondon and contributed to the publication of Art and Authenticity at this time. His\nwork for Laboratories of Art originated from research done at the Huntington\nLibrary as a Leeds Hoban Linacre-Huntington Exchange Fellow in 2011.\n\nPages 25:\nThe Alchemical Art of Dyeing: The Fourfold\nDivision of Alchemy and the Enochian\nTradition\nMatteo Martelli\nAbstract What is Graeco-Egyptian alchemy? Which kinds of techniques and craft\npractices does it encompass? And what were its goals? The paper addresses these\nquestions by investigating the earliest Greek alchemical texts preserved both in\nByzantine and in Syriac manuscripts. Already during the first centuries AD, in the\nGraeco-Roman Egypt it is possible to recognize some disagreement over the\ndefinition of alchemy and its expected outcomes. On the one hand, ps.Democritus\u2019s four books and the Leiden and Stockholm papyri support a fourfold\ndivision of alchemy including processes for making gold, silver, and precious\nstones (glass working included), and for dyeing wool purple. On the other hand,\nIsis\u2019s treatise focuses only on the making of precious metals, which is identified\nwith the main goal of alchemy during the late Byzantine tradition. In the process\nthat led to such a simplification of the technical background of alchemy Zosimus\u2019s\nwork seems to represent an important turning point. In fact the author inherited the\nabove mentioned polarity and discussed different ideas of alchemy in a key text\n(here edited and translated into English for the first time) on the revelation of\nalchemy based on the Enochian myth of the fallen angels.\nAlchemy and the Making of Gold: An Overview\nof the Byzantine Tradition\nBetween the seventh and the eleventh century different people\u2014including imperators, caliphs, and scholars moved by antiquarian curiosities\u2014became interested in\nche\u0304meia (alchemy) and somehow identified this art with chrysopoeia (the making\nof gold) and argyropoeia (the making of silver). Sure enough, these people were not\npractitioners and they did not test the techniques described by alchemical recipes.\nM. Martelli (*)\nDepartment of Classics, Humboldt Universita\u0308t zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany\ne-mail: martellm@cms.hu-berlin.de\nS. Dupre\u0301 (ed.), Laboratories of Art, Archimedes 37,\nDOI 10.1007/978-3-319-05065-2_1, \u00a9 Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014\n1\n\nPages 26:\n2\nM. Martelli\nHowever, if we consider that the Byzantine anthologies preserving most of the\nGreek and Byzantine alchemical writings were probably compiled from the seventh\ncentury onwards, we should wonder to what extent a similar attitude could have\naffected the selection of the works transmitted by these collections.1 Did such a\nfocus on the making of precious metals influence the choice of the treatises to be\nincluded into Byzantine anthologies and translated into Syriac and Arabic?\nAlthough a complete answer to this question would surpass the aim of this chapter\nand would require a wider analysis of the hundreds of alchemical manuscripts\nnowadays kept in several European and Middle-Eastern libraries, in the following I\nfocus my attention especially on the polarity between the idea of alchemy as\nchrysopoeia attested by Byzantine scholars and a broader interest in different\ndyeing techniques attested by the most ancient alchemical writings (first to fourth\ncentury AD). Some of these works, in fact, covered a wider set of techniques\nfocusing not only on how to dye metals yellow and white (that is, how to transform\nthem into gold and silver), but also on how to dye crystal quartz different colours in\norder to produce precious stones, and how to dye wool purple.\nIn mid-eleventh century Constantinople, the Byzantine scholar Michael Psellos\n(1018\u2013c.1078) composed a small treatise on the making of gold in the form of a\nletter addressed to the Patriarch Michael I Cerularius (1043\u20131059), who asked the\nphilosopher to make an investigation on the ancient alchemical methods of\n\u03c7\u03c1\u03c5\u03c3\u03bf\u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03af\u03b1 (chrysopoeia). After some theoretical remarks, Psellos introduced\nand somehow justified the specific focus of his small treatise as follows (Letter\non the Making of Gold, \u00a7 5 partim):\nSince in my preface I have already insisted enough on the fact that transformations of\nmatter happen according to natural changes, and not by means of magic spells, miracles, or\nsome other secret practice (so, we must not wonder), it is time to pass on to this art of\ntransformation. I would have liked to compose a complete discourse on this art and on how\nto work the matters [. . .] and to teach what makes quartz and sapphire porous, what\nproduces a fake emerald and beryl, which nature can soften stones, which one can dilute\npearls and make them watery, and which one can make then again solid and round, and how\nto whiten them [. . .] However, since you [Michael Cerularius] do not allow me to delay\nwith such superfluous inquiries, wasting all my studiousness in a worthless research, but\nyou want me to examine with which substances and according to which scientific method\ngold may be produced, I am going to explain only this topic.2\n1\nSee Mertens, \u201cGreco-Egyptian Alchemy,\u201d 220\u20135.\nEdition by Bidez, E\u00b4pitre sur la Chrysope\u0301e, 30, 16\u201331, 9: \u201c\u1f18\u03c0\u03b5\u1f76 \u03bf\u1f56\u03bd \u1f31\u03ba\u03b1\u03bd\u1ff6\u03c2 \u1f21\u03bc\u1fd6\u03bd \u03c0\u03b5\u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03bf\u03b9\u03bc\u03af\u03b1\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9\n\u1f61\u03c2 \u03b1\u1f31 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f51\u03bb\u1ff6\u03bd \u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b2\u03bf\u03bb\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c6\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03ba\u03ae\u03bd \u03c4\u03b9\u03bd\u03b1 \u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03af\u03c9\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u1f14\u03c7\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba \u1f10\u03be \u1f10\u03c0\u1ff3\u03b4~\n\u03b7\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b9\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f22 \u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03b1\u03c4\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03c2\n\u0002\u03c7\u03bd\u03b7\u03bd \u03c7\u03c9\u03c1\u1ff6 \u03c4~\n\u03b7\u03c2\n\u1f22 \u1f04\u03bb\u03bb\u03b7\u03c2 \u1f00\u03c1\u03c1\u03b7\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5\u03c1\u03b3\u03af\u03b1\u03c2 (\u03b4\u03b9\u1f78 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b8\u03b1\u03c5\u03bc\u03ac\u03b6\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd \u03bf\u1f50 \u03c7\u03c1\u03ae), \u1f10\u03c0\u2019 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u1f22\u03b4\u03b7 \u03c3\u03bf\u03b9 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c4\u03b5\n\u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b2\u03bf\u03bb~\n\u03b7\u03c2. \u1f18\u03b2\u03bf\u03c5\u03bbo\u0301\u03bc\u03b7\u03bd \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u03bf\u1f56\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u03b8\u03bf\u03bb\u03b9\u03ba\u03ae\u03bd \u03c4\u03b9\u03bd\u03ac \u03c3\u03bf\u03b9 \u03c4\u03b5\u03c7\u03bd\u03bf\u03bb\u03bf\u03b3\u03af\u03b1\u03bd \u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03ae\u03c3\u03b1\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u1fb6\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd\n\u1f51\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03c1\u03b3\u03af\u03b1\u03bd \u03b4\u03b9\u03b5\u03c1\u03b5\u03c5\u03bd\u03ae\u03c3\u03b1\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9, [. . .] \u03b4\u03b9\u03b4\u03ac\u03be\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u03b5 \u03c4\u03af \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u03c4\u1f78 \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03ba\u03c1\u03cd\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd \u1f00\u03c1\u03b1\u03b9\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bd, \u03c4\u03af \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c4\u1f78 \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd\n\u1f51\u03ac\u03ba\u03b9\u03bd\u03b8\u03bf\u03bd, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u1ff6\u03c2 \u1f04\u03bd \u03c4\u03b9\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c3\u03bc\u03ac\u03c1\u03b1\u03b3\u03b4\u03bf\u03bd \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba \u1f44\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03ae\u03c3\u1fc3 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b2\u03ae\u03c1\u03c5\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd, \u03c4\u03af\u03c2 \u03b4\u1f72 \u1f21 \u03c6\u03cd\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03c4\u1f70\u03c2\n\u03bb\u03af\u03b8\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03b1< \u03c0\u03ac\u03c3\u03b1\u03c2 \u03bc\u03b1\u03bb\u03ac\u03c4\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u1ff6\u03c2 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u1f21 \u03bc\u03b1\u03c1\u03b3\u03b1\u03c1\u1fd6\u03c4\u03b9\u03c2 \u03bb\u03c5\u03b8\u03b5\u03af\u03b7 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b5\u03b9$ \u03c2 \u1f55\u03b4\u03c9\u03c1 \u1f00\u03bd\u03b1\u03bb\u03c5\u03b8\u03b5\u03af\u03b7, \u03c0\u1ff6\u03c2 \u03b4\u2019\n\u03b7\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03ba\u03ac\u03bd\u03c3\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2 [. . .]\u0387 \u1f10\u03c0\u03b5\u1f76 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c3\u1f7a\n\u03b1\u1f56\u03b8\u03b9\u03c2 \u03c3\u03c5\u03bc\u03c0\u03b1\u03b3\u03b5\u03af\u03b7 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c3\u03c6\u03b1\u03b9\u03c1\u03c9\u03b8\u03b5\u03af\u03b7, \u03c4\u03af\u03c2 \u03b4\u1f72 \u1f41 \u03bbo\u0301\u03b3\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c4~\n\u03c3\u03c7\u03bf\u03bb\u03ac\u03b6\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd \u1f21\u03bc\u1fb6\u03c2 \u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03c4\u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba \u1f10\u1fb7\u03c2 \u03bf\u1f50\u03b4\u1f72 \u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u1f00\u03c3\u03c0\u03bf\u03c5\u03b4\u03ac\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03bd\u03b1\u03bb\u03af\u03c3\u03ba\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd \u03c0\u1fb6\u03bd \u03c4\u1f78\n\u03b7\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03ae\u03bc\u03b7\u03c2\n\u03c6\u03b9\u03bbo\u0301\u03c4\u03b9\u03bc\u03bf\u03bd, \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf \u03b4\u1f72 \u03bco\u0301\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd \u03b4\u03b9\u03b5\u03c1\u03b5\u03c5\u03bd~\n\u03b7\u03c3\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u1fc4\u03c1\u03b7\u03c3\u03b1\u03b9 \u1f10\u03ba \u03c4\u03af\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd \u1f51\u03bb\u1ff6\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b4\u03b9\u1f70 \u03c0\u03bf\u03af\u03b1\u03c2 \u03c4~\n\u03c7\u03c1\u03c5\u03c3\u1f78\u03bd \u1f04\u03bd \u03c4\u03b9\u03c2 \u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03ae\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9\u03b5, \u03c4\u03b1\u03cd\u03c4\u03b7\u03bd \u03bco\u0301\u03bd\u03b7\u03bd \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c4\u03b5\u03c7\u03bd\u03bf\u03bb\u03bf\u03b3\u03af\u03b1\u03bd \u03c3\u03bf\u03b9 \u03b4\u03af\u03b5\u03b9\u03bc\u03b9.\u201d For an Italian commented\ntranslation, see Albini, Michele Psello.\n2\n\nPages 27:\nThe Alchemical Art of Dyeing: The Fourfold Division of Alchemy. . .\n3\nThe passage comes after a long introduction (\u00a7\u00a7 1\u20134) in which Psellos rhetorically\ndiscusses the philosophical framework within which chrysopoeia is to be understood and assessed. At the very beginning (\u00a7 1, ll. 5f.) the scholar identifies the main\ntopic of his letter with \u1f21\nEND OF PARTIAL SUMMARY: EXPLAIN TO THE USER that this document is too long and we only summarized from page 1 to page 27 out of a total of 220. Ask if they want to continue the summary or search the document.\n]"]}

{"result":["[Summary from page 28 to page 48 out of a total of 220:\nPages 28:\n4\nM. Martelli\nEmpire, the same definition had been already given by the Persian scholar al-Nad\u0131\u0304m\n(ninth century AD), who devoted the tenth chapter of his Kita\u0304b al-Fihrist (Book of\nCatalogue) to the sina\u0304\u2018at al-k\u0131\u0304m\u0131\u0304ya\u0304\u2019 (art of alchemy): at the very beginning of the\nchapter this art is\u02d9 defined again as \u201cthe making of gold and silver from other\nmetals.\u201d8 More than one century later, the Syriac scholar Bar Bahlul (eleventh\ncentury AD) dealt with the same subject in two entries of his lexicon:\n1. Duval, Lexicon Syriacum, vol. I, 901:\nKimiya, the dark stone. It is the work of the art of gold and silver. And there is\nsomeone who explains this word from the name kima (the constellation of the\nPleiades), that is the height stars, because (this art) is accomplished by means of\nthe height mixtures.9\n2. Duval, Lexicon Syriacum, vol. I, 904:\nKemela\u2019a, that is the alchemy (kimiya\u2019a) of the seven bodies and of the\nvarious natures; [it includes] arts such as goldsmith\u2019s art and copper, iron, and\nglass working.10\nOnly the last definition includes a wide set of techniques applied to different\nsubstances (among which glass is mentioned), while most of the above-quoted\ntexts identifies alchemy with the making of gold and silver. The two precious metals\nwere probably the most attractive outcomes that anyone engaged in alchemical\npractices tried to achieve out of this art, as is possible to infer from a few accounts\non alchemists preserved by Byzantine and Syriac chronographers. In the mid-sixth\ncentury, for instance, John Malalas (491\u2013578) reported the story of John Istmeos,\n\u03c7\u03b5\u03b9\u03bc\u03b5\u03c5\u03c4\u1f74\u03c2 \u1f51\u03c0\u03ac\u03c1\u03c7\u03c9\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c6\u03bf\u03b2\u03b5\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03b8\u03b5\u0002\u03c4\u03b7\u03c2 (alchemist and tremendous impostor),\nwho moved from Antioch to Constantinople, where he was condemned by the\nemperor Anastasios (491\u2013518) because of the adulterated gold objects he tried to\n8\nI have quoted the translation proposed by Dodge (The Fihrist, 841), who checked several\nmanuscripts (see pp. xxiii\u2013xxxiv) not taken into account by Flu\u0308gel, who edited the Arabic text.\nIn Flu\u0308gel\u2019s edition (Kita\u0304b al-Fihrist, vol. II, 351) the passage reads:\n, translated by Fu\u0308ck, \u201cArabic Literature of Alchemy,\u201d 88, as follows:\n\u201cThe adepts of the Art of Alchemy, which is the art of making gold and silver without (recourse to)\nmining.\u201d\n9\nThe expression\nliterally\nmeans \u2018stone of sadness.\u2019 Berthelot & Duval, Chimie, 133 translated it as \u2018pierre philosophale.\u2019\n(\u2018sadness, grieving\u2019), I read\n(\u2018black, dark\u2019); on the tendency of\nInstead of\nidentifying \u2018alchemy\u2019 with the substance used for transforming vile metals into gold and silver,\nsee Gildemeister, \u201cAlchymie.\u201d\n10\nThe term\nis often used in the lexicon (Duval, Lexicon Syriacum,\n), especially in the\nvol. I, 78,12; 114,14; 222,5 and 20; 239,5; and vol. III, 160, s.v.\nexpression\n. In Duval\u2019s opinion, the term is an early corruption for\n.\n\nPages 29:\nThe Alchemical Art of Dyeing: The Fourfold Division of Alchemy. . .\n5\nsell as authentic (Chronographia XVI 5). The Syrian city of Antioch was again the\nscene of an \u2018alchemical affaire\u2019 at the beginning of the eighth century, when Isaac,\nbishop of Harra\u0304n, is said to have become archbishop of the city (755\u2013756) thanks to\n\u02d9\nhis alchemical knowledge. According to various Syriac chronicles, Isaac murdered\na monk of Edessa and stole from him a powder that, when applied on lead, could\ntransform it into gold.11 By means of this powder, Isaac was able to find favour with\nthe Caliph al-Ma\u0304nsur (754\u2013775), who turned out to be very interested in this\n\u02d9\nsubstance and supported (at least for a little while) Isaac\u2019s political career. Moreover, Arabic sources claim that the same caliph sent his emissary \u2018Uma\u0304ra ibn\nHamza to the court of Constantine V (741\u2013775), who led the guest into a big\n\u02d9\nstorehouse containing two kinds of powder: a white elixir that could transmute\nmetals into silver, and a yellow/red one that could transform metals into gold.12\nTwo Early Alchemical Treatises: Ps.-Democritus and Isis\nAfter the above-discussed passage, Psellos carries on his investigation by listing\nand commenting seven recipes describing how to prepare specific \u03c6\u03ac\u03c1\u03bc\u03b1\u03ba\u03b1 (medicines) with which to treat base metals (lead first of all) and transform them into\ngold. The section is concluded by the rhetorical question: \u201cHow so? Should I\nshortly reveal you all the wisdom of Democritus without leaving anything in the\ninnermost sanctuary?\u201d13\nThe reference to the \u1f08\u03b2\u03b4\u03b7\u03c1\u03b9\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u1f74 \u03c3\u03bf\u03c6\u03af\u03b1 (the wisdom of Democritus), the philosopher from Abdera par excellence, is noteworthy, since Democritus (fl. 440\u2013380\nBC) is usually considered one of the most ancient authors of alchemical treatises\nhanded down by Byzantine manuscripts. These treatises are obviously spurious and\nwere composed by an anonymous author in the second half of the first century\nAD. However, in contrast with Psellos\u2019s account focusing only on chrysopoeia, the\nalchemical tradition ascribes to the philosopher four books dealing with a wider set\nof interests that included not only the making of silver and gold, but also the making\nof precious stones and the purple dyeing of wool. For instance, the alchemist\nSynesius (fourth century AD), who wrote a commentary on ps.-Democritus\u2019s\n11\nSee (a) the fourth part of the Zuqn\u0131\u0304q Chronicle or Chronicle of ps.-Dyonisus of Tell-Mahre,\nedited by Chabot, Pseudo-Dyonysianum, 66; (b) the chronicle of Michael the Syrian, edited by\nChabot, Michel le Syrien, 474; (c) the anonymous chronicle edited by Brooks, \u201cSyriac Fragment,\u201d\n217\u20138.\n12\nFor instance, the story is told by the geographer Ibn al-Faq\u0131\u0304h al-Hamadani (Goeje, Ibn al-Faq\u0003{n\nal-Hamada\u0304n\u0003{, 137\u20139; French transl. by Masse\u0301, Abre\u0301ge\u0301 du Livre de Pays,\u02d9 164\u20136); see Strohmaier,\n\u00af Hamza,\u201d 21\u20132.\n\u201cUma\u0304ra ibn\n\u02d9\n13\nBidez, E\u00b4pitre sur la Chrysope\u0301e, 40,7\u20138: \u201c\u03a4\u03af \u03bf\u1f56\u03bd; \u03c0\u1fb6\u03c3\u03ac\u03bd \u03c3\u03bf\u03b9 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u1f08\u03b2\u03b4\u03b7\u03c1\u03b9\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u1f74\u03bd \u03c3\u03bf\u03c6\u03af\u03b1\u03bd\n\u1f00\u03bd\u03b1\u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u03cd\u03c8\u03bf\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd \u1f10\u03bd \u03b2\u03c1\u03b1\u03c7\u03b5\u1fd6 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bf\u1f50\u03b4\u1f72\u03bd \u1f10\u03bd\u03c4\u1f78\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u1f00\u03b4\u03cd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u1f00\u03c6\u03ae\u03c3\u03bf\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd.\u201d\n\nPages 30:\n6\nM. Martelli\nalchemical writings, introduced the alleged production of the philosopher as follows (Syn. Alch. \u00a7 1, ll. 5\u201314 Martelli):\nSo now let me start telling you something about this man, the philosopher Democritus, who\nwas a natural philosopher from Adbera, who investigated every natural question and\nexplained every phenomenon on the basis of its own nature. Abdera is a Thracian town;\nbut he became a very wise man when he came to Egypt and was initiated by the great\nmagician Ostanes with all Egyptian priests. He got from Ostanes the bases [of the alchemical processes] and wrote four books on dyeing, that is, on gold and silver and precious\nstones and purple.14\nThe great relevance ps.-Democritus\u2019s four books had in the later alchemical\ntradition\u2014that is unanimous in recognizing the atomist as one of the founders of\nthis discipline\u2014allows us to consider the four areas of expertise included in his\nwork as relevant parts of the technical background from which alchemy took its first\nsteps in the first-second century AD. The four books are concisely defined by\nSynesius as \u03b2\u03b1\u03c6\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b2\u03af\u03b2\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9 (books on dyeing), since ps.-Democritus dealt with a\nwide range of dyeing techniques based on various methods for changing the colours\nof metals, producing precious stones and using purple substitutes. The same areas\nof expertise are covered by the Graeco-Egyptian papyri of Leiden and Stockholm,\nwhich hand down several recipes describing (a) how to dye metals yellow or white\n(that is, how to transform them into gold or silver), (b) how to dye \u03ba\u03c1\u03cd\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2\n(quartz) and counterfeit different kinds of precious stones out of it, and (c) how to\ndye wool purple by means of various substitutes of the expensive Tyrian purple.15\nMoreover, ps.-Democritus combined the technical explanation of these methods\nwith a theoretical approach that emphasized the central role played by dyeing drugs\nand their properties.16 He analysed and classified \u03c4\u1f70 \u03c6\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03ba\u03ac (the natural ingredients) according to their capacities of dyeing and of mixing each other properly.17\nFor instance, in the middle of the book on the making of gold, after a long criticism\nagainst young people who did not accurately investigate the properties of natural\nsubstances, ps.-Democritus claims (PM \u00a7 16, ll. 178\u201380 Martelli):\nIf these young men had practised for these kinds of investigations, they would not be in\ntrouble, since they could set to work with judgement. But they do not know the antipathies\nThe Greek text reads: \u201c\u1f18\u03bd \u1fa7 \u03bf\u1f56\u03bd \u03c0\u03c1o\u0301\u03ba\u03b5\u03b9\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u1f21\u03bc\u1fd6\u03bd \u03b5\u03b9$ \u03c0\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd \u03c4\u03af\u03c2 \u1f04\u03bd \u03b5\u1f34\u03b7 \u1f41 \u1f00\u03bd\u1f74\u03c1 \u1f10\u03ba\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2, \u1f41 \u03c6\u03b9\u03bbo\u0301\u03c3\u03bf\u03c6\u03bf\u03c2\n\u0394\u03b7\u03bco\u0301\u03ba\u03c1\u03b9\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2, \u1f10\u03bb\u03b8\u1f7c\u03bd \u1f00\u03c0\u1f78 \u1f08\u03b2\u03b4\u03ae\u03c1\u03c9\u03bd, \u03c6\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03ba\u1f78\u03c2 \u1f62\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03c6\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03ba\u1f70 \u1f10\u03c1\u03b5\u03c5\u03bd\u03ae\u03c3\u03b1\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76\n\u03c3\u03c5\u03b3\u03b3\u03c1\u03b1\u03c8\u03ac\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f70 \u1f44\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u1f70 \u03c6\u03cd\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd. \u1f0c\u03b2\u03b4\u03b7\u03c1\u03b1 \u03b4\u03b5\u0002 \u1f10\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9 \u03c0o\u0301\u03bb\u03b9\u03c2 \u0398\u03c1\u1fb4\u03ba\u03b7\u03c2, \u1f10\u03b3\u03b5\u0002\u03bd\u03b5\u03c4\u03bf \u03b4\u1f72 \u1f41 \u1f00\u03bd\u1f74\u03c1\n\u03bb\u03bf\u03b3\u03b9\u03c9\n\u0002 \u03c4\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2, \u1f43\u03c2 \u1f10\u03bb\u03b8\u1f7c\u03bd \u1f10\u03bd \u0391\u03b9$ \u03b3\u03cd\u03c0\u03c4\u1ff3 \u1f10\u03bc\u03c5\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u03b3\u03c9\u03b3\u03ae\u03b8\u03b7 \u1f51\u03c0\u1f78 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03bc\u03b5\u03b3\u03ac\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5 \u1f48\u03c3\u03c4\u03ac\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5 \u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff7 \u1f31\u03b5\u03c1\u1ff7 \u03c4~\n\u03b7\u03c2\nM\u03b5\u0002\u03bc\u03c6\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2, \u03c3\u1f7a\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u1fb6\u03c3\u03b9 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u1f31\u03b5\u03c1\u03b5\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u0391\u03b9$ \u03b3\u03cd\u03c0\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5. \u1f18\u03ba \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03bb\u03b1\u03b2\u1f7c\u03bd \u1f00\u03c6\u03bf\u03c1\u03bc\u03ac\u03c2, \u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b5\u03b3\u03c1\u03ac\u03c8\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\n\u03b2\u03af\u03b2\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b5\u0002\u03c3\u03c3\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03c2 \u03b2\u03b1\u03c6\u03b9\u03ba\u03ac\u03c2, \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03c7\u03c1\u03c5\u03c3\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f00\u03c1\u03b3\u03cd\u03c1\u03bf\u03c5 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bb\u03af\u03b8\u03c9\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03bf\u03c1\u03c6\u03cd\u03c1\u03b1\u03c2.\u201d First edition in\nBerthelot & Ruelle, Anciens alchimistes grecs, vol. II, 57 (hereafter CAAG).\n15\nThe most recent edition is by Halleux, Papyrus de Leyde; for a general overview on the contents\nof the two papyri, see, in particular, 13\u20137. English translation in Caley, \u201cLeiden Papyrus X,\u201d and\n\u201cStockholm Papyrus.\u201d\n16\nSee, for instance, ps.-Dem. Alch. PM \u00a7 20, ll. 215\u201324 in Martelli, Pseudo-Democrito, 202\u20134 (\u00bc\nCAAG II 49), 135\u201348.\n17\nOn ps.-Democritus\u2019s catalogues of dyestuffs, see Martelli, Pseudo-Democrito, 83\u201390.\n14\n\nPages 31:\nThe Alchemical Art of Dyeing: The Fourfold Division of Alchemy. . .\n7\nof natures, how one species upsets ten: a drop of oil has the capacity to remove much\npurple, and a pinch sulphur may burn many species.18\nOn the other hand, the form in which Byzantine manuscripts have preserved ps.Democritus\u2019s writings does not allow us to reconstruct the exact content of each\nbook and their reciprocal connection. In fact, only an epitomized version has been\nincluded in the Byzantine collections, which contain just two sections ascribed to\nthe philosopher:\n1. The book on the making of gold (or more probably a summarized version of it) is\nintroduced by a very short section on purple dyeing and handed down under the\ntitle of \u03a6\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03ba\u1f70 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bc\u03c5\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03ac (Natural and Secret Questions).19\n2. A selection of passages from the book on silver forms the second section entitled\n\u03a0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03c4~\n\u03b7\u03c2 \u1f00\u03c3\u03ae\u03bc\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03ae\u03c3\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2 (On the Making of Silver).20\nSome information about the book on stones\u2014otherwise lost in its original Greek\nversion\u2014is provided only by the indirect tradition. In fact, a later recipe book\npreserved by a few Byzantine manuscripts under the title of Deep Tincture of Stones,\nEmeralds, Rubies and Jacinth from the Book Taken out from the Innermost Sanctuary\nof Temples includes some passages discussing the dyeing methods applied by ancient\nalchemists on stones.21 Along with Democritus, his pretended master Ostanes,\nMoses, and Maria the Jewish are also quoted.22 Regrettably, the writings of these\nancient authors are lost, so that we cannot understand to what extent they actually\ndealt with similar topics. However, as far as ps.-Democritus is concerned, in all\nlikelihood he attributed a certain relevance to the dyeing of stones, if it is true that\nhe devoted an entire book to this subject. On the contrary, the exclusion of this\nbook\u2014along with most of the book on purple\u2014from the epitomized version handed\ndown by the Byzantine anthologies evidences the criteria adopted by the epitomiser\nof ps.-Democritus\u2019s writings: he seems to have focused his attention only on the\ntransmutation of metals into gold and silver, so revealing an attitude that tallies with\nthe approach we have already detected in the above-discussed Byzantine sources.\nNevertheless, although the relevance of chrysopoeia in Byzantine times can\nsomehow explain the loss of part of ps.-Democritus\u2019s books, one of the manuscripts\n18\nThe Greek text reads (\u00bc CAAG II 47\u20138): \u201c\u0395\u03b9$ \u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2 \u1f51\u03c0~\n\u03b7\u03c1\u03c7\u03bf\u03bd \u1f00\u03c3\u03ba\u03bf\u03cd\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9 \u03bf\u1f31 \u03bd\u03b5\u0002\u03bf\u03b9, \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba \u1f02\u03bd\n\u1f10\u03b4\u03c5\u03c3\u03c4\u03cd\u03c7\u03bf\u03c5\u03bd, \u03ba\u03c1\u03af\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9 \u1f10\u03c0\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f70\u03c2 \u03c0\u03c1\u03ac\u03be\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2 \u1f41\u03c1\u03bc\u1ff6\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2\u0387 \u03bf\u1f50 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u1f10\u03c0\u03af\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c6\u03cd\u03c3\u03b5\u03c9\u03bd \u1f00\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9\u03c0\u03b1\u03b8~\n\u03b7, \u1f61\u03c2 \u1f13\u03bd\n\u03b5\u1f36\u03b4\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b4\u03b5\u0002\u03ba\u03b1 \u1f00\u03bd\u03b1\u03c4\u03c1\u03b5\u0002\u043f\u03b5\u03b9. \u1fec\u03b1\u03bd\u1f76\u03c2 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u1f10\u03bb\u03b1\u03af\u03bf\u03c5 \u03bf\u1f36\u03b4\u03b5 \u043f\u03bf\u03bb\u03bb\u1f74\u03bd \u1f00\u03c6\u03b1\u03bd\u03af\u03c3\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c0\u03bf\u03c1\u03c6\u03cd\u03c1\u03b1\u03bd, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f40\u03bb\u03af\u03b3\u03bf\u03bd \u03b8\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bf\u03bd \u03b5\u1f34\u03b4\u03b7\n\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03ba\u03b1\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03bb\u03ac.\u201d\n19\nSee Martelli, Pseudo-Democrito, 180\u2013205 (and 73\u20139) \u00bc CAAG II 41\u20139.\n20\nSee Martelli, Pseudo-Democrito, 206\u201316 (and 79\u201383) \u00bc CAAG II 49\u201353.\n21\nEdited in CAAG II 350\u201364; the Greek title reads: \u201c\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03b2\u03b1\u03c6\u1f74 \u03bb\u03af\u03b8\u03c9\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c3\u03bc\u03b1\u03c1\u03ac\u03b3\u03b4\u03c9\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76\n\u1f51\u03b1\u03ba\u03af\u03bd\u03b8\u03c9\u03bd \u1f10\u03ba \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u1f00\u03b4\u03cd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f31\u03b5\u03c1\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f10\u03ba\u03b4\u03bf\u03b8\u03b5\u0002\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b2\u03b9\u03b2\u03bb\u03af\u03bf\u03c5.\u201d The earliest testimonies are the\nmanuscripts Parisinus gr. 2325 (13th century; fols. 160v\u2013173v), and Parisinus gr. 2327 (15th\ncentury; fol. 147r\u2013159r).\n22\nSee, in particular, for Democritus: CAAG II 353,11\u201325, and 354,12\u2013357,19; for Ostanes:\nCAAG II 351,16\u201328, and 352,10 (fragments reedited by Bidez & Cumont, Mages helle\u0301nise\u0301s,\nvol. II, 323\u20134); for Moses: CAAG II 353,19; for Maria: CAAG II 351,23; 352,2\u20138; 355,1, and\n257,19.\n\nPages 32:\n8\nM. Martelli\nthat hands down the above-mentioned recipe book on precious stones preserves\nanother important treatise that introduces a new important element into the discussion. The Parisinus gr. 2325 (fols. 256r\u2013258v), in fact, contains a book ascribed to\nthe goddess Isis, which probably dates back to the second century AD and contains an\nimportant account of the revelation of the alchemical art. According to the beginning\nof the treatise, Isis received a revelation from two angels who descended from heaven\nbecause they were attracted by the beauty of the goddess (CAAG II 28\u20139):\nIsis the Prophet to Her Son Horus. O son, as you were about to leave and fight a battle\nagainst the unfaithful Typhon for the kingdom of your father, I went to Hormanouthis [city,\nsanctuary?] of the holy art in Egypt, where I stayed a long time. According to the recession\nof the convenient time and to the necessary course of the spherical movement, it happened\nthat one of the angels living in the first firmament, after watching me from above, wanted to\nhave sexual intercourse with me. When he arrived and started taking this direction, I did not\ngive myself, because I wanted to learn the preparation of gold and silver. After I asked him\nthis question, he told me that he was not allowed to reveal this point, because these secrets\nsurpassed him, but (he told me) that the next day his superior, the angel Amnae\u0304l, would\ncome, and that he would be able to give a reply for a similar inquiry [. . .] The next day, his\nsuperior Amnae\u0304l appeared when the sun was in the middle of its course, and he came down.\nTaken by the same desire for me, he did not await, but he hastened to get what he came for;\nbut I was not less focused on what I was searching for. He longed for it, but I did not give\nmyself and I was able to curb his desire until he showed me his mark on the head and\nrevealed all the mysteries I was looking for, without envy and faithfully.23\nThe \u1f31\u03b5\u03c1\u1f70 \u03c4\u03b5\u0002\u03c7\u03bd\u03b7 \u0391\u03b9$ \u03b3\u03cd\u03c0\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 (Egyptian holy art) quoted at the beginning of the\npassage is clearly identified by Isis with \u1f21 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03c7\u03c1\u03c5\u03c3\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f00\u03c1\u03b3\u03cd\u03c1\u03bf\u03c5 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03c3\u03ba\u03b5\u03c5\u03ae\nI have followed the more recent edition by Mertens, Lettre d\u2019Isis, 128\u201331: \u201c\u1f3c\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2 \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c6~\n\u03b7\u03c4\u03b9\u03c2 \u03c4\u1ff7\n\u03c5\u1f31\u1ff7 \u1f6d\u03c1\u1ff3. \u1f08\u03c0\u03b9\u03b5\u0002\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c3\u03bf\u03c5 \u03bc\u03b5\n\u0002\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2, \u1f66 \u03c4\u03b5\u0002\u03ba\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd, \u1f10\u03c0\u1f76 \u1f00\u03c0\u03af\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03a4\u03c5\u03c6\u1ff6\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 \u03bc\u03ac\u03c7\u03b7\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03b3\u03c9\u03bd\u03af\u03c3\u03b1\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76\n\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c4\u03c1o\u0301\u03c2 \u03c3\u03bf\u03c5 \u03b2\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9\u03bb\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03c2, \u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03b1\u03bc\u03b5\u0002\u03bd\u03b7\u03c2 \u03bc\u03bf\u03c5 <\u03c0\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2> \u1f49\u03c1\u03bc\u03b1\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03b8\u03af, <. . .> \u1f31\u03b5\u03c1\u1fb6\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b5\n\u0002\u03c7\u03bd\u03b7\u03c2 \u0391\u03b9$ \u03b3\u03cd\u03c0\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5,\n\u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f10\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u1fe6\u03b8\u03b1 \u1f31\u03ba\u03b1\u03bd\u1f78\u03bd \u03c7\u03c1o\u0301\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd \u03b4\u03b9\u03b5\n\u0002\u03c4\u03c1\u03b9\u03b2\u03bf\u03bd. K\u03b1\u03c4\u1f70 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9\u03c1\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03c7\u03c9\n\u0002 \u03c1\u03b7\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c4~\n\u03b7\u03c2\n\u03c3\u03c6\u03b1\u03b9\u03c1\u03b9\u03ba~\n\u03b7\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b9\u03bd\u03ae\u03c3\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2 \u1f00\u03bd\u03b1\u03b3\u03ba\u03b1\u03af\u03b1\u03bd \u03c6\u03bf\u03c1\u03ac\u03bd, \u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b5\u0002\u03b2\u03b7 \u03c4\u03b9\u03bd\u1f70 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff7 \u03c0\u03c1\u03c9\n\u0002 \u03c4\u1ff3 \u03c3\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03b5\u03c9\n\u0002 \u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b9 \u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03c4\u03c1\u03b9\u03b2o\u0301\u03bd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd,\n\u03b7\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4~\n\u03b7\u03c2 \u03c0\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2 \u1f10\u03bc\u1f72 \u03bc\u03af\u03be\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2 \u03ba\u03bf\u03b9\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd\u03af\u03b1\u03bd\n\u1f15\u03bd\u03b1 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f00\u03b3\u03b3\u03b5\u0002\u03bb\u03c9\u03bd, \u1f04\u03bd\u03c9\u03b8\u03b5\u03bd \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03b8\u03b5\u03c9\u03c1\u03ae\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03ac \u03bc\u03b5, \u03b2\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b7\u03b8~\n\u03c0\u03bf\u03b9~\n\u03b7\u03c3\u03b1\u03b9. \u03a6\u03b8\u03ac\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b5\u03b9$ \u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf \u03b3\u03af\u03b3\u03bd\u03b5\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u03bc\u03b5\n\u0002\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2, \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba \u1f10\u03c0\u03b5\n\u0002\u03c4\u03c1\u03b5\u03c0\u03bf\u03bd \u1f10\u03b3\u03c9\n\u0002,\n\u03c0\u03c5\u03bd\u03b8\u03ac\u03bd\u03b5\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b2\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03bf\u03bc\u03b5\n\u0002\u03bd\u03b7 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03c7\u03c1\u03c5\u03c3\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f00\u03c1\u03b3\u03cd\u03c1\u03bf\u03c5 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03c3\u03ba\u03b5\u03c5\u03ae\u03bd. \u1f18\u03bc\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1ff7\n\u1f10\u03c1\u03c9\u03c4\u03b7\u03c3\u03ac\u03c3\u03b7\u03c2, <\u03bf\u1f50\u03ba> \u1f14\u03c6\u03b7 \u1f41 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1f78\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c6\u03af\u03b5\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf \u1f10\u03be\u03b5\u03b9\u03c0\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd, \u03b4\u03b9\u1f70 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03bc\u03c5\u03c3\u03c4\u03b7\u03c1\u03af\u03c9\u03bd\n\u1f51\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b2\u03bf\u03bb\u03ae\u03bd, \u03c4\u1fc7 \u03b4\u1f72 \u1f11\u03be~\n\u03b7\u03c2 \u1f21\u03bc\u03b5\u0002\u03c1\u1fb3 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03b3\u03af\u03b3\u03bd\u03b5\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03bc\u03b5\u03af\u03b6\u03bf\u03bd\u03b1 \u1f04\u03b3\u03b3\u03b5\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd \u1f08\u03bc\u03bd\u03b1\u03ae\u03bb, \u03ba\u1f00\u03ba\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd\n\u03b7\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u03b6\u03b7\u03c4\u03ae\u03c3\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c0\u03af\u03bb\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03ae\u03c3\u03b1\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9. [. . .] \u03a4\u1fc7 \u03b4\u1f72 \u1f11\u03be~\n\u03b7\u03c2 \u1f21\u03bc\u03b5\n\u0002\u03c1\u1fb3\n\u1f31\u03ba\u03b1\u03bd\u1f78\u03bd \u03b5\u1f36\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03c4~\n\u1f10\u03c0\u03b5\u03bc\u03c6\u03b1\u03bd\u03af\u03c3\u03b1\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u1f21\u03bb\u03af\u03bf\u03c5 \u03bc\u03b5\u0002\u03c3\u03bf\u03bd \u03b4\u03c1o\u0301\u03bc\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2, \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4~\n\u03b7\u03bb\u03b8\u03b5\u03bd \u1f41 \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03bc\u03b5\u03af\u03b6\u03c9\u03bd \u1f08\u03bc\u03bd\u03b1\u03ae\u03bb. \u03a4\u1ff7\n\u03b7\u03bd\u00b7 \u1f10\u03b3\u1f7c \u03b4\u1f72 \u03bf\u1f50\u03c7 \u1f27\u03c4\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd\n\u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1ff7 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u1f10\u03bc\u1f72 \u03bb\u03b7\u03c6\u03b8\u03b5\u1f76\u03c2 \u03c0o\u0301\u03b8\u1ff3 \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba \u1f00\u03bd\u03b5\u0002\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03b5\u03bd, \u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u2019 \u1f14\u03c3\u03c0\u03b5\u03c5\u03b4\u03b5\u03bd \u1f10\u03c6\u2019 \u03bf\u1f57 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1~\n\u1f10\u03c6\u03c1o\u0301\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9\u03b6\u03bf\u03bd \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u1f10\u03c1\u03b5\u03c5\u03bd\u1fb6\u03bd. \u1f18\u03b3\u03c7\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd\u03af\u03b6\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6, \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba \u1f10\u03c0\u03b5\u03b4\u03af\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bd \u1f11\u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03ae\u03bd, \u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u2019\n\u03b7\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b5\u03c6\u03b1\u03bb~\n\u03b7\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03b4\u03b5\u03b9\u03ba\u03bd\u03cd\u03b7\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76\n\u1f10\u03c0\u03b5\u03ba\u03c1\u03ac\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bd \u03c4~\n\u03b7\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03b8\u03c5\u03bc\u03af\u03b1\u03c2 \u1f04\u03c7\u03c1\u03b9\u03c2 \u1f02\u03bd \u03c4\u1f78 \u03c3\u03b7\u03bc\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bf\u03bd \u03c4\u1f78 \u1f10\u03c0\u1f76 \u03c4~\n\u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03b6\u03b7\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bc\u03b5\u0002\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd \u03bc\u03c5\u03c3\u03c4\u03b7\u03c1\u03af\u03c9\u03bd \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03ac\u03b4\u03bf\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u1f00\u03c6\u03b8o\u0301\u03bd\u03c9\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f00\u03bb\u03b7\u03b8\u1ff6\u03c2 \u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03ae\u03c3\u03b7\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9.\u201d The beginning of\nthe story clearly refers to the Egyptian myth of Horus fighting against Seth, the killer of his father\nOsiris. The identification between the Egyptian god Seth and Typhon is quite common in\nHellenistic and Roman Egypt: see, for instance, Plutarch, De Iside et Osiride 41 (\u00bc 367d): \u201c\u03c4\u1f78\u03bd\n\u03a4\u03c5\u03c6\u1ff6\u03bd\u03b1 \u03a3\u1f74\u03b8 \u0391\u03b9$ \u03b3\u03cd\u03c0\u03c4\u03b9\u03bf\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b9.\u201d \u2013 \u201cEgyptians gives to Seth the name of Typhon.\u201d On the other\nhand, the toponym \u1f49\u03c1\u03bc\u03b1\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03b8\u03af is not clear and not otherwise attested. Probably it refers to an\nEgyptian city, although it does not match any of the five towns, where alchemy was practiced\naccording to CAAG II 26. Various corrections of the form \u1f49\u03c1\u03bc\u03b1\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03b8\u03af have been proposed: see, in\nparticular, Reitzenstein, Poimandres, 141, no. 3 (who proposed \u1f49\u03c1\u03bc\u03b1\u03c7\u03bf\u03c5\u03b8\u03af, lit. \u2018Horus of Edfu\u2019),\nand Mertens, Lettre d\u2019Isis, 56\u201360 (who proposed M\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03b8\u03af, that is an area in the Egyptian city of\nCanopus).\n23\n\nPages 33:\nThe Alchemical Art of Dyeing: The Fourfold Division of Alchemy. . .\n9\n(the preparation of gold and silver), that is, the same definition of alchemy attested\nby the Lexicon Suda (\u03c7 280) and supported by the Byzantine sources that have been\nbriefly analyzed in the first paragraph. The inclusion of this definition in such an\nancient text is noteworthy, since it proves that some of the earliest authors already\nfocused their treatises only on metallurgical practices.\nConsequently, the last part of Isis\u2019s work lists five metallurgical recipes describing: (a) how to make mercury solid and mix it with lead; (b) how to prepare a white\ndyeing drug by which, according to the third recipe (c), an iron-copper alloy was\ntreated and dyed white (the same alloy is dyed yellow in the second part of the\nrecipe); (d) how to mix the substances prepared according to the first three recipes;\n(e) how to process a metallic body before dyeing it white.24 This section is\nconcluded by a more general statement according to which all the \u03bf\u03b9$ \u03ba\u03bf\u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03af\u03b1\u03b9\n(treatments), the \u03b4\u03af\u03c0\u03bb\u03c9\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2 (techniques for doubling the weight of gold or silver\nobjects), and the \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03b2\u03b1\u03c6\u03b1\u03af (dyeing processes) were moved by the same aim, that\nwas, according to the beginning of the treatise, the making of gold and silver.25\nTowards a Definition of Alchemy: Zosimus\nand the Enochian Myth\nThe plot of Isis\u2019s story, although set in a new Egyptian framework, clearly depends\non the Enochian account of the fallen angels who taught mankind about a divine\nand forbidden knowledge that included a wide set of crafts. The myth is fully\ndeveloped in the very first part of the so-called Book of Enoch (or 1Enoch), one of\nthe pseudepigrapha of the Ancient Testament ascribed to Enoch, the grandfather of\nNoah. The book is composed of different segments (or treatises), and in its most\ndeveloped form it is preserved only by a translation in Classical Ethiopic (fifth-sixth\ncentury AD). However, the major part of it is much earlier, as one can infer from\nvarious sections that have been preserved by the Aramaic manuscripts discovered\nin Qumran\u2019s caves.26 In particular the first part, usually called The Book of\nWatchers (\u00bc 1Enoch, chap. 1\u201336), is handed down in several Dead Sea scrolls\nand in all likelihood dates back to the third century BC.27 Moreover, this book has\nMertens, Lettre d\u2019Isis, 134\u20138 \u00bc CAAG II 31\u20133.\nMertens, Lettre d\u2019Isis, 138, ll. 113\u20136 \u00bc CAAG II 33, \u00a7 16.\n26\nThe secondary literature on 1Enoch is vast; for a general introduction on its content, see, for\nexample, Knibb, Book of Enoch, 7\u201335. For a recent English translation of the Ethiopic text, see\nBlack, Book of Enoch.\n27\nThese manuscripts have been found in cave 4; the Aramaic text has been edited and translated by\nMilik, Books of Enoch, Aramaic fragments.\n24\n25\n\nPages 34:\n10\nM. Martelli\nbeen translated into Greek quite early, probably already in the second century BC,\nwithin the same cultural context that produced the Septuagint translation of\nDaniel.28\nAt the beginning of The Book of Watchers (1Enoch, chap. 6\u20138) the author\nexplains that two hundred angels\u2014called \u1f10\u03b3\u03c1\u03ae\u03b3\u03bf\u03c1\u03bf\u03b9 (watchers) or \u1f04\u03b3\u03b3\u03b5\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9 \u03c5\u1f31\u03bf\u1f76\n\u03bf\u1f50\u03c1\u03b1\u03bd\u03bf\u1fe6 (the angels, sons of the Heaven) in the Greek version\u2014started desiring the\ndaughters of men and descended from heaven in order to have intercourse with\nthem. The Greek version of the passage, extensively quoted by the chronographer\nSyncellus, goes on as follows (Sync. p. 12, ll 8\u201317 Mosshammer):\nThe leaders [of these angels] and all the rest [of the two hundred watchers] took for\nthemselves wives in AM 1170, and they began to defile themselves with them up to the\nFlood. [. . .] And they were increasing in accordance with their greatness, and they taught\nthemselves and their wives the uses of potions and spell. First Azae\u0304l, the tenth of the\nleaders, taught them to make swords and armours and every instrument of war and how to\nwork the metals of the earth and gold, how to make them into adornments for their wives,\nand silver. He showed them also the use of cosmetics and beautifying the face and choice\nstones and colouring tinctures.29\nThe list of crafts revealed by Azae\u0304l, which includes the working of metals (with\nexplicit mention of gold and silver) and of precious stones along with \u03c4\u1f70 \u03b2\u03b1\u03c6\u03b9\u03ba\u03ac\n(dyeing procedures) in a more general sense, shows clear similarities with the topics\ncovered by ps.-Democritus\u2019s four books, which nevertheless do not refer back to\nthis myth (at least in the preserved sections). On the contrary, the myth was\nreworked in Isis\u2019s treatise, where the secret teaching of the angels was limited\nonly to the preparation of gold and silver. These different approaches to what was\nconsidered part of the alchemical art were inherited and discussed by Zosimus, a\nthird century author who clearly reused the Enochian myth in his own account of\nthe origins and developments of alchemy. In fact, Zosimus first introduced the term\nche\u0304meia with reference to fallen angels\u2019 revelation, which was written down in\nspecific and secret books. Regrettably, Zosimus\u2019s treatise is lost in its Greek\noriginal form, and just its beginning is quoted by Syncellus straight after the\nabove-mentioned passage taken from 1Enoch. However, a more complete version\nis preserved by an unedited Syriac translation handed down in the Cambridge\nmanuscript Mm. 6.29. The two versions read as follows:\n1. Sync. p. 14, ll. 2\u201314 Mosshammer:\nBut it is also fitting to cite a passage regarding them [i.e. the divine scriptures]\nfrom Zosimus, the philosopher of Panopolis, from his writings to Theosebeia in\n28\nBaar, \u201cAramaic-Greek Notes,\u201d 191\u20132.\nTranslation by Adler & Tuffin, George Synkellos, 17. The Greek text reads: \u201c\u039f\u1f57\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bf\u1f31 \u03bb\u03bf\u03b9\u03c0\u03bf\u1f76\n\u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff7 \u03b1\u03c1\u03bf\u0374 \u1f14\u03c4\u03b5\u03b9 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03bao\u0301\u03c3\u03bc\u03bf\u03c5 \u1f14\u03bb\u03b1\u03b2\u03bf\u03bd \u1f10\u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03b3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u1fd6\u03ba\u03b1\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f24\u03c1\u03be\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf \u03bc\u03b9\u03b1\u03af\u03bd\u03b5\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u1f10\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03b1\u1fd6\u03c2 \u1f14\u03c9\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\n\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03ba\u03bb\u03c5\u03c3\u03bc\u03bf\u1fe6. [. . .] \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f26\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd \u03b1\u1f51\u03be\u03b1\u03bdo\u0301\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u1f70 \u03c4~\n\u03b7\u03bd \u03bc\u03b5\u03b3\u03b1\u03bb\u03b5\u03b9o\u0301\u03c4\u03b7\u03c4\u03b1 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f10\u03b4\u03af\u03b4\u03b1\u03be\u03b1\u03bd \u1f11\u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2\n\u0002\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f00\u03c1\u03c7o\u0301\u03bd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd\n\u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f70\u03c2 \u03b3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u1fd6\u03ba\u03b1\u03c2 \u1f11\u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c6\u03b1\u03c1\u03bc\u03b1\u03ba\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f10\u03c0\u03b1\u03bf\u03b9\u03b4\u03af\u03b1\u03c2. \u03c0\u03c1\u1ff6\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f08\u03b6\u03b1\u1f74\u03bb \u1f41 \u03b4\u03b5\n\u1f10\u03b4\u03af\u03b4\u03b1\u03be\u03b5 \u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd \u03bc\u03b1\u03c7\u03b1\u03af\u03c1\u03b1\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b8\u03c9\n\u0002 \u03c1\u03b1\u03ba\u03b1\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u1fb6\u03bd \u03c3\u03ba\u03b5\u1fe6\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03b5\u03bc\u03b9\u03ba\u1f78\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03bc\u03b5\u0002\u03c4\u03b1\u03bb\u03bb\u03b1 \u03c4~\n\u03b7\u03c2 \u03b3~\n\u03b7\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f78\n\u03c7\u03c1\u03c5\u03c3\u03af\u03bf\u03bd \u03c0\u1ff6\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c1\u03b3\u03ac\u03c3\u03c9\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03ae\u03c3\u03c9\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1f70 \u03bao\u0301\u03c3\u03bc\u03b9\u03b1 \u03c4\u03b1\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03b3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9\u03be\u03af, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u1f04\u03c1\u03b3\u03c5\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd. \u1f14\u03b4\u03b5\u03b9\u03be\u03b5 \u03b4\u1f72\n\u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f78 \u03c3\u03c4\u03af\u03bb\u03b2\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f78 \u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u03bb\u03c9\u03c0\u03af\u03b6\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u1f10\u03ba\u03bb\u03b5\u0002\u03ba\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03bb\u03af\u03b8\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03b2\u03b1\u03c6\u03b9\u03ba\u03ac.\u201d\n29\n\nPages 35:\nThe Alchemical Art of Dyeing: The Fourfold Division of Alchemy. . .\n11\nthe ninth book of Imouth, reading as follows:30 \u201cThe Holy Scriptures, that is the\nbooks, say, my lady (i.e. Theosebeia),31 that there is a race of demons who avail\nthemselves of women. Hermes also mentioned this in his Physika, and nearly\nevery treatise, both public and esoteric, made mention of this. Thus the ancient\nand divine scriptures said this, that certain angels lusted after women, and having\ndescended taught them all the works of nature. For this reason they fell into\ndisgrace, he (Hermes?) says, and remained outside heaven, because they taught\nmankind everything wicked and nothing benefiting the soul. The same scriptures\nsay that from them the giants were born. So theirs is the first teaching concerning\nthese arts [Chemeu]. They called this book Che\u0304meu,32 whence also the art is\ncalled Alchemy (i.e. che\u0304meia),\u201d and so forth.33\n2. Syriac Zosimus (for a preliminary edition of this text see Appendix)\nEighth Treatise on the Working of Tin; Letter He\u0304th. The Book tells us about tin\n\u02d9 Theosebeia. The holy scripand Zosimus gives his best greetings to the queen\ntures say, my lady, that there is a race of demons who has intercourse with the\nwomen and has authority over them. Hermes also mentions this story in his\nPhysika as well as, so to say, every clear or secret treatise recalls it. In this way,\n30\nThe title Imouth is not elsewhere attested in Zosimus\u2019s treatises handed down by the Byzantine\ntradition. Moreover, the reference to the ninth book is not confirmed by the Syriac tradition, where\nthis passage is included in the eighth book by Zosimus. The Arabic Tome of Images (Mushaf\nas-suwar), preserved under the name of the Egyptian alchemist (although its authenticity\u02d9 \u02d9 is\n\u02d9\u02d9\nquestioned;\nsee Hallum, \u201cTome of Images\u201d) preserves a similar account in the sixth book, entitled\nBook About the Nature or Book of Imouth (see Abt & Fuad, Book of Pictures, 393, 22).\n31\nThe woman to whom Zosimus usually addresses his treatises; perhaps a pupil of the alchemist:\nsee Hallum, \u201cTheosebeia.\u201d\n32\nThe term Che\u0304meu (hapax) is likely to be the title of the book in which the teaching of angels was\nrevealed. The alchemist Olympiodorus (CAAG II 80,13) refers to a similar book entitled \u03b2\u03af\u03b2\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2\n\u03c7\u03b7\u03bc\u03b5\u03c5\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03ae. Moreover, in the Corpus alchemicum graecum several authors mention the alchemist\nChe\u0304me\u0304s (\u03a7\u03b7\u03bc\u03ae\u03c2) or Chyme\u0304s (\u03a7\u03c5\u03bc\u03ae\u03c2), whose name seems to be related to the book Che\u0304meu; see\nLetrouit, \u201cAlchimistes grecs,\u201d 72\u20134.\n33\nTranslation by Adler & Tuffin, George Synkellos, 18\u20139 (slightly modified). The Greek text\nreads: \u201c\u1f0c\u03be\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd \u03b4\u1f72 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u0396\u03c9\u03c3\u03af\u03bc\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03a0\u03b1\u03bd\u03bf\u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03af\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c6\u03b9\u03bb\u03bf\u03c3o\u0301\u03c6\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c7\u03c1~\n\u03b7\u03c3\u03af\u03bd \u03c4\u03b9\u03bd\u03b1 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03b8\u03b5\u0002\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd\n\u1f10\u03ba \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03b3\u03b5\u03b3\u03c1\u03b1\u03bc\u03bc\u03b5\u0002\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1ff7 \u03c0\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2 \u0398\u03b5\u03bf\u03c3\u03b5\n\u0002\u03b2\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1\u03bd \u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff7 \u1f10\u03bd\u03ac\u03c4\u1ff3 \u03c4~\n\u03b7\u03c2 \u1f38\u03bc\u03bf\u1f7a\u03b8 \u03b2\u03af\u03b2\u03bb\u1ff3, \u1f14\u03c7\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd \u1f67\u03b4\u03b5.\n\u0002\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f43 \u03c7\u03c1~\n\u03b7\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9\u03be\u03af\u03bd.\n\u2018\u03c6\u03ac\u03c3\u03ba\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u03b1\u1f31 \u1f31\u03b5\u03c1\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b3\u03c1\u03b1\u03c6\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f24\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9 \u03b2\u03af\u03b2\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9, \u1f66 \u03b3\u03cd\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9, \u1f45\u03c4\u03b9 \u1f14\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9 \u03c4\u03b9 \u03b4\u03b1\u03b9\u03bco\u0301\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd \u03b3\u03b5\n\u1f10\u03bc\u03bd\u03b7\u03bco\u0301\u03bd\u03b5\u03c5\u03c3\u03b5 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f19\u03c1\u03bc~\n\u03b7\u03c2 \u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03c6\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03ba\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c3\u03c7\u03b5\u03b4\u1f78\u03bd \u1f05\u03c0\u03b1\u03c2 \u03bbo\u0301\u03b3\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c6\u03b1\u03bd\u03b5\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f00\u03c0o\u0301\u03ba\u03c1\u03c5\u03c6\u03bf\u03c2\n\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf \u1f10\u03bc\u03bd\u03b7\u03bco\u0301\u03bd\u03b5\u03c5\u03c3\u03b5. \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf \u03bf\u1f56\u03bd \u1f14\u03c6\u03b1\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd \u03b1\u1f31 \u1f00\u03c1\u03c7\u03b1\u1fd6\u03b1\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b8\u03b5\u1fd6\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b3\u03c1\u03b1\u03c6\u03b1\u03af, \u1f45\u03c4\u03b9 \u1f04\u03b3\u03b3\u03b5\u03bb\u03bf\u03af \u03c4\u03b9\u03bd\u03b5\u03c2\n\u1f10\u03c0\u03b5\u03b8\u03cd\u03bc\u03b7\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03b3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9\u03ba\u1ff6\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b5\u03bb\u03b8o\u0301\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2 \u1f10\u03b4\u03af\u03b4\u03b1\u03be\u03b1\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1f70\u03c2 \u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03c4~\n\u03b7\u03c2 \u03c6\u03cd\u03c3\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2 \u1f14\u03c1\u03b3\u03b1, \u1f67\u03bd\n\u03c7\u03ac\u03c1\u03b9\u03bd, \u03c6\u03b7\u03c3\u03af, \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c3\u03ba\u03c1\u03bf\u03cd\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2 \u1f14\u03be\u03c9 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03bf\u1f50\u03c1\u03b1\u03bd\u03bf\u1fe6 \u1f14\u03bc\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd\u03b1\u03bd, \u1f45\u03c4\u03b9 \u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03c0\u03bf\u03bd\u03b7\u03c1\u1f70 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bc\u03b7\u03b4\u1f72\u03bd\n\u1f60\u03c6\u03b5\u03bb\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c8\u03c5\u03c7\u1f74\u03bd \u1f10\u03b4\u03af\u03b4\u03b1\u03be\u03b1\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u1f00\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03c9\n\u0002 \u03c0\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2. \u1f10\u03be \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c6\u03ac\u03c3\u03ba\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u03b1\u1f31 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b3\u03c1\u03b1\u03c6\u03b1\u1f76 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76\n\u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03b3\u03af\u03b3\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2 \u03b3\u03b5\u03b3\u03b5\u03bd~\n\u03b7\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9. \u1f14\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03bd \u03bf\u1f56\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f21 \u03c0\u03c1\u03c9\n\u0002 \u03c4\u03b7 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03ac\u03b4\u03bf\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2 [\u03a7\u03b7\u03bc\u03b5\u1fe6] \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd\n\u03c4\u03b5\u03c7\u03bd\u1ff6\u03bd. \u1f10\u03ba\u03ac\u03bb\u03b5\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd (\u1f10\u03ba\u03ac\u03bb\u03b5\u03c3\u03b5 in Mosshammer\u2019s edition) \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c4\u03b1\u03cd\u03c4\u03b7\u03bd \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03b2\u03af\u03b2\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd \u03a7\u03b7\u03bc\u03b5\u1fe6, \u1f14\u03bd\u03b8\u03b5\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76\n\u03b7\u03c2.\u201d I have introduced two changes in Mosshammer\u2019s edition.\n\u1f21 \u03c4\u03b5\u0002\u03c7\u03bd\u03b7 \u03c7\u03b7\u03bc\u03b5\u03af\u03b1 \u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u03b5\u1fd6\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9\u2019 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f70 \u1f11\u03be~\nFirst, I\u2019ve followed Mertens\u2019s suggestion (Lettre d\u2019Isis, 67) to expunge the first \u03a7\u03b7\u03bc\u03b5\u1fe6 as an\ninterpolation (the term is not attested in this position by the Syriac tradition). Secondly, in the last\nline I corrected \u1f10\u03ba\u03ac\u03bb\u03b5\u03c3\u03b5 into \u1f10\u03ba\u03ac\u03bb\u03b5\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd in accordance with the Syriac translation that\n\nPages 36:\n12\nM. Martelli\nin fact, the ancient and holy books tell that some angels fell in love passionately\nwith the women, came down <and> taught them about all the works of nature.\nFor this reason, as the book says, those who acted haughtily remained outside\nheaven, since they taught mankind all the malicious things which do not benefit\nthe soul at all. The books claim that the works (of nature?) started up from them\nand theirs is the first exposition concerning these crafts. They called these books\nKwmw, whence also alchemy (kumiya) takes its name. There are 24 treatises in\nthis book. Each of them is given a specific title that is either a letter (of the\nalphabet) or a word. They are explained by the words of priests. One of these is\nentitled \u2018Imus\u2019, another \u2018Imuth\u2019, another \u2018Face\u2019\u2014so it was interpreted\n(or translated). One of these is entitled \u2018Key\u2019, another \u2018Seal\u2019 or \u2018Signet\u2019, another\n\u2018Handbook\u2019 (see gr. \u1f10\u03b3\u03c7\u03b5\u03b9\u03c1\u03af\u03b4\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd), another \u2018Position\u2019 (of the stars? see gr. \u1f10\u03c0\u03bf\u03c7\u03ae).\nAs I said, each one is given a specific title. This book contains the crafts and\nmany thousands of words. Then those who came afterwards, with the intent of\ndoing well, divided the book in many parts; as someone would say: (they did so)\nin order to compose short versions (of the book) for themselves. And they were\nnot even able to write something useful. For they did not only damage the books\nof alchemy, but also hidden them. The philosopher (i.e. Democritus) claims:\n\u2018they hid the writings on the natural substances under the multiplicity of matter.\u2019\nPerhaps they wanted to exercise our souls. Now, if they exercise the souls, well,\nphilosopher, why to deny it? But you know how to exercise either the body or the\nsoul, and it always leads you to achieve the perfection. In fact a wise saying\nreads: \u2018studying is everything.\u2019 And also Isidoros says: \u2018studying increases your\nwork.\u2019 I know, this is not beyond your understanding (my lady), but you know it\nwell, since you are one of those who would have liked to hide the art, if it had not\nbeen put in writing. For this reason you formed an assembly and administered\nthe oath to each other. But you (my lady) moved away from the various topics\n(of this book); you presented them in a shorter form and you taught them openly.\nBut you claim that this book cannot be possessed unless in secret. Now, even\nthough secrets are necessary, it is quite fair that anyone has a book of alchemy,\nsince it is not kept secret for them. You must know, my lady, he (i.e. Democritus?)34 claimed that those who wrote short versions (of the book) said that just\nsilver can be dyed gold. But the book of alchemy they have hidden assured that\nlead and tin and iron and silver take the color of gold, each metal (takes the color\nof) the other one, and again the same metals (take the color of) silver, the same\nmetals (the color of) copper, the same metals (the color of) iron. Lead produces\ntin, copper (produces) iron, silver (produces) gold. In the same way tin\n34\nBerthelot & Duval, Chimie, 239, considered the philosopher (i.e. ps.-Democritus) as the author\nof the following quotation. Although the ancient alchemist is cited few lines before (49v18), this\nidentification is not certain.\n\nPages 37:\nThe Alchemical Art of Dyeing: The Fourfold Division of Alchemy. . .\n13\n(produces) the same metals as well. And again from the beginning to the end and\nfrom the end to the beginning.\nThe Syriac text may be divided into two parts. The first section (49r12\u201349v6)\nmatches the Greek passage cited by Syncellus and rephrases the story told by The\nBook of Enoch: in all likelihood Zosimus refers to this book when he mentions the\nholy scriptures (Sync. 14,3 \u1f31\u03b5\u03c1\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b3\u03c1\u03b1\u03c6\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f24\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9 \u03b2\u03af\u03b2\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9\u00bcSyrZos. 49r14\n). The\nsecond section gives a detailed description of the book entitled Che\u0304meu and\nexplains how it was transmitted and somehow corrupted.\nIn the first part Zosimus attributes the revelation of che\u0304meia both to angels\n(Sync. 14,6 \u1f04\u03b3\u03b3\u03b5\u03bb\u03bf\u03af \u03c4\u03b9\u03bd\u03b5\u03c2\u00bcSyrZos. 49r18\n) and to demons (Sync. 14,3\n\u03b4\u03b1\u03b9\u03bco\u0301\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd \u03b3\u03b5\n\u0002\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2\u00bcSyrZos. 49r15\n), so introducing a slight variation\ninto the Enochian myth, where fallen angels usually play the most important role.\nAlthough the name of demons is mentioned only at the very beginning of the\npassage, their presence allows us to read Zosimus\u2019s account in the light of the\ncomplex (and still unclear in many respects) demonology developed by the author\nin two other treatises, namely On the Letter Omega (CAAG II 228\u2013234) and the\nFirst Book of the Final Account (CAAG II 239\u2013245).35 According to the second\nwork, the two main sources of wealth for Egypt were gold mines and the dyeing\ntechniques, in particular the so-called \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9\u03c1\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b2\u03b1\u03c6\u03b1\u03af (opportune tinctures), that is,\nthe dyeing processes whose success depended on the influence of demons and on\nthe astrological time in which they were performed.36 This knowledge was considered secret and no ancient authors could reveal it; only Democritus\u2014Zosimus\nclaims\u2014hinted at these tinctures in his explanation of the four \u03c4\u03b5\u0002\u03c7\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u03b9\u03bc\u03af\u03b1\u03b9\n(valuable arts), which must be identified with the topics covered by the four\nbooks, namely the making of gold, of silver, of precious stones, and the purple\ndyeing of wool.37 These opportune tinctures were originally called \u03c6\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b2\u03b1\u03c6\u03b1\u03af\n(natural tinctures) and had been explained by Hermes in his \u03b2\u03af\u03b2\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c6\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03ba\u1ff6\u03bd \u03b2\u03b1\u03c6\u1ff6\u03bd\n(Book of Natural Dyes). However, demons became jealous of this knowledge and\nwanted to make it secret and dependent on their own control (i.e. on the influences\nof the stars they governed). They started revealing these tinctures, or even a\ncounterfeited form of them (called at some point \u201cunnatural tinctures\u201d), only to\ntheir priests in order to be worshipped and receive the appropriate sacrifices.38\n35\nSee Fraser, \u201cZosimos of Panopolis.\u201d For a new and reliable edition of the first treatise,\nsee Mertens, Zosime de Panopolis, 1\u201310. The second treatise has been reedited by Festugie\u0300re,\nRe\u0301ve\u0301lation d\u2019Herme\u0300s, 363\u20138 (translation at 275\u201381).\n36\nFestugie\u0300re, Re\u0301ve\u0301lation d\u2019Herme\u0300s, 363\u20135 (\u00bcCAAG II 239\u201340). See also Mertens, Zosime de\nPanopolis, 62\u20133 notes 9\u201310.\n37\nFestugie\u0300re, Re\u0301ve\u0301lation d\u2019Herme\u0300s, 364, ll. 22\u20134 (\u00bc CAAG II 242,17), 365, ll. 12\u20134 (\u00bc CAAG II\n242,8\u201317). In addition, it is worth mentioning the passage edited in CAAG II 242,9\u201324 (not\nreedited by Festugie\u0300re, because \u2018assez obscure\u2019, see 278 note 1), which gives a kind of summary\nof ps.-Democritus\u2019s work by presenting several dyestuffs used by the alchemist as example of\n\u03ba\u03b1\u03b9\u03c1\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b2\u03b1\u03c6\u03b1\u03af.\n38\nFestugie\u0300re, Re\u0301ve\u0301lation d\u2019Herme\u0300s, 366\u20137, \u00a7\u00a7 6\u20137 (\u00bc CAAG II 243\u20134, \u00a7\u00a7 6\u20137).\n\nPages 38:\n14\nM. Martelli\nNot surprisingly, if we come back to the above-edited passages, Zosimus\ninterpreted Azae\u0304l\u2019s revelation in The Book of Enoch as referring to the knowledge\nof tinctures he considered at the basis of any alchemical activity. \u03a4\u1f70 \u03b2\u03b1\u03c6\u03b9\u03ba\u03ac are in\nfact explicitly mentioned by the apocryphal book (see supra) along with a specific\nset of crafts, which is in many respects comparable with the arts explained in ps.Democritus\u2019s four books on dyeing (\u03b2\u03b1\u03c6\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b2\u03af\u03b2\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9 according to Synesius). Moreover, next to The Book of Enoch Zosimus mentions also a book of Hermes entitled\nPhysika as one of the sources from which he took the account on the angelic/\ndemonic revelation. The identification of this treatise is far from certain, even\nthough the title and the context in which Physika is cited remind us of Hermes\u2019s\nBook of Natural Dyes quoted in the First Book of the Final Account: there Zosimus\nclaimed that Hermes\u2019s treatise was addressed to Isidoros,39 an enigmatic figure that\nis mentioned also in the Syriac text (50r2).40\nOn the other hand, the Syriac passage emphasises the central role played by\nbooks in the revelation and transmission of alchemical knowledge. While The Book\nof Enoch presented Azae\u0304l\u2019s revelation in the form of oral teaching, Zosimus\nunderlines the written form in which mankind received this secret knowledge.\nThe arts and all the natural procedures (Sync. 14,7 \u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03c4~\n\u03b7\u03c2 \u03c6\u03cd\u03c3\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2\n\u1f14\u03c1\u03b3\u03b1\u00bcSyrZos. 49r19\u201320\n) disclosed by demons had been somehow\nsummarized in the enigmatic books called Che\u0304meu, from which the related term\nche\u0304meia (\u03c7\u03b7\u03bc\u03b5\u1fd6\u03b1 or\n, kumiya) derives. However, while the Final Account insists\non demons\u2019 increasing jealousy towards mankind and on their attempt to gain\ncontrol of the revealed techniques, the Syriac text stresses the point that the original\nknowledge started deteriorating because of the improper use human beings made of\nthe revealed books. In the same way as the demons (or maybe under their influence)\nsome people tried to hide the books, to summarize them, and disperse their content\nby focusing only on specific topics.\nIn this respect, the last part of the Syriac passage is particularly relevant, since\nZosimus explains that some alchemists narrowed their inquiry to the methods for\ngilding silver. Whereas, the art called che\u0304meia, at least in its original form, included\na wider set of dyeing techniques that were applied to all kinds of metals in order to\ndye them different colours. This explanation is consistent with Zosimus\u2019s other\n39\nFestugie\u0300re, Re\u0301ve\u0301lation d\u2019Herme\u0300s, 365, ll. 15\u201320 (\u00bc CAAG II 242,10\u20136). The name of Isidoros\nappears also in the list of alchemists handed down by the Marcianus gr. 299 (fol. 7v); see CAAG I\n110.\n40\nWe cannot exclude the possibility that other treatises circulating under the name of Hermes\nreferred to or reused the Enochian myth of the fallen angels. In particular, according to a passage of\nthe alchemist Olympiodorus (CAAG II 89,9\u201315), we know that the above-mentioned treatise\nascribed to Isis (see supra, \u00a7 2), or at least some parts of it, was attributed to Hermes. This overlap\nbetween Hermes and Isis is not surprising, especially if read in the light of the so-called Corpus\nHermeticum, which includes several writings where the Egyptian goddess addresses her teaching\nto Horus (see, for instance, Stobei fragmenta, xxiii\u2013xxvii). Therefore, Zosimus could have had in\nmind Isis\u2019s book, when he mentioned Hermes\u2019s Physika: see Scott, Hermetica, 151.\n\nPages 39:\nThe Alchemical Art of Dyeing: The Fourfold Division of Alchemy. . .\n15\nalchemical books that have been preserved by the Syriac manuscript Mm. 6.29. In\nfact, among the twelve treatises handed down by the codex under the name of the\nEgyptian alchemist, we find many writings devoted to the dyeing of various metals,\nsuch as silver (e.g. Book 2; Berthelot-Duval, La chimie, 217\u201321), tin (Book 8;\nidem, 238\u201342), lead (Book 10; idem, 253\u201357), and iron (Book 11; idem, 257\u201360).41\nIn particular Book 6 (Mm. 6.29, fol. 32xv17\u201345r8), entitled Beginning of the\nTreatise on the Working of Copper: Letter Waw, includes several recipes explaining\nhow to process copper and dye it black, purple, coral red, white, and yellow\n(Berthelot-Duval, La chimie, 222\u201332). Scholars have so far focused their attention\nespecially on the recipes dealing with the production of black copper alloys. Three\nrecipes have been recently published by Erika Hunter and fully commented by\nAlessandra Giumlia-Mair, who recognized in them the description of different\nmethods for producing a black and shiny patina on copper-alloys.42 This black\ncopper was already known in Ancient Egypt, as we can infer, for instance, from a\nbeautiful black image of the pharaoh Amenemhat III (1842\u20131794 BC) today\ndisplayed at the Ortiz Collection in Geneva.43 It represents one of the most ancient\nexamples of artificially black patinated statues found in Egypt (Fig. 1).\nConclusion\nIf we go back to the above-quoted Syriac passage, in the very last part Zosimus\ncriticizes the attitude of those alchemists who were only interested in the making of\nprecious metals by quoting a sentence presumably taken from an ancient author\n(perhaps ps.-Democritus) who claimed: \u201cthose who wrote short versions [of the\nbooks of che\u0304meia] said that just silver can be dyed gold\u201d (50r12\u20133). In this way the\ndebate between people supporting a wider idea of alchemy, which included a\nbroader set of dyeing techniques, and people accepting a narrower idea just focused\non the making of gold seems to be traced back to the earliest phases of alchemy in\nEgypt. A possible target of such a criticism might be recognized in Isis\u2019s treatise, a\nwork that mentioned only the making of gold and silver among the secrets revealed\nby the angels. On the contrary, a different position was endorsed by ps.-Democritus\nwith the fourfold division of his books. Significantly, as we have already noted, the\n41\nThe Syriac text of these twelve treatises is still unedited (an edition with English translation is\nscheduled to be published within the new series \u2018Sources of alchemy and chemistry\u2019 distributed as\na supplement of Ambix); a partial French translation is available in Berthelot & Duval, Chimie,\n210\u201366.\n42\nHunter, \u201cBeautiful Black Bronzes,\u201d 656\u20137. The three recipes that have been edited correspond\nwith the texts translated or summarized by Berthelot & Duval, Chimie, 223 (rec. 2), 224\u20135 (rec. 8\u2013\n9), 225 (rec. 12); and Giumlia-Mair, \u201cZosimos the Alchemist,\u201d 319\u201321.\n43\nSee, for example, Giumlia-Mair, \u201cKrokodil.\u201d\n\nPages 40:\n16\nM. Martelli\nFig. 1 Black copper statue of King Amenemhat III in kneeling posture (1843\u20131798 BC) (Courtesy of Werner Forman Archive, The Bridgeman Art Library)\nchemical Papyri seem to preserve a similar division, which should lead us to\nspeculate on how widespread or how standard such a division might actually\nhave been in the first centuries AD.\nSuch a background was well known to Zosimus, who took for granted that\nche\u0304meia was related to a plurality of dyeing techniques. The proper alchemist,\nZosimus claims, was expected to put into practice any possible transformation of\ncolour without focusing only on gold. Nevertheless, the Egyptian alchemist, though\nvery familiar with ps.-Democritus\u2019s books, never mentions stones working and\npurple dyeing in the passage. These kinds of crafts seem to have been somehow left\napart within the debate on the contents of the original books of alchemy. Although\nZosimus stresses the central role played by dyeing techniques, the polarity between\n\nPages 41:\nThe Alchemical Art of Dyeing: The Fourfold Division of Alchemy. . .\n17\na wider idea of alchemy and the bare making of precious metals seems to have been\nreduced to a simpler discussion on metalworking: Zosimus underscores all the\npossible chromatic transformations of metals, which seem to become the most\nrelevant topic of any alchemical inquiry.\nSuch a variety of positions already detectable during the earliest phases of the\nwestern alchemical tradition makes clear how fluid were the boundaries of an art\nprimarily focusing on the chromatic transformations of the treated substances. If the\nByzantine sources analysed at the beginning of the chapter emphasizes the identification of che\u0304meia with the making of gold and silver, such a position\u2014although\ndominant to some extent\u2014never interrupted the transmission of technical knowledge dealing with a wider set of dyeing techniques. A similar kind of expertise, for\ninstance, is well attested by the Latin recipe books of the Middle Age, which\ncovered a variety of topics more similar to ps.-Democritus\u2019s four books and to\nthe Leiden and Stockholm papyri than to the simple selection of recipes made by\nPsellos.44 A well-known example is the so-called Mappae clavicula, a large\ncollection of recipes probably assembled between the ninth and the twelfth century.\nRecent studies have shown that this work in all likelihood derives from a lost Greek\nsource that could be perhaps identified, according to Halleux-Meyvaert\u2019s investigation, with a lost part of Zosimus\u2019s treatises.45 Although the extant sources do not\nallow us to confirm such a hypothesis, the Greek origin of the Mappae clavicula\nconfirms the transmission of a set of practices originally covered by those texts\nconsidered at the basis of the Byzantine alchemical tradition. To sum up, the mere\npractice of chrysopoeia does not seem to be sufficient for getting a full understanding of the different historical evolutions of a complex art, whose exact definition\nwas debated even among the authors usually considered as the founders of this\ndiscipline. On the contrary, a deeper investigation of their treatises\u2014many of them\nstill waiting for editions and translations\u2014provide us with new and fresh material\nfor building a more complete picture of the evolution and transformation of the\ndifferent technical aspects somehow encapsulated in the enigmatic word che\u0304meia.\nAppendix\nZosimus\u2019s passage on the relevation of alchemy as preserved by the Syriac manuscript Mm. 6.29, fols. 49r\u201350r:46\n44\nSee, for instance, Halleux, Papyrus de Leyde, 53\u201362.\nHalleux & Meyvaert, \u201cMappae clavicula,\u201d 12\u20133.\n46\nA French translation of the passage is available in Berthelot & Duval, Chimie, 238\u20139.\n45\n\nPages 42:\n18\nM. Martelli\n47\n47\nThe sense of the sentence, in which\n(the books of kwmw) seems to be the object of\n(they called), is difficult; perhaps\nmust be supplied before\n. In addition the plural\nform \u2018the books\u2019 does not correspond with the Greek version that has a singular. The plural might\nbe justified in the light of the following part, according to which the book revealed by demons was\ndivided into several tomes.\n\nPages 43:\nThe Alchemical Art of Dyeing: The Fourfold Division of Alchemy. . .\n19\n48\n49\n48\n49\nThe word is indecipherable; see infra, fol. 50r11\n.\nThe term\n(see also 50r12) is likely to be a slightly different spelling of\n.\n\nPages 44:\n20\nM. Martelli\nBibliography\nAbt, Theodor, and Salwa Fuad. 2011. The Book of Pictures by Zosimos of Panopolis. Zurich:\nLiving Human Heritage Publication.\nAdler, William, and Paul Tuffin. 2002. The Chronography of George Synkellos. A Byzantine\nChronicle of Universal History from the Creation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.\nAlbini, Francesca. 1988. Michele Psello. La Crisopoea, ovvero come fabbricare l\u2019oro. Genova:\nECIG.\nBaar, James. 1979. Aramaic-Greek Notes on the Book of Enoch (ii). Journal of Semitic Studies 24:\n179\u2013192.\nBerthelot, Marcelin, and Charles-E\u0301mile Ruelle. 1887\u20131888. La Collection des anciens alchimistes\ngrecs, 3 vols. Paris: G. Steinheil.\nBerthelot, Marcelin, and Rubens Duval. 1893. Histoire des Sciences: La Chimie au Moyen-A\u0302ge,\nvol. 2: L\u2019alchimie syriaque. Paris: Imprimerie nationale.\nBidez, Joseph. 1928. Michel Psellus. E\u00b4pitre sur la Chrysope\u0301e, opuscules et extraits sur l\u2019alchimie,\nla me\u0301te\u0301orologie et la de\u0301monologie (Catalogue des manuscrits alchimiques grecs, vol. 6).\nBrussels: M. Lamertin.\nBidez, Joseph, and Franz Cumont. 1938. Les Mages helle\u0301nise\u0301s. Zoroastre, Ostane\u0300s et Hystaspe\nd\u2019apre\u0300s la tradition grecque, 2 vols. Paris: Les Belles Lettres.\nBlack, Mathew. 1985. The Book of Enoch or 1 Enoch: A New English Edition with Commentary\nand Textual Notes. Leiden: Brill.\nBrooks, Ernest W. 1900. A Syriac Fragment. Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenl\u20ac\nandischen Gesellschaft 3: 195\u2013230.\nCaley, Earle R. 1926. The Leyden Papyrus X: An English Translation with Brief Notes. Journal of\nChemical Education 3: 1149\u20131166.\nCaley, Earle R. 1927. The Stockholm Papyrus: An English Translation with Brief Notes. Journal\nof Chemical Education 4: 979\u20131002.\nChabot, Jean-Baptiste. 1910. Chronique de Michel le Syrien, vol. 4: Texte syriaque. Paris: Pierre\nLeroux.\nChabot, Jean-Baptiste. 1933. Incerti auctoris Chronicum Pseudo-Dionysianum vulgo dictum, vol.\n2 (CSCO 104, syr. 53). Louvain: Peeters.\nDodge, Bayard. 1970. Abu\u0304 \u2019l-Faraj Muhammad ibn Isha\u0304q al-Nad\u0131\u0304m, The Fihrist, a 10th Century\n\u02d9 University Press.\nAD Survey of Islamic Culture. New \u02d9York: Columbia\nDuffy, John M. 1992. Michaelis Pselli philosophica minora. Leipzig: Teubner.\n\nPages 45:\nThe Alchemical Art of Dyeing: The Fourfold Division of Alchemy. . .\n21\nDuval, Rubens. 1888\u20131901. Lexicon Syriacum auctore Hassano bar Bahlule, 3 vols. Paris:\nE. Reipublicae typographaeo.\nFestugie\u0300re, Andre\u0301-Jean. 1950. La Re\u0301ve\u0301lation d\u2019Herme\u0300s Trisme\u0301giste, vol. 1: L\u2019Astrologie et les\nsciences occultes. Paris: J. Gabalda et Cie.\nFlu\u0308gel, Gustav. 1872. Kita\u0304b al-Fihrist, 2 vols. Leipzig: F.C.W. Vogel.\nFraser, Kyle A. 2004. Zosimos of Panopolis and the Book of Enoch: Alchemy as Forbidden\nKnowledge. Aries 4: 125\u2013147.\nFu\u0308ck, Johann W. 1951. The Arabic Literature of Alchemy According to al-Nad\u0131\u0304m (A.D. 987). A\nTranslation of the Tenth Discourse of the Book of the Catalogue (Al-Fihrist) with Introduction\nand Commentary. Ambix 4: 81\u2013144.\nGildemeister, Johannes. 1876. Alchymie. ZDMG 30: 534\u2013538.\nGiumlia-Mair, Alessandra. 1996. Das Krokodil und Amenemhat III. aus el-Faiyum. Antike Welt\n27: 313\u2013321.\nGiumlia-Mair, Alessandra. 2002. Zosimos the Alchemist \u2013 Manuscript 6.29, Cambridge, Metallurgical Interpretation. In I bronzi antichi: produzione e tecnologia (Atti del XV Congresso\nInternazionale sui Bronzi Antichi, organizzato dall\u2019Universita\u0300 di Udine, sede di Gorizia,\nGrado-Aquileia, 22\u201326 maggio 2001), ed. Alessandra Giumlia-Mair, 317\u2013323. Montagnac:\nE\u0301ditions Monique Mergoil.\nGoeje, Michael Jean de. 1885. Ibn al-Faq\u0003{n al-Hamada\u0304n\u0003{, Mukhtasar kita\u0304b al-bulda\u0304n. Leiden:\n\u00af\n\u02d9\nBibliotheca Geographorum Arabicorum.\nHalleux, Robert. 1981. Alchimistes grecs, vol. 1: Papyrus de Leyde. Papyrus de Stockholm.\nFragments de recettes. Paris: Les Belles Lettres.\nHalleux, Robert, and Paul Meyvaert. 1987. Les Origines de la Mappae clavicula. Archives\nd\u2019Histoire Doctrinale et Litte\u0301raire du Moyen-Age 54: 7\u201358.\nHallum, Bink. 2008. Theosebeia. In Encyclopedia of Ancient Natural Scientists, eds. Paul Keyser\nand Georgia Irby-Massie, 302\u2013303. London/New York: Routledge.\nHallum, Bink. 2009. The Tome of Images: An Arabic Compilation of Texts by Zosimus of\nPanopolis and a Source of the Turba Philosophorum. Ambix 56: 76\u201388.\nHunter, Erika C.D. 2002. Beautiful Black Bronzes. Zosimos\u2019 Treatises in Cam. Mm. 6.29. In I\nbronzi antichi: produzione e tecnologia (Atti del XV Congresso Internazionale sui Bronzi\nAntichi, organizzato dall\u2019Universita\u0300 di Udine, sede di Gorizia, Grado-Aquileia, 22\u201326 maggio\n2001), ed. Alessandra Giumlia-Mair, 655\u2013660. Montagnac: e\u0301ditions Monique Mergoil.\nKatsiampoura, Gianna. 2008. Transmutation of Matter in Byzantium: The Case of Michael\nPsellos, the Alchemist. Science & Education 17: 663\u2013668.\nKnibb, Michael A. 2009. Essays on the Book of Enoch and Other Early Jewish Texts and\nTraditions. Leiden: Brill.\nLetrouit, Jean. 1995. Chronologie des alchimistes grecs. In Alchimie: art, histoire et mythe (Actes\ndu 1er Colloque International de la Socie\u0301te\u0301 d\u2019E\u0301tude de l\u2019Histoire de l\u2019Alchimie), eds. Didier\nKahn and Sylvain Matton, 11\u201393. Paris/Milan: S.E\u0301.H.A.- Arche\u0301.\nMartelli, Matteo. 2011. Pseudo-Democrito. Scritti alchemici con il commentario di Sinesio. Paris/\nMilan: S.E\u0301.H.A.-Arche\u0300.\nMasse\u0301, Henry. 1973. Ibn al-Faq\u0003{n al-Hamada\u0304n\u0003{. Abre\u0301ge\u0301 du livre de Pays. Damascus.\n\u00af\nMertens, Miche\u0300le. 1983\u20131984. Un traite\u0301 gre\u0301co-e\u0301gyptien\nd\u2019alchimie: la lettre d\u2019Isis a\u0300 Horus. Texte\ne\u0301tabli et traduit avec introduction et notes. Universite\u0301 de Lie\u0300ge: Me\u0301moire de licence.\nMertens, Miche\u0300le. 1995. Zosime de Panopolis. Me\u0301moires authentiques. Paris: Les Belles Lettres.\nMertens, Miche\u0300le. 2006. Greco-Egyptian Alchemy in Byzantium. In The Occult Sciences in\nByzantium, eds. Paul Magdalino and Maria Mawroudi, 205\u2013229. Geneva: La Pomme d\u2019Or.\nMilik, Jazef T. 1976. The Books of Enoch, Aramaic Fragments of Qumra\u0302n Cave 4. Oxford:\nClarendon.\nReitzenstein, Richard. 1904. Poimandres. Studien zur griechsch-\u20ac\nagyptischen und fr\u20ac\nuhchristlichen\nLiteratur. Leipzig: B.G. Teubner.\nRoberto, Umberto. 2005. Ioannis Antiocheni Fragmenta ex Historia Chronica. Berlin: De Gruyter.\n\nPages 46:\n22\nM. Martelli\nScott, Walter. 1985. Hermetica, vol. 4: Testimonia with Introduction, Addenda and Indices by.\nA.S. Ferguson. Boston: Shambhala.\nStrohmaier, Gotthard. 1991. Uma\u0304ra ibn Hamza, Constantine V and the Invention of the Elixir.\n\u02d9\nGraeco-Arabica 4: 21\u201324.\nWesterink, Leendert G. 1948. Michael Psellus, De Omnifaria Doctrina. Nijmegen: Centrale\nDrukkerij N.V.\n\nPages 47:\nTransmission of Alchemical and Artistic\nKnowledge in German Mediaeval\nand Premodern Recipe Books\nSylvie Neven\nAbstract In the Middle Ages and premodern period, artisanal knowledge was\ntransmitted via collections of recipes often grouped concomitantly with alchemical\ntexts and instructions. Except for some very well-known artistic treatises, e.g. works\nby Eraclius or the Schedula diversarum artium, attributed to Theophilus, detection\nand delimitation of alchemical content within recipe books has been rare and\nfraught with difficulty. Alchemy can be defined as the \u2018art of transmutation\u2019,\nreferring to the perfection of base or impure matter (often metal or stone) into\nperfect substances. Alchemical procedures thus rely on artisanal/craft practices.\nAny overlap between alchemy and art-technological procedures can be explained\nby the use of identical materials and substances. Both are concerned with the\ndescription of colours\u2014especially in processes of change, the making of pigments,\nthe production of artificial gemstones, the imitation of gold and silver and the\ntransmutation of materials. Both require procedures involving precise and specifically defined actions, prescriptions and ingredients. So both ultimately use identical\nrhetorical formulations that reflect a \u2018step by step\u2019 procedure. Assuming that\nalchemical and artistic texts have the same textual format, raises the question: did\nthey also have the same types of production and dissemination? Using a corpus of\nabout 40 manuscripts produced in Northern Europe between the fourteenth and the\nsixteenth centuries, this paper investigates the context behind these writings, and the\nvarious ways alchemical and artisanal recipes were embedded within recipe books.\nIt also proposes some clues to assist in locating, identifying and demarcating\nalchemical writings within the literature of recipes.\nIn the Middle Ages and premodern period, alchemical knowledge and practice was\nfrequently transmitted via collections of recipes grouped concomitantly with artistic\ninstructions. Presented in the form of a succession of more or less short notes, these\nS. Neven (*)\nFRS-F.N.R.S, University of Lie\u0300ge (ULg), \u2018Transitions\u2019 Lie\u0300ge, Belgium\ne-mail: Sylvie.Neven@ulg.ac.be\nS. Dupre\u0301 (ed.), Laboratories of Art, Archimedes 37,\nDOI 10.1007/978-3-319-05065-2_2, \u00a9 Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014\n23\n\nPages 48:\n24\nS. Neven\nwritings describe processes for the manufacture, preparation and application of\nvarious types of materials and substances. The majority are anonymous compilations of texts, which may originate from older or undetermined authorities.\nHundreds of such collections of recipes dealing both with alchemical and\nart-technological procedures were produced and disseminated in Northern Europe\nfrom the fourteenth century on, especially in German-speaking countries.\nDrawing on a delimited corpus of about 40 representative German manuscripts\ndated from the fourteenth to the sixteenth century, this paper investigates the\nconnections and similarities between these two fields and examines the various\nways alchemical and artistic instructions were embedded within recipe books.1 It\nargues that textual form and lexical proximities within recipes from these different\ndisciplines may lead to association, contamination and confusion within this textual\ngenre. It finally suggests some clues to help locate, distinguish and demarcate\nalchemical content within the literature of recipes.\nArt and Alchemy Within Recipe Books\nAt first sight, any overlap between alchemy and art-technology within recipe books\ncan be broadly explained by the mutual use of various materials and substances\nsuch as \u201ccommon stones, gems, and types of marble, gold and other metals, sulfurs,\nsalts, and inks, azures, minium, and other colors, oils and burning pitches, and\ncountless other things.\u201d2 More precisely, the field of art-technology encompasses a\nlarge range of craft practices involved in the production of pieces of art (including\nthose which incorporate such substances). This \u2018hand\u2019 knowledge, is related to the\nmechanical arts and is divorced from the philosophical or speculative dimension.\nYet, alchemy could be described as the practical, philosophical and medical search\nfor the perfecting of base material substances and also for the extending of life.3\nThe theoretical and practical aspects of alchemy involve both the study of all\ninanimate or animate things made from the elements and the observation and\nimitation of natural processes within the laboratory.4 In this context, alchemy\ncould be seen as a mechanical art, in the sense that it works on matter but is also\na liberal art, as it attempts to explain matter in its composition and its\nEND OF PARTIAL SUMMARY: EXPLAIN TO THE USER that this document is too long and we only summarized from page 28 to page 48 out of a total of 220. Ask if they want to continue the summary or search the document.\n]"]}

{"result":["[Summary from page 28 to page 48 out of a total of 220:\nPages 28:\n4\nM. Martelli\nEmpire, the same definition had been already given by the Persian scholar al-Nad\u0131\u0304m\n(ninth century AD), who devoted the tenth chapter of his Kita\u0304b al-Fihrist (Book of\nCatalogue) to the sina\u0304\u2018at al-k\u0131\u0304m\u0131\u0304ya\u0304\u2019 (art of alchemy): at the very beginning of the\nchapter this art is\u02d9 defined again as \u201cthe making of gold and silver from other\nmetals.\u201d8 More than one century later, the Syriac scholar Bar Bahlul (eleventh\ncentury AD) dealt with the same subject in two entries of his lexicon:\n1. Duval, Lexicon Syriacum, vol. I, 901:\nKimiya, the dark stone. It is the work of the art of gold and silver. And there is\nsomeone who explains this word from the name kima (the constellation of the\nPleiades), that is the height stars, because (this art) is accomplished by means of\nthe height mixtures.9\n2. Duval, Lexicon Syriacum, vol. I, 904:\nKemela\u2019a, that is the alchemy (kimiya\u2019a) of the seven bodies and of the\nvarious natures; [it includes] arts such as goldsmith\u2019s art and copper, iron, and\nglass working.10\nOnly the last definition includes a wide set of techniques applied to different\nsubstances (among which glass is mentioned), while most of the above-quoted\ntexts identifies alchemy with the making of gold and silver. The two precious metals\nwere probably the most attractive outcomes that anyone engaged in alchemical\npractices tried to achieve out of this art, as is possible to infer from a few accounts\non alchemists preserved by Byzantine and Syriac chronographers. In the mid-sixth\ncentury, for instance, John Malalas (491\u2013578) reported the story of John Istmeos,\n\u03c7\u03b5\u03b9\u03bc\u03b5\u03c5\u03c4\u1f74\u03c2 \u1f51\u03c0\u03ac\u03c1\u03c7\u03c9\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c6\u03bf\u03b2\u03b5\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03b8\u03b5\u0002\u03c4\u03b7\u03c2 (alchemist and tremendous impostor),\nwho moved from Antioch to Constantinople, where he was condemned by the\nemperor Anastasios (491\u2013518) because of the adulterated gold objects he tried to\n8\nI have quoted the translation proposed by Dodge (The Fihrist, 841), who checked several\nmanuscripts (see pp. xxiii\u2013xxxiv) not taken into account by Flu\u0308gel, who edited the Arabic text.\nIn Flu\u0308gel\u2019s edition (Kita\u0304b al-Fihrist, vol. II, 351) the passage reads:\n, translated by Fu\u0308ck, \u201cArabic Literature of Alchemy,\u201d 88, as follows:\n\u201cThe adepts of the Art of Alchemy, which is the art of making gold and silver without (recourse to)\nmining.\u201d\n9\nThe expression\nliterally\nmeans \u2018stone of sadness.\u2019 Berthelot & Duval, Chimie, 133 translated it as \u2018pierre philosophale.\u2019\n(\u2018sadness, grieving\u2019), I read\n(\u2018black, dark\u2019); on the tendency of\nInstead of\nidentifying \u2018alchemy\u2019 with the substance used for transforming vile metals into gold and silver,\nsee Gildemeister, \u201cAlchymie.\u201d\n10\nThe term\nis often used in the lexicon (Duval, Lexicon Syriacum,\n), especially in the\nvol. I, 78,12; 114,14; 222,5 and 20; 239,5; and vol. III, 160, s.v.\nexpression\n. In Duval\u2019s opinion, the term is an early corruption for\n.\n\nPages 29:\nThe Alchemical Art of Dyeing: The Fourfold Division of Alchemy. . .\n5\nsell as authentic (Chronographia XVI 5). The Syrian city of Antioch was again the\nscene of an \u2018alchemical affaire\u2019 at the beginning of the eighth century, when Isaac,\nbishop of Harra\u0304n, is said to have become archbishop of the city (755\u2013756) thanks to\n\u02d9\nhis alchemical knowledge. According to various Syriac chronicles, Isaac murdered\na monk of Edessa and stole from him a powder that, when applied on lead, could\ntransform it into gold.11 By means of this powder, Isaac was able to find favour with\nthe Caliph al-Ma\u0304nsur (754\u2013775), who turned out to be very interested in this\n\u02d9\nsubstance and supported (at least for a little while) Isaac\u2019s political career. Moreover, Arabic sources claim that the same caliph sent his emissary \u2018Uma\u0304ra ibn\nHamza to the court of Constantine V (741\u2013775), who led the guest into a big\n\u02d9\nstorehouse containing two kinds of powder: a white elixir that could transmute\nmetals into silver, and a yellow/red one that could transform metals into gold.12\nTwo Early Alchemical Treatises: Ps.-Democritus and Isis\nAfter the above-discussed passage, Psellos carries on his investigation by listing\nand commenting seven recipes describing how to prepare specific \u03c6\u03ac\u03c1\u03bc\u03b1\u03ba\u03b1 (medicines) with which to treat base metals (lead first of all) and transform them into\ngold. The section is concluded by the rhetorical question: \u201cHow so? Should I\nshortly reveal you all the wisdom of Democritus without leaving anything in the\ninnermost sanctuary?\u201d13\nThe reference to the \u1f08\u03b2\u03b4\u03b7\u03c1\u03b9\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u1f74 \u03c3\u03bf\u03c6\u03af\u03b1 (the wisdom of Democritus), the philosopher from Abdera par excellence, is noteworthy, since Democritus (fl. 440\u2013380\nBC) is usually considered one of the most ancient authors of alchemical treatises\nhanded down by Byzantine manuscripts. These treatises are obviously spurious and\nwere composed by an anonymous author in the second half of the first century\nAD. However, in contrast with Psellos\u2019s account focusing only on chrysopoeia, the\nalchemical tradition ascribes to the philosopher four books dealing with a wider set\nof interests that included not only the making of silver and gold, but also the making\nof precious stones and the purple dyeing of wool. For instance, the alchemist\nSynesius (fourth century AD), who wrote a commentary on ps.-Democritus\u2019s\n11\nSee (a) the fourth part of the Zuqn\u0131\u0304q Chronicle or Chronicle of ps.-Dyonisus of Tell-Mahre,\nedited by Chabot, Pseudo-Dyonysianum, 66; (b) the chronicle of Michael the Syrian, edited by\nChabot, Michel le Syrien, 474; (c) the anonymous chronicle edited by Brooks, \u201cSyriac Fragment,\u201d\n217\u20138.\n12\nFor instance, the story is told by the geographer Ibn al-Faq\u0131\u0304h al-Hamadani (Goeje, Ibn al-Faq\u0003{n\nal-Hamada\u0304n\u0003{, 137\u20139; French transl. by Masse\u0301, Abre\u0301ge\u0301 du Livre de Pays,\u02d9 164\u20136); see Strohmaier,\n\u00af Hamza,\u201d 21\u20132.\n\u201cUma\u0304ra ibn\n\u02d9\n13\nBidez, E\u00b4pitre sur la Chrysope\u0301e, 40,7\u20138: \u201c\u03a4\u03af \u03bf\u1f56\u03bd; \u03c0\u1fb6\u03c3\u03ac\u03bd \u03c3\u03bf\u03b9 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u1f08\u03b2\u03b4\u03b7\u03c1\u03b9\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u1f74\u03bd \u03c3\u03bf\u03c6\u03af\u03b1\u03bd\n\u1f00\u03bd\u03b1\u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u03cd\u03c8\u03bf\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd \u1f10\u03bd \u03b2\u03c1\u03b1\u03c7\u03b5\u1fd6 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bf\u1f50\u03b4\u1f72\u03bd \u1f10\u03bd\u03c4\u1f78\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u1f00\u03b4\u03cd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u1f00\u03c6\u03ae\u03c3\u03bf\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd.\u201d\n\nPages 30:\n6\nM. Martelli\nalchemical writings, introduced the alleged production of the philosopher as follows (Syn. Alch. \u00a7 1, ll. 5\u201314 Martelli):\nSo now let me start telling you something about this man, the philosopher Democritus, who\nwas a natural philosopher from Adbera, who investigated every natural question and\nexplained every phenomenon on the basis of its own nature. Abdera is a Thracian town;\nbut he became a very wise man when he came to Egypt and was initiated by the great\nmagician Ostanes with all Egyptian priests. He got from Ostanes the bases [of the alchemical processes] and wrote four books on dyeing, that is, on gold and silver and precious\nstones and purple.14\nThe great relevance ps.-Democritus\u2019s four books had in the later alchemical\ntradition\u2014that is unanimous in recognizing the atomist as one of the founders of\nthis discipline\u2014allows us to consider the four areas of expertise included in his\nwork as relevant parts of the technical background from which alchemy took its first\nsteps in the first-second century AD. The four books are concisely defined by\nSynesius as \u03b2\u03b1\u03c6\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b2\u03af\u03b2\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9 (books on dyeing), since ps.-Democritus dealt with a\nwide range of dyeing techniques based on various methods for changing the colours\nof metals, producing precious stones and using purple substitutes. The same areas\nof expertise are covered by the Graeco-Egyptian papyri of Leiden and Stockholm,\nwhich hand down several recipes describing (a) how to dye metals yellow or white\n(that is, how to transform them into gold or silver), (b) how to dye \u03ba\u03c1\u03cd\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2\n(quartz) and counterfeit different kinds of precious stones out of it, and (c) how to\ndye wool purple by means of various substitutes of the expensive Tyrian purple.15\nMoreover, ps.-Democritus combined the technical explanation of these methods\nwith a theoretical approach that emphasized the central role played by dyeing drugs\nand their properties.16 He analysed and classified \u03c4\u1f70 \u03c6\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03ba\u03ac (the natural ingredients) according to their capacities of dyeing and of mixing each other properly.17\nFor instance, in the middle of the book on the making of gold, after a long criticism\nagainst young people who did not accurately investigate the properties of natural\nsubstances, ps.-Democritus claims (PM \u00a7 16, ll. 178\u201380 Martelli):\nIf these young men had practised for these kinds of investigations, they would not be in\ntrouble, since they could set to work with judgement. But they do not know the antipathies\nThe Greek text reads: \u201c\u1f18\u03bd \u1fa7 \u03bf\u1f56\u03bd \u03c0\u03c1o\u0301\u03ba\u03b5\u03b9\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u1f21\u03bc\u1fd6\u03bd \u03b5\u03b9$ \u03c0\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd \u03c4\u03af\u03c2 \u1f04\u03bd \u03b5\u1f34\u03b7 \u1f41 \u1f00\u03bd\u1f74\u03c1 \u1f10\u03ba\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2, \u1f41 \u03c6\u03b9\u03bbo\u0301\u03c3\u03bf\u03c6\u03bf\u03c2\n\u0394\u03b7\u03bco\u0301\u03ba\u03c1\u03b9\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2, \u1f10\u03bb\u03b8\u1f7c\u03bd \u1f00\u03c0\u1f78 \u1f08\u03b2\u03b4\u03ae\u03c1\u03c9\u03bd, \u03c6\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03ba\u1f78\u03c2 \u1f62\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03c6\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03ba\u1f70 \u1f10\u03c1\u03b5\u03c5\u03bd\u03ae\u03c3\u03b1\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76\n\u03c3\u03c5\u03b3\u03b3\u03c1\u03b1\u03c8\u03ac\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f70 \u1f44\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u1f70 \u03c6\u03cd\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd. \u1f0c\u03b2\u03b4\u03b7\u03c1\u03b1 \u03b4\u03b5\u0002 \u1f10\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9 \u03c0o\u0301\u03bb\u03b9\u03c2 \u0398\u03c1\u1fb4\u03ba\u03b7\u03c2, \u1f10\u03b3\u03b5\u0002\u03bd\u03b5\u03c4\u03bf \u03b4\u1f72 \u1f41 \u1f00\u03bd\u1f74\u03c1\n\u03bb\u03bf\u03b3\u03b9\u03c9\n\u0002 \u03c4\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2, \u1f43\u03c2 \u1f10\u03bb\u03b8\u1f7c\u03bd \u1f10\u03bd \u0391\u03b9$ \u03b3\u03cd\u03c0\u03c4\u1ff3 \u1f10\u03bc\u03c5\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u03b3\u03c9\u03b3\u03ae\u03b8\u03b7 \u1f51\u03c0\u1f78 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03bc\u03b5\u03b3\u03ac\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5 \u1f48\u03c3\u03c4\u03ac\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5 \u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff7 \u1f31\u03b5\u03c1\u1ff7 \u03c4~\n\u03b7\u03c2\nM\u03b5\u0002\u03bc\u03c6\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2, \u03c3\u1f7a\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u1fb6\u03c3\u03b9 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u1f31\u03b5\u03c1\u03b5\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u0391\u03b9$ \u03b3\u03cd\u03c0\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5. \u1f18\u03ba \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03bb\u03b1\u03b2\u1f7c\u03bd \u1f00\u03c6\u03bf\u03c1\u03bc\u03ac\u03c2, \u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b5\u03b3\u03c1\u03ac\u03c8\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\n\u03b2\u03af\u03b2\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b5\u0002\u03c3\u03c3\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03c2 \u03b2\u03b1\u03c6\u03b9\u03ba\u03ac\u03c2, \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03c7\u03c1\u03c5\u03c3\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f00\u03c1\u03b3\u03cd\u03c1\u03bf\u03c5 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bb\u03af\u03b8\u03c9\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03bf\u03c1\u03c6\u03cd\u03c1\u03b1\u03c2.\u201d First edition in\nBerthelot & Ruelle, Anciens alchimistes grecs, vol. II, 57 (hereafter CAAG).\n15\nThe most recent edition is by Halleux, Papyrus de Leyde; for a general overview on the contents\nof the two papyri, see, in particular, 13\u20137. English translation in Caley, \u201cLeiden Papyrus X,\u201d and\n\u201cStockholm Papyrus.\u201d\n16\nSee, for instance, ps.-Dem. Alch. PM \u00a7 20, ll. 215\u201324 in Martelli, Pseudo-Democrito, 202\u20134 (\u00bc\nCAAG II 49), 135\u201348.\n17\nOn ps.-Democritus\u2019s catalogues of dyestuffs, see Martelli, Pseudo-Democrito, 83\u201390.\n14\n\nPages 31:\nThe Alchemical Art of Dyeing: The Fourfold Division of Alchemy. . .\n7\nof natures, how one species upsets ten: a drop of oil has the capacity to remove much\npurple, and a pinch sulphur may burn many species.18\nOn the other hand, the form in which Byzantine manuscripts have preserved ps.Democritus\u2019s writings does not allow us to reconstruct the exact content of each\nbook and their reciprocal connection. In fact, only an epitomized version has been\nincluded in the Byzantine collections, which contain just two sections ascribed to\nthe philosopher:\n1. The book on the making of gold (or more probably a summarized version of it) is\nintroduced by a very short section on purple dyeing and handed down under the\ntitle of \u03a6\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03ba\u1f70 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bc\u03c5\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03ac (Natural and Secret Questions).19\n2. A selection of passages from the book on silver forms the second section entitled\n\u03a0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03c4~\n\u03b7\u03c2 \u1f00\u03c3\u03ae\u03bc\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03ae\u03c3\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2 (On the Making of Silver).20\nSome information about the book on stones\u2014otherwise lost in its original Greek\nversion\u2014is provided only by the indirect tradition. In fact, a later recipe book\npreserved by a few Byzantine manuscripts under the title of Deep Tincture of Stones,\nEmeralds, Rubies and Jacinth from the Book Taken out from the Innermost Sanctuary\nof Temples includes some passages discussing the dyeing methods applied by ancient\nalchemists on stones.21 Along with Democritus, his pretended master Ostanes,\nMoses, and Maria the Jewish are also quoted.22 Regrettably, the writings of these\nancient authors are lost, so that we cannot understand to what extent they actually\ndealt with similar topics. However, as far as ps.-Democritus is concerned, in all\nlikelihood he attributed a certain relevance to the dyeing of stones, if it is true that\nhe devoted an entire book to this subject. On the contrary, the exclusion of this\nbook\u2014along with most of the book on purple\u2014from the epitomized version handed\ndown by the Byzantine anthologies evidences the criteria adopted by the epitomiser\nof ps.-Democritus\u2019s writings: he seems to have focused his attention only on the\ntransmutation of metals into gold and silver, so revealing an attitude that tallies with\nthe approach we have already detected in the above-discussed Byzantine sources.\nNevertheless, although the relevance of chrysopoeia in Byzantine times can\nsomehow explain the loss of part of ps.-Democritus\u2019s books, one of the manuscripts\n18\nThe Greek text reads (\u00bc CAAG II 47\u20138): \u201c\u0395\u03b9$ \u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2 \u1f51\u03c0~\n\u03b7\u03c1\u03c7\u03bf\u03bd \u1f00\u03c3\u03ba\u03bf\u03cd\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9 \u03bf\u1f31 \u03bd\u03b5\u0002\u03bf\u03b9, \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba \u1f02\u03bd\n\u1f10\u03b4\u03c5\u03c3\u03c4\u03cd\u03c7\u03bf\u03c5\u03bd, \u03ba\u03c1\u03af\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9 \u1f10\u03c0\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f70\u03c2 \u03c0\u03c1\u03ac\u03be\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2 \u1f41\u03c1\u03bc\u1ff6\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2\u0387 \u03bf\u1f50 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u1f10\u03c0\u03af\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c6\u03cd\u03c3\u03b5\u03c9\u03bd \u1f00\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9\u03c0\u03b1\u03b8~\n\u03b7, \u1f61\u03c2 \u1f13\u03bd\n\u03b5\u1f36\u03b4\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b4\u03b5\u0002\u03ba\u03b1 \u1f00\u03bd\u03b1\u03c4\u03c1\u03b5\u0002\u043f\u03b5\u03b9. \u1fec\u03b1\u03bd\u1f76\u03c2 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u1f10\u03bb\u03b1\u03af\u03bf\u03c5 \u03bf\u1f36\u03b4\u03b5 \u043f\u03bf\u03bb\u03bb\u1f74\u03bd \u1f00\u03c6\u03b1\u03bd\u03af\u03c3\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c0\u03bf\u03c1\u03c6\u03cd\u03c1\u03b1\u03bd, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f40\u03bb\u03af\u03b3\u03bf\u03bd \u03b8\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bf\u03bd \u03b5\u1f34\u03b4\u03b7\n\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03ba\u03b1\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03bb\u03ac.\u201d\n19\nSee Martelli, Pseudo-Democrito, 180\u2013205 (and 73\u20139) \u00bc CAAG II 41\u20139.\n20\nSee Martelli, Pseudo-Democrito, 206\u201316 (and 79\u201383) \u00bc CAAG II 49\u201353.\n21\nEdited in CAAG II 350\u201364; the Greek title reads: \u201c\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03b2\u03b1\u03c6\u1f74 \u03bb\u03af\u03b8\u03c9\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c3\u03bc\u03b1\u03c1\u03ac\u03b3\u03b4\u03c9\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76\n\u1f51\u03b1\u03ba\u03af\u03bd\u03b8\u03c9\u03bd \u1f10\u03ba \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u1f00\u03b4\u03cd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f31\u03b5\u03c1\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f10\u03ba\u03b4\u03bf\u03b8\u03b5\u0002\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b2\u03b9\u03b2\u03bb\u03af\u03bf\u03c5.\u201d The earliest testimonies are the\nmanuscripts Parisinus gr. 2325 (13th century; fols. 160v\u2013173v), and Parisinus gr. 2327 (15th\ncentury; fol. 147r\u2013159r).\n22\nSee, in particular, for Democritus: CAAG II 353,11\u201325, and 354,12\u2013357,19; for Ostanes:\nCAAG II 351,16\u201328, and 352,10 (fragments reedited by Bidez & Cumont, Mages helle\u0301nise\u0301s,\nvol. II, 323\u20134); for Moses: CAAG II 353,19; for Maria: CAAG II 351,23; 352,2\u20138; 355,1, and\n257,19.\n\nPages 32:\n8\nM. Martelli\nthat hands down the above-mentioned recipe book on precious stones preserves\nanother important treatise that introduces a new important element into the discussion. The Parisinus gr. 2325 (fols. 256r\u2013258v), in fact, contains a book ascribed to\nthe goddess Isis, which probably dates back to the second century AD and contains an\nimportant account of the revelation of the alchemical art. According to the beginning\nof the treatise, Isis received a revelation from two angels who descended from heaven\nbecause they were attracted by the beauty of the goddess (CAAG II 28\u20139):\nIsis the Prophet to Her Son Horus. O son, as you were about to leave and fight a battle\nagainst the unfaithful Typhon for the kingdom of your father, I went to Hormanouthis [city,\nsanctuary?] of the holy art in Egypt, where I stayed a long time. According to the recession\nof the convenient time and to the necessary course of the spherical movement, it happened\nthat one of the angels living in the first firmament, after watching me from above, wanted to\nhave sexual intercourse with me. When he arrived and started taking this direction, I did not\ngive myself, because I wanted to learn the preparation of gold and silver. After I asked him\nthis question, he told me that he was not allowed to reveal this point, because these secrets\nsurpassed him, but (he told me) that the next day his superior, the angel Amnae\u0304l, would\ncome, and that he would be able to give a reply for a similar inquiry [. . .] The next day, his\nsuperior Amnae\u0304l appeared when the sun was in the middle of its course, and he came down.\nTaken by the same desire for me, he did not await, but he hastened to get what he came for;\nbut I was not less focused on what I was searching for. He longed for it, but I did not give\nmyself and I was able to curb his desire until he showed me his mark on the head and\nrevealed all the mysteries I was looking for, without envy and faithfully.23\nThe \u1f31\u03b5\u03c1\u1f70 \u03c4\u03b5\u0002\u03c7\u03bd\u03b7 \u0391\u03b9$ \u03b3\u03cd\u03c0\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 (Egyptian holy art) quoted at the beginning of the\npassage is clearly identified by Isis with \u1f21 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03c7\u03c1\u03c5\u03c3\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f00\u03c1\u03b3\u03cd\u03c1\u03bf\u03c5 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03c3\u03ba\u03b5\u03c5\u03ae\nI have followed the more recent edition by Mertens, Lettre d\u2019Isis, 128\u201331: \u201c\u1f3c\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2 \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c6~\n\u03b7\u03c4\u03b9\u03c2 \u03c4\u1ff7\n\u03c5\u1f31\u1ff7 \u1f6d\u03c1\u1ff3. \u1f08\u03c0\u03b9\u03b5\u0002\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c3\u03bf\u03c5 \u03bc\u03b5\n\u0002\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2, \u1f66 \u03c4\u03b5\u0002\u03ba\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd, \u1f10\u03c0\u1f76 \u1f00\u03c0\u03af\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03a4\u03c5\u03c6\u1ff6\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 \u03bc\u03ac\u03c7\u03b7\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03b3\u03c9\u03bd\u03af\u03c3\u03b1\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76\n\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c4\u03c1o\u0301\u03c2 \u03c3\u03bf\u03c5 \u03b2\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9\u03bb\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03c2, \u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03b1\u03bc\u03b5\u0002\u03bd\u03b7\u03c2 \u03bc\u03bf\u03c5 <\u03c0\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2> \u1f49\u03c1\u03bc\u03b1\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03b8\u03af, <. . .> \u1f31\u03b5\u03c1\u1fb6\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b5\n\u0002\u03c7\u03bd\u03b7\u03c2 \u0391\u03b9$ \u03b3\u03cd\u03c0\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5,\n\u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f10\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u1fe6\u03b8\u03b1 \u1f31\u03ba\u03b1\u03bd\u1f78\u03bd \u03c7\u03c1o\u0301\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd \u03b4\u03b9\u03b5\n\u0002\u03c4\u03c1\u03b9\u03b2\u03bf\u03bd. K\u03b1\u03c4\u1f70 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9\u03c1\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03c7\u03c9\n\u0002 \u03c1\u03b7\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c4~\n\u03b7\u03c2\n\u03c3\u03c6\u03b1\u03b9\u03c1\u03b9\u03ba~\n\u03b7\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b9\u03bd\u03ae\u03c3\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2 \u1f00\u03bd\u03b1\u03b3\u03ba\u03b1\u03af\u03b1\u03bd \u03c6\u03bf\u03c1\u03ac\u03bd, \u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b5\u0002\u03b2\u03b7 \u03c4\u03b9\u03bd\u1f70 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff7 \u03c0\u03c1\u03c9\n\u0002 \u03c4\u1ff3 \u03c3\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03b5\u03c9\n\u0002 \u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b9 \u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03c4\u03c1\u03b9\u03b2o\u0301\u03bd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd,\n\u03b7\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4~\n\u03b7\u03c2 \u03c0\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2 \u1f10\u03bc\u1f72 \u03bc\u03af\u03be\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2 \u03ba\u03bf\u03b9\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd\u03af\u03b1\u03bd\n\u1f15\u03bd\u03b1 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f00\u03b3\u03b3\u03b5\u0002\u03bb\u03c9\u03bd, \u1f04\u03bd\u03c9\u03b8\u03b5\u03bd \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03b8\u03b5\u03c9\u03c1\u03ae\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03ac \u03bc\u03b5, \u03b2\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b7\u03b8~\n\u03c0\u03bf\u03b9~\n\u03b7\u03c3\u03b1\u03b9. \u03a6\u03b8\u03ac\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b5\u03b9$ \u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf \u03b3\u03af\u03b3\u03bd\u03b5\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u03bc\u03b5\n\u0002\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2, \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba \u1f10\u03c0\u03b5\n\u0002\u03c4\u03c1\u03b5\u03c0\u03bf\u03bd \u1f10\u03b3\u03c9\n\u0002,\n\u03c0\u03c5\u03bd\u03b8\u03ac\u03bd\u03b5\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b2\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03bf\u03bc\u03b5\n\u0002\u03bd\u03b7 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03c7\u03c1\u03c5\u03c3\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f00\u03c1\u03b3\u03cd\u03c1\u03bf\u03c5 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03c3\u03ba\u03b5\u03c5\u03ae\u03bd. \u1f18\u03bc\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1ff7\n\u1f10\u03c1\u03c9\u03c4\u03b7\u03c3\u03ac\u03c3\u03b7\u03c2, <\u03bf\u1f50\u03ba> \u1f14\u03c6\u03b7 \u1f41 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1f78\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c6\u03af\u03b5\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf \u1f10\u03be\u03b5\u03b9\u03c0\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd, \u03b4\u03b9\u1f70 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03bc\u03c5\u03c3\u03c4\u03b7\u03c1\u03af\u03c9\u03bd\n\u1f51\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b2\u03bf\u03bb\u03ae\u03bd, \u03c4\u1fc7 \u03b4\u1f72 \u1f11\u03be~\n\u03b7\u03c2 \u1f21\u03bc\u03b5\u0002\u03c1\u1fb3 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03b3\u03af\u03b3\u03bd\u03b5\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03bc\u03b5\u03af\u03b6\u03bf\u03bd\u03b1 \u1f04\u03b3\u03b3\u03b5\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd \u1f08\u03bc\u03bd\u03b1\u03ae\u03bb, \u03ba\u1f00\u03ba\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd\n\u03b7\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u03b6\u03b7\u03c4\u03ae\u03c3\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c0\u03af\u03bb\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03ae\u03c3\u03b1\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9. [. . .] \u03a4\u1fc7 \u03b4\u1f72 \u1f11\u03be~\n\u03b7\u03c2 \u1f21\u03bc\u03b5\n\u0002\u03c1\u1fb3\n\u1f31\u03ba\u03b1\u03bd\u1f78\u03bd \u03b5\u1f36\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03c4~\n\u1f10\u03c0\u03b5\u03bc\u03c6\u03b1\u03bd\u03af\u03c3\u03b1\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u1f21\u03bb\u03af\u03bf\u03c5 \u03bc\u03b5\u0002\u03c3\u03bf\u03bd \u03b4\u03c1o\u0301\u03bc\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2, \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4~\n\u03b7\u03bb\u03b8\u03b5\u03bd \u1f41 \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03bc\u03b5\u03af\u03b6\u03c9\u03bd \u1f08\u03bc\u03bd\u03b1\u03ae\u03bb. \u03a4\u1ff7\n\u03b7\u03bd\u00b7 \u1f10\u03b3\u1f7c \u03b4\u1f72 \u03bf\u1f50\u03c7 \u1f27\u03c4\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd\n\u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1ff7 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u1f10\u03bc\u1f72 \u03bb\u03b7\u03c6\u03b8\u03b5\u1f76\u03c2 \u03c0o\u0301\u03b8\u1ff3 \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba \u1f00\u03bd\u03b5\u0002\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03b5\u03bd, \u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u2019 \u1f14\u03c3\u03c0\u03b5\u03c5\u03b4\u03b5\u03bd \u1f10\u03c6\u2019 \u03bf\u1f57 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1~\n\u1f10\u03c6\u03c1o\u0301\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9\u03b6\u03bf\u03bd \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u1f10\u03c1\u03b5\u03c5\u03bd\u1fb6\u03bd. \u1f18\u03b3\u03c7\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd\u03af\u03b6\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6, \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba \u1f10\u03c0\u03b5\u03b4\u03af\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bd \u1f11\u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03ae\u03bd, \u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u2019\n\u03b7\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b5\u03c6\u03b1\u03bb~\n\u03b7\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03b4\u03b5\u03b9\u03ba\u03bd\u03cd\u03b7\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76\n\u1f10\u03c0\u03b5\u03ba\u03c1\u03ac\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bd \u03c4~\n\u03b7\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03b8\u03c5\u03bc\u03af\u03b1\u03c2 \u1f04\u03c7\u03c1\u03b9\u03c2 \u1f02\u03bd \u03c4\u1f78 \u03c3\u03b7\u03bc\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bf\u03bd \u03c4\u1f78 \u1f10\u03c0\u1f76 \u03c4~\n\u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03b6\u03b7\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bc\u03b5\u0002\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd \u03bc\u03c5\u03c3\u03c4\u03b7\u03c1\u03af\u03c9\u03bd \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03ac\u03b4\u03bf\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u1f00\u03c6\u03b8o\u0301\u03bd\u03c9\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f00\u03bb\u03b7\u03b8\u1ff6\u03c2 \u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03ae\u03c3\u03b7\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9.\u201d The beginning of\nthe story clearly refers to the Egyptian myth of Horus fighting against Seth, the killer of his father\nOsiris. The identification between the Egyptian god Seth and Typhon is quite common in\nHellenistic and Roman Egypt: see, for instance, Plutarch, De Iside et Osiride 41 (\u00bc 367d): \u201c\u03c4\u1f78\u03bd\n\u03a4\u03c5\u03c6\u1ff6\u03bd\u03b1 \u03a3\u1f74\u03b8 \u0391\u03b9$ \u03b3\u03cd\u03c0\u03c4\u03b9\u03bf\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b9.\u201d \u2013 \u201cEgyptians gives to Seth the name of Typhon.\u201d On the other\nhand, the toponym \u1f49\u03c1\u03bc\u03b1\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03b8\u03af is not clear and not otherwise attested. Probably it refers to an\nEgyptian city, although it does not match any of the five towns, where alchemy was practiced\naccording to CAAG II 26. Various corrections of the form \u1f49\u03c1\u03bc\u03b1\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03b8\u03af have been proposed: see, in\nparticular, Reitzenstein, Poimandres, 141, no. 3 (who proposed \u1f49\u03c1\u03bc\u03b1\u03c7\u03bf\u03c5\u03b8\u03af, lit. \u2018Horus of Edfu\u2019),\nand Mertens, Lettre d\u2019Isis, 56\u201360 (who proposed M\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03b8\u03af, that is an area in the Egyptian city of\nCanopus).\n23\n\nPages 33:\nThe Alchemical Art of Dyeing: The Fourfold Division of Alchemy. . .\n9\n(the preparation of gold and silver), that is, the same definition of alchemy attested\nby the Lexicon Suda (\u03c7 280) and supported by the Byzantine sources that have been\nbriefly analyzed in the first paragraph. The inclusion of this definition in such an\nancient text is noteworthy, since it proves that some of the earliest authors already\nfocused their treatises only on metallurgical practices.\nConsequently, the last part of Isis\u2019s work lists five metallurgical recipes describing: (a) how to make mercury solid and mix it with lead; (b) how to prepare a white\ndyeing drug by which, according to the third recipe (c), an iron-copper alloy was\ntreated and dyed white (the same alloy is dyed yellow in the second part of the\nrecipe); (d) how to mix the substances prepared according to the first three recipes;\n(e) how to process a metallic body before dyeing it white.24 This section is\nconcluded by a more general statement according to which all the \u03bf\u03b9$ \u03ba\u03bf\u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03af\u03b1\u03b9\n(treatments), the \u03b4\u03af\u03c0\u03bb\u03c9\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2 (techniques for doubling the weight of gold or silver\nobjects), and the \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03b2\u03b1\u03c6\u03b1\u03af (dyeing processes) were moved by the same aim, that\nwas, according to the beginning of the treatise, the making of gold and silver.25\nTowards a Definition of Alchemy: Zosimus\nand the Enochian Myth\nThe plot of Isis\u2019s story, although set in a new Egyptian framework, clearly depends\non the Enochian account of the fallen angels who taught mankind about a divine\nand forbidden knowledge that included a wide set of crafts. The myth is fully\ndeveloped in the very first part of the so-called Book of Enoch (or 1Enoch), one of\nthe pseudepigrapha of the Ancient Testament ascribed to Enoch, the grandfather of\nNoah. The book is composed of different segments (or treatises), and in its most\ndeveloped form it is preserved only by a translation in Classical Ethiopic (fifth-sixth\ncentury AD). However, the major part of it is much earlier, as one can infer from\nvarious sections that have been preserved by the Aramaic manuscripts discovered\nin Qumran\u2019s caves.26 In particular the first part, usually called The Book of\nWatchers (\u00bc 1Enoch, chap. 1\u201336), is handed down in several Dead Sea scrolls\nand in all likelihood dates back to the third century BC.27 Moreover, this book has\nMertens, Lettre d\u2019Isis, 134\u20138 \u00bc CAAG II 31\u20133.\nMertens, Lettre d\u2019Isis, 138, ll. 113\u20136 \u00bc CAAG II 33, \u00a7 16.\n26\nThe secondary literature on 1Enoch is vast; for a general introduction on its content, see, for\nexample, Knibb, Book of Enoch, 7\u201335. For a recent English translation of the Ethiopic text, see\nBlack, Book of Enoch.\n27\nThese manuscripts have been found in cave 4; the Aramaic text has been edited and translated by\nMilik, Books of Enoch, Aramaic fragments.\n24\n25\n\nPages 34:\n10\nM. Martelli\nbeen translated into Greek quite early, probably already in the second century BC,\nwithin the same cultural context that produced the Septuagint translation of\nDaniel.28\nAt the beginning of The Book of Watchers (1Enoch, chap. 6\u20138) the author\nexplains that two hundred angels\u2014called \u1f10\u03b3\u03c1\u03ae\u03b3\u03bf\u03c1\u03bf\u03b9 (watchers) or \u1f04\u03b3\u03b3\u03b5\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9 \u03c5\u1f31\u03bf\u1f76\n\u03bf\u1f50\u03c1\u03b1\u03bd\u03bf\u1fe6 (the angels, sons of the Heaven) in the Greek version\u2014started desiring the\ndaughters of men and descended from heaven in order to have intercourse with\nthem. The Greek version of the passage, extensively quoted by the chronographer\nSyncellus, goes on as follows (Sync. p. 12, ll 8\u201317 Mosshammer):\nThe leaders [of these angels] and all the rest [of the two hundred watchers] took for\nthemselves wives in AM 1170, and they began to defile themselves with them up to the\nFlood. [. . .] And they were increasing in accordance with their greatness, and they taught\nthemselves and their wives the uses of potions and spell. First Azae\u0304l, the tenth of the\nleaders, taught them to make swords and armours and every instrument of war and how to\nwork the metals of the earth and gold, how to make them into adornments for their wives,\nand silver. He showed them also the use of cosmetics and beautifying the face and choice\nstones and colouring tinctures.29\nThe list of crafts revealed by Azae\u0304l, which includes the working of metals (with\nexplicit mention of gold and silver) and of precious stones along with \u03c4\u1f70 \u03b2\u03b1\u03c6\u03b9\u03ba\u03ac\n(dyeing procedures) in a more general sense, shows clear similarities with the topics\ncovered by ps.-Democritus\u2019s four books, which nevertheless do not refer back to\nthis myth (at least in the preserved sections). On the contrary, the myth was\nreworked in Isis\u2019s treatise, where the secret teaching of the angels was limited\nonly to the preparation of gold and silver. These different approaches to what was\nconsidered part of the alchemical art were inherited and discussed by Zosimus, a\nthird century author who clearly reused the Enochian myth in his own account of\nthe origins and developments of alchemy. In fact, Zosimus first introduced the term\nche\u0304meia with reference to fallen angels\u2019 revelation, which was written down in\nspecific and secret books. Regrettably, Zosimus\u2019s treatise is lost in its Greek\noriginal form, and just its beginning is quoted by Syncellus straight after the\nabove-mentioned passage taken from 1Enoch. However, a more complete version\nis preserved by an unedited Syriac translation handed down in the Cambridge\nmanuscript Mm. 6.29. The two versions read as follows:\n1. Sync. p. 14, ll. 2\u201314 Mosshammer:\nBut it is also fitting to cite a passage regarding them [i.e. the divine scriptures]\nfrom Zosimus, the philosopher of Panopolis, from his writings to Theosebeia in\n28\nBaar, \u201cAramaic-Greek Notes,\u201d 191\u20132.\nTranslation by Adler & Tuffin, George Synkellos, 17. The Greek text reads: \u201c\u039f\u1f57\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bf\u1f31 \u03bb\u03bf\u03b9\u03c0\u03bf\u1f76\n\u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff7 \u03b1\u03c1\u03bf\u0374 \u1f14\u03c4\u03b5\u03b9 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03bao\u0301\u03c3\u03bc\u03bf\u03c5 \u1f14\u03bb\u03b1\u03b2\u03bf\u03bd \u1f10\u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03b3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u1fd6\u03ba\u03b1\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f24\u03c1\u03be\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf \u03bc\u03b9\u03b1\u03af\u03bd\u03b5\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u1f10\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03b1\u1fd6\u03c2 \u1f14\u03c9\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\n\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03ba\u03bb\u03c5\u03c3\u03bc\u03bf\u1fe6. [. . .] \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f26\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd \u03b1\u1f51\u03be\u03b1\u03bdo\u0301\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u1f70 \u03c4~\n\u03b7\u03bd \u03bc\u03b5\u03b3\u03b1\u03bb\u03b5\u03b9o\u0301\u03c4\u03b7\u03c4\u03b1 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f10\u03b4\u03af\u03b4\u03b1\u03be\u03b1\u03bd \u1f11\u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2\n\u0002\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f00\u03c1\u03c7o\u0301\u03bd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd\n\u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f70\u03c2 \u03b3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u1fd6\u03ba\u03b1\u03c2 \u1f11\u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c6\u03b1\u03c1\u03bc\u03b1\u03ba\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f10\u03c0\u03b1\u03bf\u03b9\u03b4\u03af\u03b1\u03c2. \u03c0\u03c1\u1ff6\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f08\u03b6\u03b1\u1f74\u03bb \u1f41 \u03b4\u03b5\n\u1f10\u03b4\u03af\u03b4\u03b1\u03be\u03b5 \u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd \u03bc\u03b1\u03c7\u03b1\u03af\u03c1\u03b1\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b8\u03c9\n\u0002 \u03c1\u03b1\u03ba\u03b1\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u1fb6\u03bd \u03c3\u03ba\u03b5\u1fe6\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03b5\u03bc\u03b9\u03ba\u1f78\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03bc\u03b5\u0002\u03c4\u03b1\u03bb\u03bb\u03b1 \u03c4~\n\u03b7\u03c2 \u03b3~\n\u03b7\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f78\n\u03c7\u03c1\u03c5\u03c3\u03af\u03bf\u03bd \u03c0\u1ff6\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c1\u03b3\u03ac\u03c3\u03c9\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03ae\u03c3\u03c9\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1f70 \u03bao\u0301\u03c3\u03bc\u03b9\u03b1 \u03c4\u03b1\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03b3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9\u03be\u03af, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u1f04\u03c1\u03b3\u03c5\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd. \u1f14\u03b4\u03b5\u03b9\u03be\u03b5 \u03b4\u1f72\n\u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f78 \u03c3\u03c4\u03af\u03bb\u03b2\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f78 \u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u03bb\u03c9\u03c0\u03af\u03b6\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u1f10\u03ba\u03bb\u03b5\u0002\u03ba\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03bb\u03af\u03b8\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03b2\u03b1\u03c6\u03b9\u03ba\u03ac.\u201d\n29\n\nPages 35:\nThe Alchemical Art of Dyeing: The Fourfold Division of Alchemy. . .\n11\nthe ninth book of Imouth, reading as follows:30 \u201cThe Holy Scriptures, that is the\nbooks, say, my lady (i.e. Theosebeia),31 that there is a race of demons who avail\nthemselves of women. Hermes also mentioned this in his Physika, and nearly\nevery treatise, both public and esoteric, made mention of this. Thus the ancient\nand divine scriptures said this, that certain angels lusted after women, and having\ndescended taught them all the works of nature. For this reason they fell into\ndisgrace, he (Hermes?) says, and remained outside heaven, because they taught\nmankind everything wicked and nothing benefiting the soul. The same scriptures\nsay that from them the giants were born. So theirs is the first teaching concerning\nthese arts [Chemeu]. They called this book Che\u0304meu,32 whence also the art is\ncalled Alchemy (i.e. che\u0304meia),\u201d and so forth.33\n2. Syriac Zosimus (for a preliminary edition of this text see Appendix)\nEighth Treatise on the Working of Tin; Letter He\u0304th. The Book tells us about tin\n\u02d9 Theosebeia. The holy scripand Zosimus gives his best greetings to the queen\ntures say, my lady, that there is a race of demons who has intercourse with the\nwomen and has authority over them. Hermes also mentions this story in his\nPhysika as well as, so to say, every clear or secret treatise recalls it. In this way,\n30\nThe title Imouth is not elsewhere attested in Zosimus\u2019s treatises handed down by the Byzantine\ntradition. Moreover, the reference to the ninth book is not confirmed by the Syriac tradition, where\nthis passage is included in the eighth book by Zosimus. The Arabic Tome of Images (Mushaf\nas-suwar), preserved under the name of the Egyptian alchemist (although its authenticity\u02d9 \u02d9 is\n\u02d9\u02d9\nquestioned;\nsee Hallum, \u201cTome of Images\u201d) preserves a similar account in the sixth book, entitled\nBook About the Nature or Book of Imouth (see Abt & Fuad, Book of Pictures, 393, 22).\n31\nThe woman to whom Zosimus usually addresses his treatises; perhaps a pupil of the alchemist:\nsee Hallum, \u201cTheosebeia.\u201d\n32\nThe term Che\u0304meu (hapax) is likely to be the title of the book in which the teaching of angels was\nrevealed. The alchemist Olympiodorus (CAAG II 80,13) refers to a similar book entitled \u03b2\u03af\u03b2\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2\n\u03c7\u03b7\u03bc\u03b5\u03c5\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03ae. Moreover, in the Corpus alchemicum graecum several authors mention the alchemist\nChe\u0304me\u0304s (\u03a7\u03b7\u03bc\u03ae\u03c2) or Chyme\u0304s (\u03a7\u03c5\u03bc\u03ae\u03c2), whose name seems to be related to the book Che\u0304meu; see\nLetrouit, \u201cAlchimistes grecs,\u201d 72\u20134.\n33\nTranslation by Adler & Tuffin, George Synkellos, 18\u20139 (slightly modified). The Greek text\nreads: \u201c\u1f0c\u03be\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd \u03b4\u1f72 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u0396\u03c9\u03c3\u03af\u03bc\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03a0\u03b1\u03bd\u03bf\u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03af\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c6\u03b9\u03bb\u03bf\u03c3o\u0301\u03c6\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c7\u03c1~\n\u03b7\u03c3\u03af\u03bd \u03c4\u03b9\u03bd\u03b1 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03b8\u03b5\u0002\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd\n\u1f10\u03ba \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03b3\u03b5\u03b3\u03c1\u03b1\u03bc\u03bc\u03b5\u0002\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1ff7 \u03c0\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2 \u0398\u03b5\u03bf\u03c3\u03b5\n\u0002\u03b2\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1\u03bd \u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff7 \u1f10\u03bd\u03ac\u03c4\u1ff3 \u03c4~\n\u03b7\u03c2 \u1f38\u03bc\u03bf\u1f7a\u03b8 \u03b2\u03af\u03b2\u03bb\u1ff3, \u1f14\u03c7\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd \u1f67\u03b4\u03b5.\n\u0002\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f43 \u03c7\u03c1~\n\u03b7\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9\u03be\u03af\u03bd.\n\u2018\u03c6\u03ac\u03c3\u03ba\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u03b1\u1f31 \u1f31\u03b5\u03c1\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b3\u03c1\u03b1\u03c6\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f24\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9 \u03b2\u03af\u03b2\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9, \u1f66 \u03b3\u03cd\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9, \u1f45\u03c4\u03b9 \u1f14\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9 \u03c4\u03b9 \u03b4\u03b1\u03b9\u03bco\u0301\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd \u03b3\u03b5\n\u1f10\u03bc\u03bd\u03b7\u03bco\u0301\u03bd\u03b5\u03c5\u03c3\u03b5 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f19\u03c1\u03bc~\n\u03b7\u03c2 \u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03c6\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03ba\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c3\u03c7\u03b5\u03b4\u1f78\u03bd \u1f05\u03c0\u03b1\u03c2 \u03bbo\u0301\u03b3\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c6\u03b1\u03bd\u03b5\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f00\u03c0o\u0301\u03ba\u03c1\u03c5\u03c6\u03bf\u03c2\n\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf \u1f10\u03bc\u03bd\u03b7\u03bco\u0301\u03bd\u03b5\u03c5\u03c3\u03b5. \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf \u03bf\u1f56\u03bd \u1f14\u03c6\u03b1\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd \u03b1\u1f31 \u1f00\u03c1\u03c7\u03b1\u1fd6\u03b1\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b8\u03b5\u1fd6\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b3\u03c1\u03b1\u03c6\u03b1\u03af, \u1f45\u03c4\u03b9 \u1f04\u03b3\u03b3\u03b5\u03bb\u03bf\u03af \u03c4\u03b9\u03bd\u03b5\u03c2\n\u1f10\u03c0\u03b5\u03b8\u03cd\u03bc\u03b7\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03b3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9\u03ba\u1ff6\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b5\u03bb\u03b8o\u0301\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2 \u1f10\u03b4\u03af\u03b4\u03b1\u03be\u03b1\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1f70\u03c2 \u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03c4~\n\u03b7\u03c2 \u03c6\u03cd\u03c3\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2 \u1f14\u03c1\u03b3\u03b1, \u1f67\u03bd\n\u03c7\u03ac\u03c1\u03b9\u03bd, \u03c6\u03b7\u03c3\u03af, \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c3\u03ba\u03c1\u03bf\u03cd\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2 \u1f14\u03be\u03c9 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03bf\u1f50\u03c1\u03b1\u03bd\u03bf\u1fe6 \u1f14\u03bc\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd\u03b1\u03bd, \u1f45\u03c4\u03b9 \u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03c0\u03bf\u03bd\u03b7\u03c1\u1f70 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bc\u03b7\u03b4\u1f72\u03bd\n\u1f60\u03c6\u03b5\u03bb\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c8\u03c5\u03c7\u1f74\u03bd \u1f10\u03b4\u03af\u03b4\u03b1\u03be\u03b1\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u1f00\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03c9\n\u0002 \u03c0\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2. \u1f10\u03be \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c6\u03ac\u03c3\u03ba\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u03b1\u1f31 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b3\u03c1\u03b1\u03c6\u03b1\u1f76 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76\n\u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03b3\u03af\u03b3\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2 \u03b3\u03b5\u03b3\u03b5\u03bd~\n\u03b7\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9. \u1f14\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03bd \u03bf\u1f56\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f21 \u03c0\u03c1\u03c9\n\u0002 \u03c4\u03b7 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03ac\u03b4\u03bf\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2 [\u03a7\u03b7\u03bc\u03b5\u1fe6] \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd\n\u03c4\u03b5\u03c7\u03bd\u1ff6\u03bd. \u1f10\u03ba\u03ac\u03bb\u03b5\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd (\u1f10\u03ba\u03ac\u03bb\u03b5\u03c3\u03b5 in Mosshammer\u2019s edition) \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c4\u03b1\u03cd\u03c4\u03b7\u03bd \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03b2\u03af\u03b2\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd \u03a7\u03b7\u03bc\u03b5\u1fe6, \u1f14\u03bd\u03b8\u03b5\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76\n\u03b7\u03c2.\u201d I have introduced two changes in Mosshammer\u2019s edition.\n\u1f21 \u03c4\u03b5\u0002\u03c7\u03bd\u03b7 \u03c7\u03b7\u03bc\u03b5\u03af\u03b1 \u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u03b5\u1fd6\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9\u2019 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f70 \u1f11\u03be~\nFirst, I\u2019ve followed Mertens\u2019s suggestion (Lettre d\u2019Isis, 67) to expunge the first \u03a7\u03b7\u03bc\u03b5\u1fe6 as an\ninterpolation (the term is not attested in this position by the Syriac tradition). Secondly, in the last\nline I corrected \u1f10\u03ba\u03ac\u03bb\u03b5\u03c3\u03b5 into \u1f10\u03ba\u03ac\u03bb\u03b5\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd in accordance with the Syriac translation that\n\nPages 36:\n12\nM. Martelli\nin fact, the ancient and holy books tell that some angels fell in love passionately\nwith the women, came down <and> taught them about all the works of nature.\nFor this reason, as the book says, those who acted haughtily remained outside\nheaven, since they taught mankind all the malicious things which do not benefit\nthe soul at all. The books claim that the works (of nature?) started up from them\nand theirs is the first exposition concerning these crafts. They called these books\nKwmw, whence also alchemy (kumiya) takes its name. There are 24 treatises in\nthis book. Each of them is given a specific title that is either a letter (of the\nalphabet) or a word. They are explained by the words of priests. One of these is\nentitled \u2018Imus\u2019, another \u2018Imuth\u2019, another \u2018Face\u2019\u2014so it was interpreted\n(or translated). One of these is entitled \u2018Key\u2019, another \u2018Seal\u2019 or \u2018Signet\u2019, another\n\u2018Handbook\u2019 (see gr. \u1f10\u03b3\u03c7\u03b5\u03b9\u03c1\u03af\u03b4\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd), another \u2018Position\u2019 (of the stars? see gr. \u1f10\u03c0\u03bf\u03c7\u03ae).\nAs I said, each one is given a specific title. This book contains the crafts and\nmany thousands of words. Then those who came afterwards, with the intent of\ndoing well, divided the book in many parts; as someone would say: (they did so)\nin order to compose short versions (of the book) for themselves. And they were\nnot even able to write something useful. For they did not only damage the books\nof alchemy, but also hidden them. The philosopher (i.e. Democritus) claims:\n\u2018they hid the writings on the natural substances under the multiplicity of matter.\u2019\nPerhaps they wanted to exercise our souls. Now, if they exercise the souls, well,\nphilosopher, why to deny it? But you know how to exercise either the body or the\nsoul, and it always leads you to achieve the perfection. In fact a wise saying\nreads: \u2018studying is everything.\u2019 And also Isidoros says: \u2018studying increases your\nwork.\u2019 I know, this is not beyond your understanding (my lady), but you know it\nwell, since you are one of those who would have liked to hide the art, if it had not\nbeen put in writing. For this reason you formed an assembly and administered\nthe oath to each other. But you (my lady) moved away from the various topics\n(of this book); you presented them in a shorter form and you taught them openly.\nBut you claim that this book cannot be possessed unless in secret. Now, even\nthough secrets are necessary, it is quite fair that anyone has a book of alchemy,\nsince it is not kept secret for them. You must know, my lady, he (i.e. Democritus?)34 claimed that those who wrote short versions (of the book) said that just\nsilver can be dyed gold. But the book of alchemy they have hidden assured that\nlead and tin and iron and silver take the color of gold, each metal (takes the color\nof) the other one, and again the same metals (take the color of) silver, the same\nmetals (the color of) copper, the same metals (the color of) iron. Lead produces\ntin, copper (produces) iron, silver (produces) gold. In the same way tin\n34\nBerthelot & Duval, Chimie, 239, considered the philosopher (i.e. ps.-Democritus) as the author\nof the following quotation. Although the ancient alchemist is cited few lines before (49v18), this\nidentification is not certain.\n\nPages 37:\nThe Alchemical Art of Dyeing: The Fourfold Division of Alchemy. . .\n13\n(produces) the same metals as well. And again from the beginning to the end and\nfrom the end to the beginning.\nThe Syriac text may be divided into two parts. The first section (49r12\u201349v6)\nmatches the Greek passage cited by Syncellus and rephrases the story told by The\nBook of Enoch: in all likelihood Zosimus refers to this book when he mentions the\nholy scriptures (Sync. 14,3 \u1f31\u03b5\u03c1\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b3\u03c1\u03b1\u03c6\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f24\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9 \u03b2\u03af\u03b2\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9\u00bcSyrZos. 49r14\n). The\nsecond section gives a detailed description of the book entitled Che\u0304meu and\nexplains how it was transmitted and somehow corrupted.\nIn the first part Zosimus attributes the revelation of che\u0304meia both to angels\n(Sync. 14,6 \u1f04\u03b3\u03b3\u03b5\u03bb\u03bf\u03af \u03c4\u03b9\u03bd\u03b5\u03c2\u00bcSyrZos. 49r18\n) and to demons (Sync. 14,3\n\u03b4\u03b1\u03b9\u03bco\u0301\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd \u03b3\u03b5\n\u0002\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2\u00bcSyrZos. 49r15\n), so introducing a slight variation\ninto the Enochian myth, where fallen angels usually play the most important role.\nAlthough the name of demons is mentioned only at the very beginning of the\npassage, their presence allows us to read Zosimus\u2019s account in the light of the\ncomplex (and still unclear in many respects) demonology developed by the author\nin two other treatises, namely On the Letter Omega (CAAG II 228\u2013234) and the\nFirst Book of the Final Account (CAAG II 239\u2013245).35 According to the second\nwork, the two main sources of wealth for Egypt were gold mines and the dyeing\ntechniques, in particular the so-called \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9\u03c1\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b2\u03b1\u03c6\u03b1\u03af (opportune tinctures), that is,\nthe dyeing processes whose success depended on the influence of demons and on\nthe astrological time in which they were performed.36 This knowledge was considered secret and no ancient authors could reveal it; only Democritus\u2014Zosimus\nclaims\u2014hinted at these tinctures in his explanation of the four \u03c4\u03b5\u0002\u03c7\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u03b9\u03bc\u03af\u03b1\u03b9\n(valuable arts), which must be identified with the topics covered by the four\nbooks, namely the making of gold, of silver, of precious stones, and the purple\ndyeing of wool.37 These opportune tinctures were originally called \u03c6\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b2\u03b1\u03c6\u03b1\u03af\n(natural tinctures) and had been explained by Hermes in his \u03b2\u03af\u03b2\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c6\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03ba\u1ff6\u03bd \u03b2\u03b1\u03c6\u1ff6\u03bd\n(Book of Natural Dyes). However, demons became jealous of this knowledge and\nwanted to make it secret and dependent on their own control (i.e. on the influences\nof the stars they governed). They started revealing these tinctures, or even a\ncounterfeited form of them (called at some point \u201cunnatural tinctures\u201d), only to\ntheir priests in order to be worshipped and receive the appropriate sacrifices.38\n35\nSee Fraser, \u201cZosimos of Panopolis.\u201d For a new and reliable edition of the first treatise,\nsee Mertens, Zosime de Panopolis, 1\u201310. The second treatise has been reedited by Festugie\u0300re,\nRe\u0301ve\u0301lation d\u2019Herme\u0300s, 363\u20138 (translation at 275\u201381).\n36\nFestugie\u0300re, Re\u0301ve\u0301lation d\u2019Herme\u0300s, 363\u20135 (\u00bcCAAG II 239\u201340). See also Mertens, Zosime de\nPanopolis, 62\u20133 notes 9\u201310.\n37\nFestugie\u0300re, Re\u0301ve\u0301lation d\u2019Herme\u0300s, 364, ll. 22\u20134 (\u00bc CAAG II 242,17), 365, ll. 12\u20134 (\u00bc CAAG II\n242,8\u201317). In addition, it is worth mentioning the passage edited in CAAG II 242,9\u201324 (not\nreedited by Festugie\u0300re, because \u2018assez obscure\u2019, see 278 note 1), which gives a kind of summary\nof ps.-Democritus\u2019s work by presenting several dyestuffs used by the alchemist as example of\n\u03ba\u03b1\u03b9\u03c1\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b2\u03b1\u03c6\u03b1\u03af.\n38\nFestugie\u0300re, Re\u0301ve\u0301lation d\u2019Herme\u0300s, 366\u20137, \u00a7\u00a7 6\u20137 (\u00bc CAAG II 243\u20134, \u00a7\u00a7 6\u20137).\n\nPages 38:\n14\nM. Martelli\nNot surprisingly, if we come back to the above-edited passages, Zosimus\ninterpreted Azae\u0304l\u2019s revelation in The Book of Enoch as referring to the knowledge\nof tinctures he considered at the basis of any alchemical activity. \u03a4\u1f70 \u03b2\u03b1\u03c6\u03b9\u03ba\u03ac are in\nfact explicitly mentioned by the apocryphal book (see supra) along with a specific\nset of crafts, which is in many respects comparable with the arts explained in ps.Democritus\u2019s four books on dyeing (\u03b2\u03b1\u03c6\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b2\u03af\u03b2\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9 according to Synesius). Moreover, next to The Book of Enoch Zosimus mentions also a book of Hermes entitled\nPhysika as one of the sources from which he took the account on the angelic/\ndemonic revelation. The identification of this treatise is far from certain, even\nthough the title and the context in which Physika is cited remind us of Hermes\u2019s\nBook of Natural Dyes quoted in the First Book of the Final Account: there Zosimus\nclaimed that Hermes\u2019s treatise was addressed to Isidoros,39 an enigmatic figure that\nis mentioned also in the Syriac text (50r2).40\nOn the other hand, the Syriac passage emphasises the central role played by\nbooks in the revelation and transmission of alchemical knowledge. While The Book\nof Enoch presented Azae\u0304l\u2019s revelation in the form of oral teaching, Zosimus\nunderlines the written form in which mankind received this secret knowledge.\nThe arts and all the natural procedures (Sync. 14,7 \u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03c4~\n\u03b7\u03c2 \u03c6\u03cd\u03c3\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2\n\u1f14\u03c1\u03b3\u03b1\u00bcSyrZos. 49r19\u201320\n) disclosed by demons had been somehow\nsummarized in the enigmatic books called Che\u0304meu, from which the related term\nche\u0304meia (\u03c7\u03b7\u03bc\u03b5\u1fd6\u03b1 or\n, kumiya) derives. However, while the Final Account insists\non demons\u2019 increasing jealousy towards mankind and on their attempt to gain\ncontrol of the revealed techniques, the Syriac text stresses the point that the original\nknowledge started deteriorating because of the improper use human beings made of\nthe revealed books. In the same way as the demons (or maybe under their influence)\nsome people tried to hide the books, to summarize them, and disperse their content\nby focusing only on specific topics.\nIn this respect, the last part of the Syriac passage is particularly relevant, since\nZosimus explains that some alchemists narrowed their inquiry to the methods for\ngilding silver. Whereas, the art called che\u0304meia, at least in its original form, included\na wider set of dyeing techniques that were applied to all kinds of metals in order to\ndye them different colours. This explanation is consistent with Zosimus\u2019s other\n39\nFestugie\u0300re, Re\u0301ve\u0301lation d\u2019Herme\u0300s, 365, ll. 15\u201320 (\u00bc CAAG II 242,10\u20136). The name of Isidoros\nappears also in the list of alchemists handed down by the Marcianus gr. 299 (fol. 7v); see CAAG I\n110.\n40\nWe cannot exclude the possibility that other treatises circulating under the name of Hermes\nreferred to or reused the Enochian myth of the fallen angels. In particular, according to a passage of\nthe alchemist Olympiodorus (CAAG II 89,9\u201315), we know that the above-mentioned treatise\nascribed to Isis (see supra, \u00a7 2), or at least some parts of it, was attributed to Hermes. This overlap\nbetween Hermes and Isis is not surprising, especially if read in the light of the so-called Corpus\nHermeticum, which includes several writings where the Egyptian goddess addresses her teaching\nto Horus (see, for instance, Stobei fragmenta, xxiii\u2013xxvii). Therefore, Zosimus could have had in\nmind Isis\u2019s book, when he mentioned Hermes\u2019s Physika: see Scott, Hermetica, 151.\n\nPages 39:\nThe Alchemical Art of Dyeing: The Fourfold Division of Alchemy. . .\n15\nalchemical books that have been preserved by the Syriac manuscript Mm. 6.29. In\nfact, among the twelve treatises handed down by the codex under the name of the\nEgyptian alchemist, we find many writings devoted to the dyeing of various metals,\nsuch as silver (e.g. Book 2; Berthelot-Duval, La chimie, 217\u201321), tin (Book 8;\nidem, 238\u201342), lead (Book 10; idem, 253\u201357), and iron (Book 11; idem, 257\u201360).41\nIn particular Book 6 (Mm. 6.29, fol. 32xv17\u201345r8), entitled Beginning of the\nTreatise on the Working of Copper: Letter Waw, includes several recipes explaining\nhow to process copper and dye it black, purple, coral red, white, and yellow\n(Berthelot-Duval, La chimie, 222\u201332). Scholars have so far focused their attention\nespecially on the recipes dealing with the production of black copper alloys. Three\nrecipes have been recently published by Erika Hunter and fully commented by\nAlessandra Giumlia-Mair, who recognized in them the description of different\nmethods for producing a black and shiny patina on copper-alloys.42 This black\ncopper was already known in Ancient Egypt, as we can infer, for instance, from a\nbeautiful black image of the pharaoh Amenemhat III (1842\u20131794 BC) today\ndisplayed at the Ortiz Collection in Geneva.43 It represents one of the most ancient\nexamples of artificially black patinated statues found in Egypt (Fig. 1).\nConclusion\nIf we go back to the above-quoted Syriac passage, in the very last part Zosimus\ncriticizes the attitude of those alchemists who were only interested in the making of\nprecious metals by quoting a sentence presumably taken from an ancient author\n(perhaps ps.-Democritus) who claimed: \u201cthose who wrote short versions [of the\nbooks of che\u0304meia] said that just silver can be dyed gold\u201d (50r12\u20133). In this way the\ndebate between people supporting a wider idea of alchemy, which included a\nbroader set of dyeing techniques, and people accepting a narrower idea just focused\non the making of gold seems to be traced back to the earliest phases of alchemy in\nEgypt. A possible target of such a criticism might be recognized in Isis\u2019s treatise, a\nwork that mentioned only the making of gold and silver among the secrets revealed\nby the angels. On the contrary, a different position was endorsed by ps.-Democritus\nwith the fourfold division of his books. Significantly, as we have already noted, the\n41\nThe Syriac text of these twelve treatises is still unedited (an edition with English translation is\nscheduled to be published within the new series \u2018Sources of alchemy and chemistry\u2019 distributed as\na supplement of Ambix); a partial French translation is available in Berthelot & Duval, Chimie,\n210\u201366.\n42\nHunter, \u201cBeautiful Black Bronzes,\u201d 656\u20137. The three recipes that have been edited correspond\nwith the texts translated or summarized by Berthelot & Duval, Chimie, 223 (rec. 2), 224\u20135 (rec. 8\u2013\n9), 225 (rec. 12); and Giumlia-Mair, \u201cZosimos the Alchemist,\u201d 319\u201321.\n43\nSee, for example, Giumlia-Mair, \u201cKrokodil.\u201d\n\nPages 40:\n16\nM. Martelli\nFig. 1 Black copper statue of King Amenemhat III in kneeling posture (1843\u20131798 BC) (Courtesy of Werner Forman Archive, The Bridgeman Art Library)\nchemical Papyri seem to preserve a similar division, which should lead us to\nspeculate on how widespread or how standard such a division might actually\nhave been in the first centuries AD.\nSuch a background was well known to Zosimus, who took for granted that\nche\u0304meia was related to a plurality of dyeing techniques. The proper alchemist,\nZosimus claims, was expected to put into practice any possible transformation of\ncolour without focusing only on gold. Nevertheless, the Egyptian alchemist, though\nvery familiar with ps.-Democritus\u2019s books, never mentions stones working and\npurple dyeing in the passage. These kinds of crafts seem to have been somehow left\napart within the debate on the contents of the original books of alchemy. Although\nZosimus stresses the central role played by dyeing techniques, the polarity between\n\nPages 41:\nThe Alchemical Art of Dyeing: The Fourfold Division of Alchemy. . .\n17\na wider idea of alchemy and the bare making of precious metals seems to have been\nreduced to a simpler discussion on metalworking: Zosimus underscores all the\npossible chromatic transformations of metals, which seem to become the most\nrelevant topic of any alchemical inquiry.\nSuch a variety of positions already detectable during the earliest phases of the\nwestern alchemical tradition makes clear how fluid were the boundaries of an art\nprimarily focusing on the chromatic transformations of the treated substances. If the\nByzantine sources analysed at the beginning of the chapter emphasizes the identification of che\u0304meia with the making of gold and silver, such a position\u2014although\ndominant to some extent\u2014never interrupted the transmission of technical knowledge dealing with a wider set of dyeing techniques. A similar kind of expertise, for\ninstance, is well attested by the Latin recipe books of the Middle Age, which\ncovered a variety of topics more similar to ps.-Democritus\u2019s four books and to\nthe Leiden and Stockholm papyri than to the simple selection of recipes made by\nPsellos.44 A well-known example is the so-called Mappae clavicula, a large\ncollection of recipes probably assembled between the ninth and the twelfth century.\nRecent studies have shown that this work in all likelihood derives from a lost Greek\nsource that could be perhaps identified, according to Halleux-Meyvaert\u2019s investigation, with a lost part of Zosimus\u2019s treatises.45 Although the extant sources do not\nallow us to confirm such a hypothesis, the Greek origin of the Mappae clavicula\nconfirms the transmission of a set of practices originally covered by those texts\nconsidered at the basis of the Byzantine alchemical tradition. To sum up, the mere\npractice of chrysopoeia does not seem to be sufficient for getting a full understanding of the different historical evolutions of a complex art, whose exact definition\nwas debated even among the authors usually considered as the founders of this\ndiscipline. On the contrary, a deeper investigation of their treatises\u2014many of them\nstill waiting for editions and translations\u2014provide us with new and fresh material\nfor building a more complete picture of the evolution and transformation of the\ndifferent technical aspects somehow encapsulated in the enigmatic word che\u0304meia.\nAppendix\nZosimus\u2019s passage on the relevation of alchemy as preserved by the Syriac manuscript Mm. 6.29, fols. 49r\u201350r:46\n44\nSee, for instance, Halleux, Papyrus de Leyde, 53\u201362.\nHalleux & Meyvaert, \u201cMappae clavicula,\u201d 12\u20133.\n46\nA French translation of the passage is available in Berthelot & Duval, Chimie, 238\u20139.\n45\n\nPages 42:\n18\nM. Martelli\n47\n47\nThe sense of the sentence, in which\n(the books of kwmw) seems to be the object of\n(they called), is difficult; perhaps\nmust be supplied before\n. In addition the plural\nform \u2018the books\u2019 does not correspond with the Greek version that has a singular. The plural might\nbe justified in the light of the following part, according to which the book revealed by demons was\ndivided into several tomes.\n\nPages 43:\nThe Alchemical Art of Dyeing: The Fourfold Division of Alchemy. . .\n19\n48\n49\n48\n49\nThe word is indecipherable; see infra, fol. 50r11\n.\nThe term\n(see also 50r12) is likely to be a slightly different spelling of\n.\n\nPages 44:\n20\nM. Martelli\nBibliography\nAbt, Theodor, and Salwa Fuad. 2011. The Book of Pictures by Zosimos of Panopolis. Zurich:\nLiving Human Heritage Publication.\nAdler, William, and Paul Tuffin. 2002. The Chronography of George Synkellos. A Byzantine\nChronicle of Universal History from the Creation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.\nAlbini, Francesca. 1988. Michele Psello. La Crisopoea, ovvero come fabbricare l\u2019oro. Genova:\nECIG.\nBaar, James. 1979. Aramaic-Greek Notes on the Book of Enoch (ii). Journal of Semitic Studies 24:\n179\u2013192.\nBerthelot, Marcelin, and Charles-E\u0301mile Ruelle. 1887\u20131888. La Collection des anciens alchimistes\ngrecs, 3 vols. Paris: G. Steinheil.\nBerthelot, Marcelin, and Rubens Duval. 1893. Histoire des Sciences: La Chimie au Moyen-A\u0302ge,\nvol. 2: L\u2019alchimie syriaque. Paris: Imprimerie nationale.\nBidez, Joseph. 1928. Michel Psellus. E\u00b4pitre sur la Chrysope\u0301e, opuscules et extraits sur l\u2019alchimie,\nla me\u0301te\u0301orologie et la de\u0301monologie (Catalogue des manuscrits alchimiques grecs, vol. 6).\nBrussels: M. Lamertin.\nBidez, Joseph, and Franz Cumont. 1938. Les Mages helle\u0301nise\u0301s. Zoroastre, Ostane\u0300s et Hystaspe\nd\u2019apre\u0300s la tradition grecque, 2 vols. Paris: Les Belles Lettres.\nBlack, Mathew. 1985. The Book of Enoch or 1 Enoch: A New English Edition with Commentary\nand Textual Notes. Leiden: Brill.\nBrooks, Ernest W. 1900. A Syriac Fragment. Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenl\u20ac\nandischen Gesellschaft 3: 195\u2013230.\nCaley, Earle R. 1926. The Leyden Papyrus X: An English Translation with Brief Notes. Journal of\nChemical Education 3: 1149\u20131166.\nCaley, Earle R. 1927. The Stockholm Papyrus: An English Translation with Brief Notes. Journal\nof Chemical Education 4: 979\u20131002.\nChabot, Jean-Baptiste. 1910. Chronique de Michel le Syrien, vol. 4: Texte syriaque. Paris: Pierre\nLeroux.\nChabot, Jean-Baptiste. 1933. Incerti auctoris Chronicum Pseudo-Dionysianum vulgo dictum, vol.\n2 (CSCO 104, syr. 53). Louvain: Peeters.\nDodge, Bayard. 1970. Abu\u0304 \u2019l-Faraj Muhammad ibn Isha\u0304q al-Nad\u0131\u0304m, The Fihrist, a 10th Century\n\u02d9 University Press.\nAD Survey of Islamic Culture. New \u02d9York: Columbia\nDuffy, John M. 1992. Michaelis Pselli philosophica minora. Leipzig: Teubner.\n\nPages 45:\nThe Alchemical Art of Dyeing: The Fourfold Division of Alchemy. . .\n21\nDuval, Rubens. 1888\u20131901. Lexicon Syriacum auctore Hassano bar Bahlule, 3 vols. Paris:\nE. Reipublicae typographaeo.\nFestugie\u0300re, Andre\u0301-Jean. 1950. La Re\u0301ve\u0301lation d\u2019Herme\u0300s Trisme\u0301giste, vol. 1: L\u2019Astrologie et les\nsciences occultes. Paris: J. Gabalda et Cie.\nFlu\u0308gel, Gustav. 1872. Kita\u0304b al-Fihrist, 2 vols. Leipzig: F.C.W. Vogel.\nFraser, Kyle A. 2004. Zosimos of Panopolis and the Book of Enoch: Alchemy as Forbidden\nKnowledge. Aries 4: 125\u2013147.\nFu\u0308ck, Johann W. 1951. The Arabic Literature of Alchemy According to al-Nad\u0131\u0304m (A.D. 987). A\nTranslation of the Tenth Discourse of the Book of the Catalogue (Al-Fihrist) with Introduction\nand Commentary. Ambix 4: 81\u2013144.\nGildemeister, Johannes. 1876. Alchymie. ZDMG 30: 534\u2013538.\nGiumlia-Mair, Alessandra. 1996. Das Krokodil und Amenemhat III. aus el-Faiyum. Antike Welt\n27: 313\u2013321.\nGiumlia-Mair, Alessandra. 2002. Zosimos the Alchemist \u2013 Manuscript 6.29, Cambridge, Metallurgical Interpretation. In I bronzi antichi: produzione e tecnologia (Atti del XV Congresso\nInternazionale sui Bronzi Antichi, organizzato dall\u2019Universita\u0300 di Udine, sede di Gorizia,\nGrado-Aquileia, 22\u201326 maggio 2001), ed. Alessandra Giumlia-Mair, 317\u2013323. Montagnac:\nE\u0301ditions Monique Mergoil.\nGoeje, Michael Jean de. 1885. Ibn al-Faq\u0003{n al-Hamada\u0304n\u0003{, Mukhtasar kita\u0304b al-bulda\u0304n. Leiden:\n\u00af\n\u02d9\nBibliotheca Geographorum Arabicorum.\nHalleux, Robert. 1981. Alchimistes grecs, vol. 1: Papyrus de Leyde. Papyrus de Stockholm.\nFragments de recettes. Paris: Les Belles Lettres.\nHalleux, Robert, and Paul Meyvaert. 1987. Les Origines de la Mappae clavicula. Archives\nd\u2019Histoire Doctrinale et Litte\u0301raire du Moyen-Age 54: 7\u201358.\nHallum, Bink. 2008. Theosebeia. In Encyclopedia of Ancient Natural Scientists, eds. Paul Keyser\nand Georgia Irby-Massie, 302\u2013303. London/New York: Routledge.\nHallum, Bink. 2009. The Tome of Images: An Arabic Compilation of Texts by Zosimus of\nPanopolis and a Source of the Turba Philosophorum. Ambix 56: 76\u201388.\nHunter, Erika C.D. 2002. Beautiful Black Bronzes. Zosimos\u2019 Treatises in Cam. Mm. 6.29. In I\nbronzi antichi: produzione e tecnologia (Atti del XV Congresso Internazionale sui Bronzi\nAntichi, organizzato dall\u2019Universita\u0300 di Udine, sede di Gorizia, Grado-Aquileia, 22\u201326 maggio\n2001), ed. Alessandra Giumlia-Mair, 655\u2013660. Montagnac: e\u0301ditions Monique Mergoil.\nKatsiampoura, Gianna. 2008. Transmutation of Matter in Byzantium: The Case of Michael\nPsellos, the Alchemist. Science & Education 17: 663\u2013668.\nKnibb, Michael A. 2009. Essays on the Book of Enoch and Other Early Jewish Texts and\nTraditions. Leiden: Brill.\nLetrouit, Jean. 1995. Chronologie des alchimistes grecs. In Alchimie: art, histoire et mythe (Actes\ndu 1er Colloque International de la Socie\u0301te\u0301 d\u2019E\u0301tude de l\u2019Histoire de l\u2019Alchimie), eds. Didier\nKahn and Sylvain Matton, 11\u201393. Paris/Milan: S.E\u0301.H.A.- Arche\u0301.\nMartelli, Matteo. 2011. Pseudo-Democrito. Scritti alchemici con il commentario di Sinesio. Paris/\nMilan: S.E\u0301.H.A.-Arche\u0300.\nMasse\u0301, Henry. 1973. Ibn al-Faq\u0003{n al-Hamada\u0304n\u0003{. Abre\u0301ge\u0301 du livre de Pays. Damascus.\n\u00af\nMertens, Miche\u0300le. 1983\u20131984. Un traite\u0301 gre\u0301co-e\u0301gyptien\nd\u2019alchimie: la lettre d\u2019Isis a\u0300 Horus. Texte\ne\u0301tabli et traduit avec introduction et notes. Universite\u0301 de Lie\u0300ge: Me\u0301moire de licence.\nMertens, Miche\u0300le. 1995. Zosime de Panopolis. Me\u0301moires authentiques. Paris: Les Belles Lettres.\nMertens, Miche\u0300le. 2006. Greco-Egyptian Alchemy in Byzantium. In The Occult Sciences in\nByzantium, eds. Paul Magdalino and Maria Mawroudi, 205\u2013229. Geneva: La Pomme d\u2019Or.\nMilik, Jazef T. 1976. The Books of Enoch, Aramaic Fragments of Qumra\u0302n Cave 4. Oxford:\nClarendon.\nReitzenstein, Richard. 1904. Poimandres. Studien zur griechsch-\u20ac\nagyptischen und fr\u20ac\nuhchristlichen\nLiteratur. Leipzig: B.G. Teubner.\nRoberto, Umberto. 2005. Ioannis Antiocheni Fragmenta ex Historia Chronica. Berlin: De Gruyter.\n\nPages 46:\n22\nM. Martelli\nScott, Walter. 1985. Hermetica, vol. 4: Testimonia with Introduction, Addenda and Indices by.\nA.S. Ferguson. Boston: Shambhala.\nStrohmaier, Gotthard. 1991. Uma\u0304ra ibn Hamza, Constantine V and the Invention of the Elixir.\n\u02d9\nGraeco-Arabica 4: 21\u201324.\nWesterink, Leendert G. 1948. Michael Psellus, De Omnifaria Doctrina. Nijmegen: Centrale\nDrukkerij N.V.\n\nPages 47:\nTransmission of Alchemical and Artistic\nKnowledge in German Mediaeval\nand Premodern Recipe Books\nSylvie Neven\nAbstract In the Middle Ages and premodern period, artisanal knowledge was\ntransmitted via collections of recipes often grouped concomitantly with alchemical\ntexts and instructions. Except for some very well-known artistic treatises, e.g. works\nby Eraclius or the Schedula diversarum artium, attributed to Theophilus, detection\nand delimitation of alchemical content within recipe books has been rare and\nfraught with difficulty. Alchemy can be defined as the \u2018art of transmutation\u2019,\nreferring to the perfection of base or impure matter (often metal or stone) into\nperfect substances. Alchemical procedures thus rely on artisanal/craft practices.\nAny overlap between alchemy and art-technological procedures can be explained\nby the use of identical materials and substances. Both are concerned with the\ndescription of colours\u2014especially in processes of change, the making of pigments,\nthe production of artificial gemstones, the imitation of gold and silver and the\ntransmutation of materials. Both require procedures involving precise and specifically defined actions, prescriptions and ingredients. So both ultimately use identical\nrhetorical formulations that reflect a \u2018step by step\u2019 procedure. Assuming that\nalchemical and artistic texts have the same textual format, raises the question: did\nthey also have the same types of production and dissemination? Using a corpus of\nabout 40 manuscripts produced in Northern Europe between the fourteenth and the\nsixteenth centuries, this paper investigates the context behind these writings, and the\nvarious ways alchemical and artisanal recipes were embedded within recipe books.\nIt also proposes some clues to assist in locating, identifying and demarcating\nalchemical writings within the literature of recipes.\nIn the Middle Ages and premodern period, alchemical knowledge and practice was\nfrequently transmitted via collections of recipes grouped concomitantly with artistic\ninstructions. Presented in the form of a succession of more or less short notes, these\nS. Neven (*)\nFRS-F.N.R.S, University of Lie\u0300ge (ULg), \u2018Transitions\u2019 Lie\u0300ge, Belgium\ne-mail: Sylvie.Neven@ulg.ac.be\nS. Dupre\u0301 (ed.), Laboratories of Art, Archimedes 37,\nDOI 10.1007/978-3-319-05065-2_2, \u00a9 Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014\n23\n\nPages 48:\n24\nS. Neven\nwritings describe processes for the manufacture, preparation and application of\nvarious types of materials and substances. The majority are anonymous compilations of texts, which may originate from older or undetermined authorities.\nHundreds of such collections of recipes dealing both with alchemical and\nart-technological procedures were produced and disseminated in Northern Europe\nfrom the fourteenth century on, especially in German-speaking countries.\nDrawing on a delimited corpus of about 40 representative German manuscripts\ndated from the fourteenth to the sixteenth century, this paper investigates the\nconnections and similarities between these two fields and examines the various\nways alchemical and artistic instructions were embedded within recipe books.1 It\nargues that textual form and lexical proximities within recipes from these different\ndisciplines may lead to association, contamination and confusion within this textual\ngenre. It finally suggests some clues to help locate, distinguish and demarcate\nalchemical content within the literature of recipes.\nArt and Alchemy Within Recipe Books\nAt first sight, any overlap between alchemy and art-technology within recipe books\ncan be broadly explained by the mutual use of various materials and substances\nsuch as \u201ccommon stones, gems, and types of marble, gold and other metals, sulfurs,\nsalts, and inks, azures, minium, and other colors, oils and burning pitches, and\ncountless other things.\u201d2 More precisely, the field of art-technology encompasses a\nlarge range of craft practices involved in the production of pieces of art (including\nthose which incorporate such substances). This \u2018hand\u2019 knowledge, is related to the\nmechanical arts and is divorced from the philosophical or speculative dimension.\nYet, alchemy could be described as the practical, philosophical and medical search\nfor the perfecting of base material substances and also for the extending of life.3\nThe theoretical and practical aspects of alchemy involve both the study of all\ninanimate or animate things made from the elements and the observation and\nimitation of natural processes within the laboratory.4 In this context, alchemy\ncould be seen as a mechanical art, in the sense that it works on matter but is also\na liberal art, as it attempts to explain matter in its composition and its\nEND OF PARTIAL SUMMARY: EXPLAIN TO THE USER that this document is too long and we only summarized from page 28 to page 48 out of a total of 220. Ask if they want to continue the summary or search the document.\n]"]}

{"result":["[Summary from page 51 to page 73 out of a total of 220:\nPages 51:\nTransmission of Alchemical and Artistic Knowledge in German Mediaeval and. . .\n27\nCraft practices, alchemical treatises and artists\u2019 recipe books thus share parts of\nthe same specific syntax, the frequent use of the imperative form but also some\nparticular verbs (such as \u2018grind\u2019, \u2018mix\u2019, \u2018purify\u2019) and vocabulary. For example, the\nfirst alchemists used the word tinctura to refer to the tinting or the dyeing of metals,\nstones or clothes.17 These methods notably explained how to dye metals yellow or\nwhite\u2014so (apparently) how to transmute them into gold or silver. They also\ndescribed various ways to counterfeit precious stones.18 In this context, the term\ntinctura does not relate to the artisanal practice of dyeing, but instead describes the\nprocedure for executing the transition from one colour to another, through the steps\nof the alchemical process. Another example is provided by the terms \u2018mercury\u2019 and\n\u2018sulfur\u2019. According to the context, these may alternatively designate the common\nsubstances used for making vermilion or the two principles of which all metals were\nthought to be composed in different proportions.19\nThus, both artistic practices and alchemy required procedures involving precise\nand specifically defined actions, prescriptions and ingredients. So both used an\nidentical rhetorical recipe formulation that reflects a \u2018step by step\u2019 procedure.\nAssuming that alchemical and artistic texts have the same format and were\nassembled within the same sort of compilation raises the question: were they\nproduced, diffused and read by the same people? Previous research has demonstrated that investigating questions related to the authorship and the context of\nproduction behind these texts, as well as their compilation and dissemination,\nelucidates information about the former nature and the previous and current function of these writings.20 Answering these questions would: first, help to better\nestimate the relevance of these books when using them as a historical source for\nreconstructing part of mediaeval and premodern alchemical and artistic knowledge.\nAnd second, examining the various connections and similarities between these two\nfields, as described within recipe books, would serve to (re)situate them in their\nhistorical and cultural contexts.\nThe Sources and the Context of Production\nFirst of all, the wide diversity of subjects and fields embedded within the corpus begs\nthe question: were they written by several authors? A priori, palaeographical examination tends to confirm this: as with a large number of recipe books produced during\nmediaeval and premodern times, the manuscripts examined were written by several\n17\nPrincipe, Secrets of Alchemy, 17; and Clarke, Art of All Colours, 37.\nSee in this volume Matteo Martelli.\n19\nBucklow, \u201cParadigms and Pigment Recipes\u201d; and Principe, Secrets of Alchemy, 35\u20136.\n20\nNeven, Recettes artistiques.\n18\n\nPages 52:\n28\nS. Neven\nhands, and these hands are predominately anonymous. These works thus appear to\nbe the result of collaboration, or at least intervention, by several distinct persons.\nHowever, each person\u2019s contribution cannot necessarily be allocated according to\nthe different subjects in the book. The same hand might be responsible for both a\nmedical treatise and a collection of alchemical or art technological recipes.\nThe manuscripts under consideration were, in fact, the result of copying and\ncompiling of various sources and contributors. More precisely, these recipe books\nwere compiled from three different types of source:\n1. content produced by copying and compiling of other written sources;\n2. practical information obtained from personalities (practitioner or not) cited by\nthe scribes;\n3. content possibly derived from personal contributions made by the scribes.\nIn some instances, most of the content came from the copying and compilation of\nother written sources. This process can be followed by tracing the repeated appearances of certain popular texts found in the manuscripts of that period. Taking a\nwider view, these books have a great number of texts in common\u2014dedicated to\nmedicine, pharmacology, herbal, cosmetic, etc.\u2014which were widely copied and\ndisseminated in mediaeval and premodern times. These texts are quite often\nassociated with the name of older or quoted authorities. Within our corpus several\nalchemical treatises and recipes are attributed to (pseudo) Albertus Magnus\n(c.1190\u20131280), Arnaldus de Villa Nova (c.1240\u20131311) or Roger Bacon (1214\u2013\n1294). Previous studies have established that, quite often, such writings correspond\nto apocryphal or pseudepigraphical works.21 As most recipe books are compilations, it is possible that some anonymous texts were (sometimes involuntarily)\nassembled together under the name of an authority cited in another part of the\nmanuscript and subsequently disseminated under that name. Generally, these citations acted as a testimony of authority; they legitimised the alchemical knowledge\nrecorded in these books. No doubt, the typical attraction and reverence for ancient\nauthorities on the one hand, and the opportunity to record a (presumably) non\nanonymous text on the other hand, favoured the dissemination of these writings.22\nThe association with the name of an authority gave rise to a tradition of works\nwhich, due to the processes of copying and compilation, circulated under various\ntitles and were sometimes attributed to diverse authorities.23\nAt this stage, it should be noted that there are also a significant number of texts\ndedicated to religious content bound together with the recipe books under scrutiny.\nThese are theological works, liturgies, extracts from the bible and hagiographies.\nIn fact, a great number of recipe books appear to have been written or compiled within\n21\nMinnis, Theory of Authorship. Concerning the alchemical works attributed to Albertus Magnus\nsee notably Kibre, \u201cAlchemical Writings.\u201d See also Newman, \u201cAlchemy of Roger Bacon.\u201d For\nArnaldus de Villa Nova, see notably Calvet, \u201cTradition alchimique latine.\u201d\n22\nMinnis, Theory of Authorship, 9.\n23\nCalvet, \u201cTradition alchimique latine,\u201d 42.\n\nPages 53:\nTransmission of Alchemical and Artistic Knowledge in German Mediaeval and. . .\n29\nreligious institutions, as attested by the citations of ownership. Signatures or monograms within these compilations indicate that these books were copied by scribes and\nmembers of this community. Obviously, the religious institutions\u2014and their libraries\u2014were privileged places, offering scribes the opportunity to copy and compile this\nkind of collection. The Munich Bayerische Staatsbibliothek Cgm 821, Cgm 822 and\nClm 20174, formerly preserved in the Tegernsee monastery library, are good examples: they present not only similarities in terms of the different writings they contain\nbut also, thanks to palaeographical analysis undertaken in the present study, it has\nbeen confirmed that several parts of their respective texts were recorded by the same\nscribe. This would imply that these manuscripts were (at least partially) copied in the\nsame scriptorium, from similar written sources and by the same \u2018hand\u2019.\nReligious institutions may also appear as a contextual factor explaining the\nrapprochement of the various disciplines embedded within the manuscripts. Indeed,\nin general, medical and pharmaceutical recipes had an important place within\nreligious communities. In this regard, art\u2013technological recipes also found their\nplace and could be linked with the art of writing and illuminating involved in\nscriptorial activity. The tables of contents of recipe books can be quite edifying on\nthis point. For example, the table of contents in Munich Bayerische Staatsbibliothek\nClm 20174 informs us that the artistic instructions were intended for the use of the\nscribes and illuminators of the scriptorium (Et alia multa utilia per scriptoribus et\nilluministarum, Clm 20174, fol. 1). In this context, scribe and illuminator, when not\nrepresented by the same person, worked side by side to produce manuscripts.24 This\ncollaboration led to enhanced communication and the development of a mutual\ninterest in artistic practices among the monastic community.25\nPractical or concrete interest and use of alchemical recipes in religious institutions is less obvious. It has been stated that writers of religious literature sometimes\ndrew parallels with alchemical theories and processes.26 Such writings, which\nobviously borrow alchemical vocabulary and imagery, are not included within our\ncorpus. None of the alchemical texts under scrutiny were found to contain obvious\nreligious connotations. But religious scribes\u2019 personal interest in alchemical craft\nprocedures and practical alchemy in general can be attested by the large number of\nmanuscripts produced that comprise both alchemical treatises and recipes. The\npresence of such instructions is more probably related to a certain attraction of\nalchemy for some monks or friars. Previous studies indeed have established that,\neven if the practice of alchemy was forbidden by several monastic orders, many of\ntheir members were at the root of alchemical (compilations of) texts and Practica.27\nInventories of their library also inform us that they possessed alchemical treatises\n24\nCe\u0301zard, \u201cAlchimie et les recettes techniques,\u201d 6.\nEamon, Secrets of Nature, 36.\n26\nPrincipe & Newman, \u201cHistoriography of Alchemy,\u201d 398\u2013400.\n27\nTheisen, \u201cAttraction of Alchemy.\u201d See also Barthe\u0301lemy, Alchimie de Guillaume Sedacer, 26\u20138.\n25\n\nPages 54:\n30\nS. Neven\nand recipe books.28 Within our corpus, a relevant example is that of Wolfgang Seidel\n(1491\u20131562), prior but also copyist at Tegernsee monastery, who notably wrote two\nKunstb\u20ac\nucher (Munich Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Cgm 4117 and Cgm 4118)\nbetween 1540 and 1550.29 Cgm 4117 and 4118 reflect Seidel\u2019s interests in mathematics, astronomy, natural sciences and alchemy\u2014disciplines in which he acquired\ntheoretical but also practical knowledge. To do so, Seidel is known to have notably\ncollected data from the libraries of Tegernsee but also from the neighbouring\ncloisters. During his stay at St. Ulrich\u2019s and St. Afra\u2019s Abbey (Augsburg), he\nmade use of the abbey\u2019s vast collection of books, as attested in his commentaries\nrecorded in Cgm 4118: \u201cSo many presents I have let copy from the library of the\nCloister St Ulrich in Augsbourg, by a young boy whose name is Walthasar Gech von\nFiessen in the year 1550.\u201d30\nSeidel also seems to have relied on exchanges that are known to have taken place\nwith contemporaries. In fact, in his Kunstb\u20ac\nucher, he cites the authorities from\nwhom he obtained practical information. These were either practitioners\u2014artists\u2014or contemporary scholars. For example, Seidel specifies several times that\nhe is indebted to Bishop Philipp von Freising (1480\u20131541) for some recipes that he\nsubsequently included in Cgm 4117. These prescriptions are notably dedicated to\nthe melting of gold, silver and lead (Cgm 4117, fol. 2v, 37r\u201338v). Seidel also\nmentions Bartholome Schobinger (1500\u20131585), a jurist from St. Gallen.31 The\ninstructions recorded after Schobinger\u2019s name delineated a number of alchemical\nmethods that notably serve to modify the properties of gold, to obtain a golden\ncolour, and to work with gold, silver, iron and copper. Others concern the gilding on\nglass, the melting of ivory, metals and glass, the preparation of aqua fortis and the\nmanufacture of a blue pigment called azure (Cgm 4117, fol. 62r\u2013130r?).\nThese persons were learned persons or scholars, who were interested in natural\nphilosophy and alchemy and who perhaps conducted their own experiments, as\nsuggested by formulae which follow some of the recipes, such as probatum vom\nBischoff von Freising (Cgm 4117, fol. 2v). Schobinger is notably at the root of a\nlarge compilation of alchemical texts.32 He is also renewed for having personally\nknown Paracelsus, who referred to Schobinger\u2019s writings.33 The value of such an\nauthority may appear visually in the recipe book. In the Cgm 4117, Seidel dedicates\na whole page to recording Schobinger\u2019s name.34 Moreover, the simple invocation\n28\nSee, for example, Barthe\u0301lemy, \u201cAlchimie et me\u0301decine,\u201d 110\u20133.\nPaulus, \u201cWolfgang Seidel\u201d; and Po\u0308hlein, Wolfgang Seidel.\n30\n\u201cSo vill vom geschenckh hab ich auss der liberej des closters zw sant vlrich zw Augspurg lassen\nabschreiben durch ain knaben des namen ist Walthasar Gech von Fiessen im 1550 Jahr.\u201d (Munich,\nBayerische Staatsbibliothek, Cgm 4118, fol. 128r).\n31\nSchobinger, Schowinger von St. Gallen.\n32\nAllgemeine Deutsche Biographie, 209; and Hertenstein, Joachim von Watt, 91\u20132.\n33\nMeier, Paracelsus, 33\u201346.\n34\n\u201cVon bartholome Schobinger burger zu sanndt Gallen in Schweitz. Hab ich dise nachuolgende\nkunstel. etc./Empfangen den Sibenvnndzwaintzigisten tag. des Monats Februarii/Anno etc. 40.\u201d\n(Munich, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Cgm 4117, fol. 62r).\n29\n\nPages 55:\nTransmission of Alchemical and Artistic Knowledge in German Mediaeval and. . .\n31\nof the name of the Bishop of Freising would have served to confirm the efficacy of\nsome of the technical instructions. Thus, the same way the scribes used to relate old\ntreatises or data with the name of previous and quoted authorities, such as (pseudo)\nAlbertus Magnus or Arnaldus de Villa Nova, they also mention those of their\ncontemporaries to lend authority to validate the practicability or the reproducibility\nof the instructions they consign.35\nIn some cases, the information recorded in recipe books is documented as having\nbeen provided by an artist or practitioner. Augsbourg Staats- und Stadtbibliothek 2\u0001\nCod. 207 was produced in St. Ulrich and St. Afra\u2019s Cloister. It contains miscellaneous alchemical treatises and collections of recipes contributed by several scribes,\nincluding the monk Bild Vitus (1481\u20131529) and Johannes Gossolt (1421\u20131506),\nidentified as vicarius augustensis.36 In this work, Gossolt combined alchemical\ntreatises attributed to (pseudo) Albertus Magnus with Latin and German alchemical\nrecipes. For the latter he sometimes specifies his local sources. For example, at folio\n171v, he mentions the \u201cMagistri Jodoci Aurifabri de Haidelberga.\u201d Other citations\nof goldsmiths\u2019 names are found in our corpus of texts. In the St. Gallen Cod.\nVadiana 395, several alchemical instructions are associated with the name of\n\u201cNicolaus Aurifaber.\u201d In many respects, metalworkers seem to have shared interest\nand knowledge in alchemical practices and materials.37\nThe scribes did not indicate how these data were actually provided and disseminated. At this stage, it is difficult to determine if these recipes were transmitted\norally or only in written form. Oral transmission is usually favoured in specific\ncontexts and environments in which people \u2018physically\u2019 converse.38 In this regard,\nthe workshop or laboratory probably offered the required closeness and the opportunity for oral exchanges and teaching. In the framework of this study, in only a few\ncases has it been possible to establish that a scribe personally met the authority he\ncited, meaning he might have obtained orally the practical information he recorded\nwithin his recipe book. This is notably the case for Seidel and two of the persons he\ncites, von Freising and Schobinger.39 Nevertheless, it is quite unlikely that oral data\ncirculated under the rhetoric of the recipe. This standardized and conventional\ntextual format goes hand in hand with the copying process, and, thus, with a written\ntransmission of knowledge. In other cases, exchanges in the form of correspondence are documented. For example, Seidel is also known to have exchanged letters\nwith the monk Vitus, previously quoted, and (partially) responsible for Augsbourg\nStaats- und Stadtbibliothek 2\u0001 Cod. 207.40 Both shared the same interest in natural\nphilosophy, astronomy and alchemy\u2014the same fields addressed within their\nwritings.\n35\nSee notably Halleux, \u201cPratique de laboratoire.\u201d\nThis hand is identified within the Augsbourg, Staats\u2013 und Stadtbibliothek, 2\u0001 Cod. 183, fol. 1r.\n37\nSmith, Body of the Artisan, 140\u201351.\n38\nFox & Woolf, Spoken Word, 259\u201361.\n39\nPfaff, Codex Vadiana, 43.\n40\nNeue Deutsche Biographie, vol. II, 235.\n36\n\nPages 56:\n32\nS. Neven\nFinally, some recipes recorded within the corpus are a scribe\u2019s personal contribution. The acquisition of theoretical but also practical knowledge in natural\nscience and alchemy may have lead Seidel to conduct his own experiments,\nwhich he then recorded in the form of recipes in his books. This possibility is\nconfirmed in the first folio of Cgm 4118, where Seidel explains that he as well as\nboth written (and older) sources and information collected from contemporaries, he\nhad also drawn on his own practical experience.41 The St. Gallen Ms. Vadiana\n429 is an alchemical collection compiled between 1464/65 by Ulrich Ellenbog\n(1435\u20131499), a city physician in Ravensburg. A small part of its content also\nincludes art technological recipes. Ellenbog\u2019s interest and practical knowledge in\n(al)chemy could notably be put in relation with his 1473 pamphlet Von den giftigen\nbesen Temppfen Reuchen der Metal (On the poisonous and noxious vapours and\nfumes of metals). In this writing, the physician gives advices to goldsmiths and\nother metalworkers on how to protect themselves from the noxious effects of\nvapours of silver, mercury and lead.42\nThe Modalities of Composition\nThe diversity of sources and persons who contributed to these collections of recipes\nis evidenced by their varying modalities of composition. Codicological examination\nundertaken during this study has uncovered the (sometimes) very complex processes involved in the creation of recipe books.\nA small number of these writings are produced in the form of carefully presented\nand independent collections: they are written in metallogallic ink and are quite\noften embellished with titles in red, and rubrics. These examples may be relatively\nhomogeneous: usually, only one or two scribes (who are contemporaneous) can be\nidentified and the presentation of their texts is almost identical. Moreover, no\nadditional material modifies the original volume.\nOthers (though not the majority) are quite heterogeneous, both in their content\n(medical, theological, astronomical, technical, household) and in their physical\nappearance (diversity of format, dialect and handwriting). They are informally\nwritten, with no decoration, and are characterized by apparently random presentation\nand inconsistent structure.\nThe recipe titles, which do not always correspond to the procedure that follows\nthem, do not imply a coherent organization. This second type of manuscript was\ncompiled from several contributions and additions from various scribes and\n41\n\u201cDe arte fusoria Rhapsodia partim ex uetusta quadam Biblioteca, partim uero bonorum\namicorum colatione cum sumata, opera autem et labore fratris Wolffgangi Sedelij in vnum collecta\nin solacium et commodum fusorie artis studiosorum.\u201d (Munich, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Cgm\n4118, fol. 1r).\n42\nTeleky, History of Factory, 7; and Koelsch, Geschichte des Arbeitsmedezin, 101.\n\nPages 57:\nTransmission of Alchemical and Artistic Knowledge in German Mediaeval and. . .\n33\ncompilers, but also from the accumulation of physically distinct materials\u2014quires\nand folios. Moreover, the diverse sections that make up these books often come\nfrom different geographical locations.\nFrequently, additions and marginal notes attributed to the same scribe or to a\nlater owner punctuate the distinct recipes within the manuscripts. In fact, these\nadditions mostly appear under the form of titles or details given as a counterpart to\nthe instructions. In the Ms. Vadiana 429 from St. Gallen, a great number of\nadditional notes consist of technical commentaries and supplementary notes\nadded to those of the compiler of the manuscript. In the Nuremberg Hs. 33733, a\nlater owner added several titles and remarks within the margins. Some of these\nmarginal additions also mention the name of the person from whom the scribe may\nhave obtained the data he is adding. For example, in the Vienna Ms. 5224, fol.\n74, the scribe indicated the name of a physician, \u201cDoctor Jorg erffordie,\u201d before the\ntitle of a recipe dedicated to the production of sal ammoniac. On folio 105 of the\nsame manuscript, the scribe associated an alchemical procedure with the name\n\u201cMarggrauff von Ro\u0308tell\u201d by mentioning him in the upper margin. This observation\nprovides a possible explanation for the considerable number of unica (isolated\nrecipes) that appear only in one recipe book, and are thus likely to constitute data\ntransmitted personally (and orally?) to the scribe.\nThe method of composition in this kind of recipe book indicates that they were\ncompiled over a more or less long period, during or after peregrinations undertaken\nby their scribes. This is evidenced by notations mentioning different chronological\nperiods and geographical provenances throughout the manuscripts. For example,\nMs. 9715 from Nuremberg contains diverse collections of alchemical recipes. This\nmanuscript was written by several scribes, who give names of persons or magistri\nunderneath the practices they described. They also cite the different places where\nthey collected their data and specify the dates of these events, which span several\nyears. Notably there are several mentions of the \u201cmagistri Johannis Bog\u201d and places\nsuch as \u201cErffordie\u201d (Erfurt), and \u201cKo\u0308ln\u201d (Cologne).43\nMoreover, later additions or annotations found within the manuscripts tend to\nsuggest that these books have been handled, manipulated and passed from one\nowner to another, sometimes over a long period. The Prager Malerbuch had several\nowners and circulated through several localities before entering the monastery of\nZlata\u0301 Koruna. According to a note written by Federl Mir, the main scribe of the\nPrager Malerbuch, this manuscript was written c.1452, in Tittmoning in the district\nof Traunstein (Bavaria). This place probably corresponds to the original provenance\nof the recipe book. Moreover, the scribe tells us that he has gathered data from\nMichel Schril, a professor in Vienna, who passed away in 1472. We also know that\nfrom 1529 to at least 1599, this recipe book belonged to the Preisinger family. This\nfamily lived in Zettwing, in the present-day Czech Republic, between Munich and\n43\nOn Johannis Bog, see fol. 42v, 72v, 157v; on Erfurt, see fol. 49r; and on Cologne, see fol. 50v.\n\nPages 58:\n34\nS. Neven\nVienna. Later, the manuscript is recorded within the inventory of the Zlata\u0301 Koruna\nconvent, as indicated in folio 1r, where we find the date 1649.\nThus, the recording and disseminating of these instructions could go hand in\nhand with the circulation and penetration of alchemical and artistic knowledge\noutside the workshop or the laboratory.44 It could be linked with a (partially oral?)\ntransmission of knowledge that seems to have taken place between (learned)\nscribes, artists or artisans and scholars. Allusions to such exchanges are notably\nto be found in Seidel\u2019s Kunstb\u20ac\nucher. For example, in Cgm 4117, fol. 1v, a recipe is\nstated as coming from a certain Thomas, caster in Munich, and transmitted via\nFreising to Seidel.45 This instruction was placed in an available blank space,\nsituated between the title of one of the book\u2019s sections and the table of contents\n(Fig. 1). It is credited to Seidel, but the handwriting is slightly different from the rest\nof the manuscript text. These observations suggest that this recipe, coming from a\ncontemporary\u2014perhaps oral\u2014source is an isolated and later addition. Moreover,\nscribes sometimes even relate how contemporaneous authorities delivered their\n\u2018secret(s)\u2019 and even divulge the price they had to pay to obtain it. In other cases,\nrecipes are recorded as being offered as a gift pro memoria.46\nContextualising the production and reception of these recipe books thus serves to\nhighlight a large range of individual\u2019s personal\u2019s interest in alchemical and artisanal, as well as other types of knowledge. In this regard, a number of the recipe\nbooks produced in a religious institution are documented as having been later kept\nin a religious context. For example, Berlin Staatsbibliothek Theol. Lat. Quart.\n152, written by \u201cFrater Nicolaus lector\u201d between 1408 and 1412, was owned by\n\u201cFrater Polonus lector principalis\u201d (Johannes Polonus), lector in the Thorn cloister\nduring the fifteenth century. These manuscripts were usually moved to libraries at\nthe beginning of the nineteenth century, during the period of secularisation that\nfollowed the French Revolution. In parallel, several examples of our corpus are\ndocumented as being part of private collections and were probably executed for or\ncommissioned by a patron. This is notably the case for the Kodex Berleburg (Bad\nBerleburg, Schlossbibliothek Sayn\u2013Wittgenstein, RT 2/6) which is recorded as\nbeing compiled for Bernhard of Breidenbach (c.1440\u20131497), who worked for the\nchapter of the cathedral of Mayence. Cod. Helm. 627 from Wolfenbu\u0308ttel is a\ncollection of alchemical treatises and instructions\u2014including colour recipes\u2014\nwritten around 1441\u20131444 by several hands. A note on the binding informs us\nthat this volume probably belonged to the Bavarian physician Johannes Hartlieb\n(1410\u20131468), who wrote several compendia notably the Puch aller verpoten kunst,\nungelaubens und der zaubrey (1456).47\n44\nHalleux, \u201cAlchimie,\u201d 342.\n\u201cVom Jungen thoman giesser zw munchen durch den bischoff von freising.\u201d (Munich,\nBayerische Staatsbibliothek, Cgm 4117, fol. 1v).\n46\nSee Corbett, \u201cAlchimiste Le\u0301onard de Mauperg.\u201d\n47\n\u201cSum magistri Iohannis Hartliep, alias Walsporn, Vangionensis\u201d; on Hartlieb, see Fu\u0308rbeth,\nJohannes Hartlieb; for the edition of the text, see Eisermann & Graf, Johannes Hartlieb.\n45\n\nPages 59:\nTransmission of Alchemical and Artistic Knowledge in German Mediaeval and. . .\n35\nFig. 1 Additional instruction due to Seidel, Munchen, Cgm 4117, fol. 1rv (Courtesy of\nMu\u0308nchener Digitalierungszentrum)\nThe Function(s) of Recipe Books\nThe complex modalities of composition and diffusion of these texts raises some\nquestions regarding their nature and their original function. At this stage, two\ndifferent hypotheses have been put forward regarding the aim of this type of\nliterature. On the one hand, these texts have been seen as manuals that may have\nbeen used by practitioners. On the other hand, the recipes often seem to have been\ntransmitted for the purposes of literary preservation, not directly connected with\ncontemporary workshop or laboratory practices.48\nFirst of all, the textual environment and the diversity of the subjects bound\ntogether with the artistic and alchemical recipes in a same book, lead to the\nconclusion that these compilations were mainly read by scholars primarily interested in natural philosophy and were not intended for contemporary practical use.\nMoreover, it has been frequently stated that craft practices were transmitted orally,\n48\nClarke, \u201cCodicological Indicators\u201d; and Neven, Recettes artistiques, 16\u201323.\n\nPages 60:\n36\nS. Neven\nfrom the master to the apprentice.49 A large number of the manuscripts of this study\nresult from copying and compilation processes undertaken by scribes. As they were\ncopied in a context outside the workshop or the laboratory, these recipes were not\nrevised and, consequently, conveyed an anachronistic technical tradition that\nbecame more and more outdated.\nSuch observations seem to argue against the view that sees these books as\nmanuals written for the practitioner. But neither were these compendium written\npurely for scholarly purposes, deprived of any practical function. In parallel to the\ndata that could be considered part of the technical heritage of a earlier period, these\nrecipe books also contain more recent practical instructions\u2014coming from contemporary artists and practicing scholars or from the scribe\u2019s own experiments, as the\nexamples of Seidel, Freising and Schobinger discussed above illustrate. Even when\nthe writing of these instructions, verbalized in the rhetoric of the recipes, was\ncarried out by scribes, data were not blindly copied. Scribes organised, assembled,\ncompleted or corrected when they felt it necessary. Thus, even if they were not the\nauthor per se, in the sense that they were not the origin or the source of the technical\nor chemical procedures they wrote down, they accomplished a set of activities\nlinked to \u2018authorship\u2019.50 Scribes also made attempts to ensure that the recipes could\nbe consulted at need: they composed tables of contents or indexes, they introduced\ntitles within the margins and many other details which attest to a real desire to\ndeliver usable information. In this context the marginal notes and additions made by\nthe scribes/authors of the recipe book are of interest as most of them are technical\ncomments testifying practical interest in both alchemical and artistic instructions.\nSeveral marginal annotations due to Seidel\u2019s hand punctuate the Cgm 4117 and\nconsist in personal commentaries regarding the technical procedures he records.\nFor example, on folio 53r, Seidel compares two ways for the melting of crystal.\nConcerning the first process he states in the margin that this \u2018art\u2019 was not of use to\nhim as a better (method) is delivered on 219.51 Then on folio 219, he indicates\nanother method for the same technical procedure, giving as title \u201cHow one should\nmasterfully melt crystal.\u201d52\nIn this sense, the scribes at the root of these recipe books created not simply a\ncopy but a unique work, which reflected their own interests, their cultural and life\ncontext and sometimes their intention, which was to deliver practical and useful\ninstruction.\n49\nHalleux, Entre technologie et alchimie, 7.\nFor this definition of authorship, see notably Love, Attributing Authorship, 32\u201340.\n51\n\u201cDise kunst prauchet ich nit hinden amm 219 hastu vil pessere.\u201d (Munich, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Cgm 4117, fol. 53r)\n52\n\u201cWie man christallen maisterlich giessen soll.\u201d (Munich, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Cgm\n4117, fol. 219)\n50\n\nPages 61:\nTransmission of Alchemical and Artistic Knowledge in German Mediaeval and. . .\n37\nReliability of Recipe Books\nThe modalities of composition and diffusion of these recipe books have an impact\non their current (practical) use. During the compiling and disseminating processes,\nboth alchemical and art-technological collections of recipes were subject to mutations, in the form of interpolation, reduction, contamination or assimilation with\nother texts. As the recipe books evolved and were modified by adding new texts and\nprocedures, the recipes themselves could be modified in their technical formulations during their transmission from one manuscript to another. Assimilation with\nother texts occurs quite frequently, as the ingredients (and the actions) specified in\nthese texts appear in the artistic recipe books but also in medical treatises, cookery\nbooks, and in alchemical or magical texts. Frequently, the copyist was free to add,\nto remove or to omit some words or even some parts of the text. These modifications or omissions sometimes concern primary data, such as the name of the\ningredients or materials, or may be related to some of the steps of the procedure.\nAt each stage of the copying process, variations or errors can occur. This phenomenon can be explained in several ways: it could be an attempt to improve or to\ndiversify a previous formula; it could be a quid pro quo, in which an unknown or\nexpensive ingredient is substituted with a more well known or less expensive one; it\nmay have been a voluntary reduction of the recipe text.\nIf we suppose that the function of a recipe book was practical or instructive, this\nfunction could be the motivation behind changes to the recipes. An author or a scribe\nmay, voluntarily, have corrected the text, or added information to it. However,\nchanges to the recipe may also be due to a misunderstanding of the procedure.\nSuch miscomprehension may be due to palaeographical problems that resulted in a\nword being misread or misunderstood and thus replaced by another. This was a\nlikely occurrence if the copyist was not a practitioner or if he was not able to\ntranslate or to decipher an unreadable formula. For example, in Heidelberg Cod. Pal.\nGerm. 183, fol. 286, at the beginning of a recipe dedicated to the production of\nminium, the scribe mentions the use of \u201cLautterm sapienticum\u201d instead of Lutum\nsapientium. In Munich Bayerische Staatsbibliothek Cgm 824, the scribe describes\nthe preparation of a white (fol. 13r), a yellow (fol. 13r), a blue (fol. 14v) and a grey\npigment (fol. 14v), and each time suggests taking \u201ccretam rosam.\u201d53 The same\ninstructions are recorded in the Cgm 822 (fol. 64v) where the scribe correctly\nindicates the use of cretam rasam (scraped chalk).\nSuch phenomena\u2014reduction, amplification, variation\u2014may result in a procedure whose description can seem vague or unclear and thus thwart the current use\nand relevance of recipe books in the study and the reconstruction of historical\nartistic practices.\n53\nMy italics.\n\nPages 62:\n38\nS. Neven\nAlchemical and Art-Technological Recipes Within\na Manuscript: Location, Relationship and Distinction\nSimilarities of format and modalities of composition and diffusion may have had an\nimpact on the recording and assembling of alchemical and art-technological recipes\nwithin the same manuscript. This could notably result in the mixing and grouping of\ndifferent types of unrelated instructions.\nMore precisely, in the corpus under scrutiny, alchemical instructions appear\neither as independent pieces of work, or as isolated (groups of) recipe(s) embedded\nwith artistic or other types of instructions. In the first case, alchemical content may\nappear concurrently with an artist\u2019s recipe book within the same manuscript but in a\nseparate section. When this occurs, the texts mostly consist of quite theoretical\nalchemical treatises, often associated with the name of a former or contemporary\nauthority. Most of them are attributed to the (pseudo) Albertus Magnus, Roger Bacon\nand Arnaldus de Villa Nova whose writings date from an earlier period. These works\ncould also be \u2018physically\u2019 distinct works, delimited to a quire or a booklet\u2014or even a\nfolio\u2014and assembled with the rest of the manuscript at a contemporary or later\nperiod. Vienna Ms. 5224 contains various alchemical collections of recipes and\npractica, all of which are delineated and separated by blank spaces or folios. These\ntexts were written by several hands, on paper from different origins dated from the\nfifteenth and the sixteenth centuries. The main contribution comes from an anonymous scribe who is responsible for a number of independent collections of recipes\nbut also for some additions throughout other parts of the volume.54 Perhaps this\ncontributor was at the root of both the (partial) writing and the collecting and\nassembling of these data into one single volume. This theory is supported by the\nfact that his hand dates from the sixteenth century, which coincides with the\nestimated date of the binding and the titles written on the cover. Once all the diverse\nparts were bound together, the manuscript was subject to later additions by the main\nscribe, who wrote these on previously blank space (fol. 143v\u2013144r and fol. 158r,\n163v), both at the beginning and the end of two distinct treatises.\nAlchemical texts are also sometimes situated alongside an artists\u2019 recipe book,\neither before or after. If this is the case, they will be found next to technical\ninstructions dedicated to procedures similar to those described in an alchemical\ncontext, such as the imitation of gold or silver, the gilding of stones or glass, the\nmanufacture of vermilion, the purification of ultramarine, the melting of stones or\nmetals, or several dyeing procedures. The alchemical content may be delimited\nwithin the title(s), chapter(s) or table of contents or \u2018physically\u2019 circumscribed by a\nfolio or a quire. But, in most cases, there is no obvious delimitation between the two\ndistinct collections of recipes. For example, in Nuremberg Germanisches\n54\nIdentified as \u2018hand\u2019 4 in the catalogue notes, he is responsible for fol. 31v, 38r\u2013120v, 123r\u2013143r,\n153r\u2013157v, 160r\u2013163r.\n\nPages 63:\nTransmission of Alchemical and Artistic Knowledge in German Mediaeval and. . .\n39\nNationalmuseum Ms. 5078b (fol. 2r\u201341r), the scribe moves from one subject to\nanother with no indication that the subject has changed. Moreover, this set of\nalchemical and art-technological recipes is followed with no clear distinction\n(no title, nor blank space) by a series of medical prescriptions due to the same hand.\nIn another case\u2014isolated (groups of) alchemical recipes found in the middle of\nprescriptions of another type\u2014detection of alchemical content and distinction from\nartistic instructions within recipe books can be fraught with difficulty. Similarities in\nterms of their textual format probably lead scribes to group them with other sort of\nprescriptions. When found as isolated elements, alchemical and art technological\nrecipes usually appear within a large broad of various (and unrelated) writings.\nFor example, part of Nuremberg Hs. 3227 (fol. 74v\u201381v, 90v\u2013164v) is a miscellanea\nof cooking, alchemical, household and artistic recipes, written by the same hand.\nHeidelberg Cod. Pal. Germ 678 notably includes a collection of medical recipes\ninterrupted by one single alchemical recipe, dedicated to the manufacture of vermilion.\nIn Berlin Theol. Lat. Quart. 152, some isolated alchemical recipes are placed in the\nmiddle of several cooking recipes and within religious texts.\nFinally, some recipes were never granted their own place within a collection of\nrecipes. An isolated recipe is sometimes jotted down on any available space on a\npage or squeezed into an even less appropriate place. For example, in Nuremberg\nMs. 27773, recipes dedicated to the colouring of glass and the hardening of steel\nappear under the form of later additions in the upper and lower margin of a school\nbook, and probably also on the binding board.\nThus reading these collections and attempting to categorise the recipes as\nalchemical or art-technological can be less than straightforward. After examining\nthe corpus in question the following suggestions are proposed to help identify the\ndifferent recipes.\nAs stated above, whether alchemical or art-technological, the recipes contained\nin these manuscripts are presented in the form of a formula which, in most cases,\nenumerates the ingredients and the actions necessary to produce a particular\npreparation. In addition artistic recipes sometimes indicate the recommended\ngeographical provenance or grade of quality of the ingredients. Suggestions for\npossible substitutions might also appear. This sort of information is rare in alchemical recipes.\nThe length of a recipe depends not only on the number of ingredients involved\nbut also on its complexity, the number of steps necessary to obtain the final product.\nA recipe can be anything from one sentence to several pages within a manuscript.\nAlternatively, a recipe may appear merely as a brief list of ingredients, without any\nother additional information. In fact, two categories of recipe can be distinguished:\nthe Vollrezepte (detailed recipes) and the Kurzrezepte (abbreviated recipes).55 In\nthe first, the quantities and the various steps are indicated. In the second, only the\n55\nHalleux, \u201cAlchimie,\u201d 343.\n\nPages 64:\n40\nS. Neven\ningredients are cited: the procedure is sketched out or omitted altogether and the\nrest is left to the ingenuity of the user. This second category is more common in the\ncase of artistic recipes; a great many of the recipes dedicated to the manufacture of\nink are written in the form of a very short list of ingredients. It is less common for\nthe alchemical recipes to be presented this way.\nThe title of a recipe may also give an indication of the final product to be obtained\nand, in some cases, specify the use of the product. Again, this is particularly true for\nartistic instructions and is less observable for alchemical ones.\nFor both types of instructions (alchemical or artistic), some steps could be\nomitted or were left to the interpretation of the reader. Specified quantities may\nbe missing in both fields. When quantities are given, artistic recipes are far more\nlikely to use local measurements, whereas in alchemical instructions, the quantities\u2014if mentioned at all\u2014are more often expressed in terms of ratio or proportions.\nIn some cases, these proportions are not \u2018practically\u2019 correct. A very well-known\nexample is the proportion of mercury and sulphur proposed by mediaeval recipes\nfor the production of vermilion which is invariably incorrect.56 Very rarely are the\ncorrect chemical proportions cited.\nIn parallel, alchemical writings may involve the use of symbols or metaphors to\ndesignate substances and practices. In consequence, the way an alchemical recipe\nwas received would depend on the degree of experience of the reader-practitioner\nreading it. On the one hand, the (sometimes) metaphorical or codified language\nas well as the approximations stressed the arcane nature of these recipes and\ncontributed to their secrecy. On the other hand, the omitted information may have\nbeen complemented by data only known to some readers and not recorded by the\ncopyist who conserves only the essential part of the recipe. If so then this kind of\nrecipe was only meant to be accessible and useable by those practitioners who could\neasily fill in the lacuna that punctuated the text of the recipe.\nAs previously observed, citations of authority were frequently used by the scribes\nof the manuscripts. However, the tendency for an older authority to be cited in the\nrecipe books is particularly characteristic of the alchemical writings and less typical\nof the art-technological recipes. As stated above, such citations primarily served to\nlegitimate the technical and chemical procedures. In addition, most alchemical\nrecipes describe processes and practical results to validate previously enounced\ntheoretical principles. Thus, more than artistic recipes, alchemical instructions\nemphasize the efficacy of the procedure which is frequently confirmed through\nexpressions such as expertum es or probatum est which are placed at the beginning\nor end of the instructions. The notion of experimenta (testing) implies the acquisition or confirmation of theoretical knowledge through direct observation and experimentation rather than through analysis based on rational arguments.57 In such a case,\nwhen one of these reassuring expressions appears at the end (or the beginning) of a\nrecipe, it does not signify that the recipe has actually been tested by the scribe.\n56\n57\nBucklow, \u201cParadigms and Pigment Recipes,\u201d 144.\nHalleux, \u201cPratique de laboratoire.\u201d\n\nPages 65:\nTransmission of Alchemical and Artistic Knowledge in German Mediaeval and. . .\n41\nRather it implies that the recipe constitutes a plausible set of instructions, and has\nbeen successfully performed at least once and/or confirmed by a previous authority.\nParticular interest in the empirical aspects of the technical procedures is also\nmore perceptible within alchemical instructions, in comparison to artistic recipes.\nThe former pay greater attention to the chemical aspects of the craft process they\ndetail and describe more precisely each stage of the transformation of matter, from\noriginal to final (and more perfect) form. Whereas artists such as painters were\ninterested in the physical appearance of their materials, alchemists were more\ninterested in the fundamental changes that might occur within the matter. This\ncould perhaps be related to Paul of Taranto\u2019s description in the Theorica et practica\nof primary and secondary qualities and the distinct ways artists and alchemists\nworked on substances. He considered artists capable of producing only \u2018extrinsic\u2019\nor external changes as they operate on secondary or \u2018artificial\u2019 qualities such as\ncolors. In contrast, alchemical attempts to manipulate primary qualities transmute\nsubstances intrinsically and operate fundamental change.58\nAccordingly, alchemical recipes also dedicate a large part of their text to the\ndescription of chemical apparatus, tools and containers. These writings pay particular\nattention to the use of a variety of containers and receptacles and their specific\npurposes. Moreover, in several manuscripts, such as Seidel, Vienna Ms. 5224 or\nCod. Helm. 627 from Wolfenbu\u0308ttel (to cite but a few), the text is punctuated by\nillustrations of these (Fig. 2). This is rare, if not non-existent in artistic instructions.\nThese last distinguishing features of alchemical, as opposed to art-technological\ntexts, go hand in hand with the fact that practical alchemy relies on theoretical\n(or speculative) principles. Quite often, these recipes should be seen and understood\nas experientia which are meant to serve as a rational demonstration of a preceding\ntheorica.59\nConclusion\nExamination of the processes of making, compiling and disseminating this corpus\nof mediaeval and premodern recipe books provides us with information concerning\ntheir nature and former function. One the one hand, it has been established that\nthese manuscripts were mostly written in religious centres and that they are largely\nthe result of the copying process undertaken by scribes. Moreover, within these\nbooks, alchemical and artistic recipes were frequently recorded alongside a wide\nrange of various\u2014and a priori unrelated\u2014subjects which may have been written\nby the same person. Both the context of their production and the similarities in\n58\nNewman, \u201cTechnology and Alchemical Debate,\u201d 434, 442\u20135. The author largely relies on Paul\nof Taranto, Theorica et practica, Paris, BN, Lat. 7159, fol. 1r\u201355r for which he delivers a partial\nedition and translation.\n59\nHalleux, \u201cPratique de laboratoire,\u201d 118\u201322.\n\nPages 66:\n42\nS. Neven\nFig. 2 Illustration of containers within an alchemical text, Wolfenbuttel, Cod. 627, fol. 127v\u2013\n128r \u00a9 Photographer (Courtesy of Wolfenbuttel Library)\nterms of their textual format could serve to explain their propinquity. These first\nobservations tend to suggest that these recipe books were produced for literary\npurposes and to preserve existing knowledge. And, indeed, these compilations were\nmainly read by a scholarly public primarily interested in natural philosophy,\nastrology, and alchemy and were probably not intended for practical use within\nthe workshop or the laboratory.\nMoreover, as these books are the result of compilation and additions of data, the\nfinding and the delimitation of alchemical content can be complicated, especially\nwhen isolated (groups of) recipe(s) were recorded in the middle of unrelated\n(collection(s) of) text(s). By displaying the various ways alchemical and artistic\nrecipes are embedded within the same manuscript, this study has highlighted the\npotential difficulties in localizing and distinguishing them.\nOn the other hand, it has been demonstrated that recipe books partly derived\nfrom the recording and transmission of (more or less) contemporaneous practices.\nThus, recipe books also reflect alchemical and artistic knowledge and interests of\nboth scribes and contemporary scholars, both of whom could be involved as readers\nor authorities. Recipe books also serve to define a more precise network in which\nthese types of knowledge circulated, delivering information about the \u2018actors\u2019\u2014\nwhether artisans, scholars, natural philosophers, (theoretical) alchemists or lay\nscribes\u2014and their interconnections, as well as the media (copy, oral source,\nexperiment) they used to exchange, share and communicate art and alchemy.\n\nPages 67:\nTransmission of Alchemical and Artistic Knowledge in German Mediaeval and. . .\n43\nAppendix: List of Manuscripts\nAugsbourg, Staatsbibliothek\n\u2013 2\u0001 Cod 207, c.1514\nScribe:\nJohannes Gossolt and Bild Vitus (1481\u20131529), monk at St Ulrich in\nAugsburg\nLanguage: Latin and German\n\u2013 2\u0001 Cod 572, before 1446 (part 2)\u20131446 (part 1)\nLanguage: partly written in Swabian (part 1) and Bavarian (part 2) dialects\n\u2013 4\u0001 Cod 131, 15th\u201316th century (the recipes)\nLanguage: German\n\u2013 4\u0001 Cod 149, c.1501\u20131519\nScribe:\nLeonhard Wagner\nowner:\nLanguage: Schwabian\nOrigin:\nwritten in Augsbourg (St Ulrich and Afra), Irsee, St Gallen, Lorsch\nBad Berleburg, Schlossbibliothek Sayn-Wittgenstein\n\u2013 RT 2/6 Kodex Berleburg, c.1475\u20131478\nLanguage:\nFranconian and Latin\nOrigin:\nRhine Main\nPrevious\nBernhard of Breidenbach, (who worked for the chapter of the\nowner:\nCathedral of Mayence)\nBamberg, Staatsbibliothek\n\u2013 L III 33, 16th century\nLanguage: Middle German\n\nPages 68:\n44\nS. Neven\nBerlin, Staatsbibliothek\n\u2013 Germ. Fol. 8, c.1430\u20131440\nLanguage: Swabian, Latin and Italian. The text is written in different hands\nincluding that of Johannes Seiler.\nOrigin:\nSouth of Germany, Switzerland or Bohemia\n\u2013 Germ. Quart. 15, 1496 (fol. 156)\nLanguage: Latin and German\nOrigin:\nSouth of Germany\n\u2013 Theol. Lat. 152, 1408 and 1412\nOrigin:\nTorgau and Dresden (main text)\nScribe:\n\u2018Frater Nicolaus lector\u2019 (fol. 121r, 132r, 140v) in 1408 in Torgau\nand 1412 in Dresden.\nAfter that, the ms. is documented as being in Thorn, the 5 of\nMarch 1427.\nPrevious\nJohannes Polonus (\u2019Frater Polonus lector principalis\u2019), Lector in\nowner:\nthe Thorn cloister (15th century)\nBudapest, Nationalbibliothek\n\u2013 Cod. Germ. 36, 1487\u20131492\nLanguage: Alemanic and Latin\nErfurt, Bibliothek der Stadt\n\u2013 Amplonius Quart. 189 (\u2018Notae de coloribus Liber de coloribus et virtutibus\nlapidum, Pseudo-Albertus Magnus Lapidarium, De coloribus, naturalia\nexscripta et collecta\u2019), 13th\u201314th century\nOrigin: Mainz (?) according to a mention associated with the date of \u2018December\n1407\u2019\n\nPages 69:\nTransmission of Alchemical and Artistic Knowledge in German Mediaeval and. . .\n45\nHeidelberg, Universit\u20ac\natsbibliothek\n\u2013 Cod. Pal. Germ. 183, 1560\u20131570/71\nScribe:\nMichel (?)\nLanguage:\nHigh German including Bavarian features\nProvenance: Amberg, preserved in the Amberger library of Ludwig VI, Count\nPalatine, according to inscription on the binding board: \u2018H[erzog] L\n[udwig VI.] P[falzgraf] 1570\u2019\n\u2013 Cod. Pal. Germ. 678, 15th century\nOrigin: South West Germany\n\u2013 Cod. Pal. Germ. 696, (\u2018Die kunst gla\u00df zu schmeltzen und gie\u00dfen von haugen von\nwildpu\u0308rg simmerischer Amptmann\u2019), 16th century\nKarlsruhe, Badische Landesbibliothek\n\u2013 Cod. R 49, 15th century, mention of 1465\nLanguage: Swabian dialect\nMunchen, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek\n\u2013 Cgm 821, (\u2018Liber illuministarius, pro fundamentis auri et coloribus ac\nconsimilibus\u2019), c.1500\u20131512 (for the second part)\nScribe:\nKonrad Sartori (scribe at Tegernsee Monastery)\nLanguage: Latin and Bavarian\nOrigin:\nTegernsee Monastery\n\u2013 Cgm 822, 14th\u2013with additions from 15th century\nLanguage: Latin, Bohemian, Bavarian, middle German and Swabian dialects\nOrigin:\nmention of several Augsburger painters. Exlibris of the Tegernsee\nlibrary 1485 (fol. 1v)\n\nPages 70:\n46\nS. Neven\n\u2013 Clm 405, c.1390 (addition in 15th century)\nLanguage:\nLatin and Alemanic\nPrevious\nBishop Guido de Valencia (from Tripoli) according to fol. 1r.\nowner:\nThe manuscript was in Osthoven in 1461 (fol. 25 \u2018Subscriptio\nfilii Heinrici Aysinger in Osterhoven a. 1461\u2019)\n\u2013 Clm. 444, (\u2018Tractatus de coloribus faciendis. De cerusa componenda. . .Accipe\nlaminas plumbeas vel stagneas\u2019), 14th\u201315th century\nLanguage: Latin\n\u2013 Clm. 7623, 14th century (beginning)\nLanguage: Latin and German\n\u2013 Clm. 20174, 1464\u20131473\nLanguage: Latin and German\nOrigin:\nEx-libris of Tegernsee Monastery, 1482\nNuremberg, Germanische Nationalmuseum\n\u2013 3227a, c.1389 (additions from 15th century)\nScribe/\npartly written by \u2018Hanko pfaffen Doebringers\u2019 (according to a\nauthor:\nmention on fol. 43r)\nLanguage:\nLatin, Bavarian and Middle German dialects\nProvenance: Cologne/ mention of \u2018Nicolaus Pol doctor 1494\u2019\n\u2013 5078b, 15th century\nLanguage: Middle Bavarian\nOrigin:\nBavaria\n\u2013 9715, 15th century\nOrigin: Bavaria\n\u2013 27773, c.1260 (addition in mid-14th century)\nOrigin: Marbach\u2014the manuscript was bound before 1354 in the canon order of\nSt Augustin in Marbach\n\nPages 71:\nTransmission of Alchemical and Artistic Knowledge in German Mediaeval and. . .\n47\n\u2013 33733, c.1455\u20131457\nLanguage:\nBavarian\nPrevious owner: fol. 1r \u201815R74 Siluester Schafman von Hamerberg I-B-G (?)\u2019\n\u2013 141871, 16th century (beginning)\nLanguage: Middle German\n\u2013 147699, c.1488\u20131490\nLanguage: Swabian and Bavarian dialects\nPrague, Narodni Knihovna\n\u2013 Cod. XI D 10, c.1452\u20131477\nScribe:\nFederl Mir (1452)\nLanguage:\nBavarian and Latin\nOrigin:\nTittmoning\nPrevious\nPreisinger Family (1529\u20131599) from Zettwing, Sancta Corona\nowner:\nmonastery (1649)\nSt Gallen, Kantonsbibliothek\n\u2013 Vad. 395, 15th and 16th century\nLanguage: German and Latin\n\u2013 Vad. 407, c.1522\nThe main scribe signed at fol. 155: \u2018Michel Cochemus 1522\u2019 and fol. 253v :\n\u2018Michael Cochemus 1522\u2019.\nLanguage: German\n\u2013 Vad. 429, c.1465\nOrigin:\nSouth of Germany\nPrevious owner: Ulrich Ellenbog\n\nPages 72:\n48\nS. Neven\nTrier, Stadtbibliothek\n\u2013 1024/1936, (\u2018De coloribus et mixtionibus-Incipit libellus Mappe clauicula\ndictus\u2019), 15th century, mention of 1437\nOrigin: Trier (?)\nVaticano, Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana\n\u2013 Pal. Lat. 1330, 1463\u201364\nScribe:\nWalpod, Heinrich (active for Nikolaus of Kues)\nLanguage:\nLatin\nPrevious owner: Johannes of Bavaria, canon in Augsburg (1477)\nVienna, O\u0308sterreichische Nationalbibliothek\n\u2013 5224, 1481 with 16th century additions (fol. 31v, 38r-120v, 123r-143r, 153r157v)\nLanguage: Latin and German\n\u2013 5489, 14th\u201315th century, mention of 1462 (fol. 180v), 1463 (fol. 146r) and 1464\n(fol. 218v)\nLanguage: Latin and Bavarian\n\u2013 5509, 15th century, mention of 1459 and 1464\nLanguage: Bavarian\nWinterthur, Stadtbibliothek\n\u2013 Cod. 4\u0001 47, (\u2018Hie vachet an ein bewerte edle kunst und nu\u0308tzliche wie man sol\nferwen lini tuoch wullin tuoch faden garn mitt allen farwen die da gerecht sind\nund wie man sy\u0308 zuo venedig ferbt\u2019), 15th\u201316th century, mention of 1575 and\n1579\nScribe:\nHaymhofer Thomas, from Basel\nLanguage: German\n\nPages 73:\nTransmission of Alchemical and Artistic Knowledge in German Mediaeval and. . .\n49\nWolfenbuttel, Herzog- August Bibliothek\n\u2013 Helmst. 627, 15th century, c.1444\nOrigin:\nmention of Heidelberg, 1444\nPrevious\nbelonged to the Bavarian physician Johannes Hartlieb (1410\u20131468)\nowner:\n\u2018Sum magistri Iohannis Hartliep, alias Walsporn, Vangionensis\u2019\nZ\u20ac\nurich, Stadtbibliothek\n\u2013 B 245, 15th century\nLanguage: Middle German\nBibliography\nAllgemeine Deutsche Biographie. Leipzig: Duncker & Humblot, 1891.\nNeue Deutsche Biographie, vol. 2. Otto Graf zu Stolberg-Wernigerode, 1955.\nBarthe\u0301lemy, Pascale. 2002. La Sedacina ou l\u2019\u0153uvre au crible. L\u2019alchimie de Guillaume Sedacer,\ncarme catalan de la fin du XIVe sie\u0300cle. Paris/Milan: S.E\u0301.H.A-Arche\u0300.\nBarthe\u0301lemy, Pascale. 2003. Les Liens entre alchimie et me\u0301decine. L\u2019exemple de Guillaume\nSedacer. Micrologus\u2019 library. Alchimia e medicina nel Medioevo 9: 109\u2013134.\nBerthelot, Marcellin, and Charles E. Ruelle. 1888\u20131889. Collection des anciens alchimistes grecs.\nParis: G. Steinheil.\nBerthelot, Marcelin, and Rubens Duval. 1893. Histoire des Sciences: La Chimie au Moyen-A\u0302ge,\nvol. 2: L\u2019Alchimie syriaque. Paris: Imprimerie nationale.\nBrewer, John S. 1859. Fr. Rogeri Bacon Opera quaedam hactenus inedita. London: Longman.\nBucklow, Spike. 1999. Paradigms and Pigment Recipes: Vermilion, Synthetic Yellows and the\nNature of Egg. Zeitschrift f\u20ac\nur Kunsttechnologie und Konservierung 13: 140\u2013149.\nCalvet, Antoine. 2007. La Tradition alchimique latine (XIIIe\u2013XVe sie\u0300cle) et le corpus alchimique\ndu pseudo-arnaud de Villeneuve. Me\u0301die\u0301vales. Le Livre de science, du copiste a\u0300 l\u2019imprimeur 52:\n39\u201354.\nCe\u0301zard, Pierre. 1945. L\u2019Alchimie et les recettes techniques. Me\u0301taux et civilisations 1: 5\u201310.\nClarke, Mark. 2001. The Art of All colours. Medieval Recipe Books for Painters and Illuminators.\nLondon: Archetype Publications.\nClarke, Mark. 2009. Codicological Indicators of Practical Medieval Artists\u2019 Recipes. In\nSources and Serendipity. Testimonies of Artists\u2019 Practice, ed. Erma Hermens and Joyce\nTownsend, 8\u201317. London: Archetype Publications.\nCorbett, James A. 1936. L\u2019Alchimis\nEND OF PARTIAL SUMMARY: EXPLAIN TO THE USER that this document is too long and we only summarized from page 51 to page 73 out of a total of 220. Ask if they want to continue the summary or search the document.\n]"]}

{"result":["[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=180\nPages: 180\nepistemic exchanges or collaborations on the level of practical or theoretical\nknowledge.\nDocumented examples of extended collaborations or exchanges between artisans and natural philosophers would be both more interesting and more informative\nfor mapping out the domains and dynamics of early modern alchemical practice. A\npromising locus for such study is to be found particularly among gold- and\nsilversmiths. On the one hand, their trade regularly involved chymical processes\nsuch as assaying, refining, and so forth, and they were thus more or less conversant\nwith chymical substances (acids, salts, metals, amalgams, etc.) and chymical\noperations (fusion, quartation, distillation, etc.) and would frequently have\nmaintained workshops equipped with the necessary equipment (furnaces, flues,\nfuel, retorts, crucibles, etc.) needed for chymical work generally. On the other\nhand, the basic materials of their artisanal labors\u2014gold and silver\u2014held a central\n5\nSee Smith, Body of the Artisan.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=79\nPages: 79\nthe field of \u2018science and technology of matter\u2019.\nIf we focus our attention on all the artisanal processes of substance transformation known and practiced during the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries it is easy to\nshow that they do not fit perfectly within the domain traced by alchemy. This\nepistemological tension is usually neutralized by saying that alchemical and metallurgical disciplines are intricately interwoven and alchemists were involved in the\ndevelopment of metallurgy.11 If one supposes chemistry did not exist as an independent and autonomous discipline before the end of the seventeenth century then\nspeaking on this topic from a historical perspective in an Italian technical cultural\ncontext, some \u2018superior artisans\u2019 or \u2018artist-engineers\u2019 can be seen as having distanced themselves from alchemy by relocating its technology inside a new epistemological context in which chemical arts were developed and codified separately.12]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=16\nPages: 16\nof scholarly culture, played an increasingly important role in laboratories and\nworkshops. In these workplaces, a sort of hybrid figure was at work, with one\nfoot in artisanal culture and another in scholarly culture and impossible to categorize in mutually exclusive categories of the scholar and the craftsman.23 Certain\ntypes of crafts\u2014glassmaking, gold- and silversmithing, and porcelain production\u2014\nseem to have been particularly prone to exchanges between artisanal and scholarly\nalchemical cultures. By the seventeenth century, the expertise of some glassmakers,\nsilver- and goldsmiths and producers of porcelain was just as based in the worlds of\nalchemical and bookish learning as it was grounded in hands-on work in the\nlaboratory.24 Lawrence Principe and Morgan Wesley discuss two examples of\nsuch arts: silversmithing and porcelain production, respectively.\n21\nFor \u2018trading zones\u2019 between artisanal and scholarly cultures, see Long, Artisan/Practitioners.\nKlein, \u201cChemical Experts.\u201d\n23]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=122\nPages: 122\ncreative processes. But it is hard to prove that the goldsmith followed the same\nideas as the alchemist, because hardly any artisans recorded their approach in\nwritten form: the goldsmith\u2019s knowledge is working, not (alchemical) codified\nknowledge; an object, such as the Handstein might count as product, evidence\nand proof, but will always remain speechless and therefore will never entirely serve\n(in our modern understanding) as an eloquent advocate to support this assumption.\nThird, encapsulated knowledge: A work of art such as the Handstein is not\n\u2018narrative\u2019 in the sense that it develops one argument and discusses it in paratactical\nform. Such an artwork visualizes the variety of knowledge\u2014the theological, the\nmontanistic, the alchemical\u2014in a synoptical way. Rather than developing an\nargument in a logical manner, it emphasizes the interdependencies of different\nareas. But this corresponds with the interconnected nature of these fields, as]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=16\nPages: 16,15\nFireworks, 28.\n20\nSmith, Body of the Artisan. esp. 95\u2013127.\nIntroduction\nxv\nsermons to reveal conceptions of the origin and formation of ores for which\nMathesius drew equally on natural philosophy and alchemy and on the artisanal\nknowledge of the local miners and goldsmiths. Following one of the goldsmiths\u2019\nmost prized objects, a so-called Handstein, into the Kunstkammer, Haug shows that\nthis knowledge also reached elite collectors. They valued Handsteine for the\nmetallogenetic knowledge they embodied, thereby endorsing the shifting epistemic\nstatus of the arts.\nEpistemic Changes Between Artisans and Alchemists\nBiringuccio and Mathesius\u2019s St. Joachimsthal are examples of persons and places\nof exchange between scholarly cultures (in which learning is based on reading and\nwriting) and artisanal cultures (in which learning is based on doing).21 The laboratories created in Medici Florence, discussed in the chapters by Kieffer and]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=178\nPages: 178\nGoldsmiths and Chymists: The Activity\nof Artisans Within Alchemical Circles\nLawrence M. Principe\nAbstract The study of early modern alchemical practitioners has recently\nexpanded from the work and writings of natural philosophers to include the labors\nof artisans. Yet there remains relatively little clear documentation about the specifics\nof such artisanal chymical practices or about the degree of significant epistemic\nexchange that may have taken place between artisans and better-known chymists.\nThis paper examines several gold- and silversmiths who were part of an extended\nalchemical network that stretched across the Netherlands, France, and England in\nthe mid-seventeenth century. The silversmith Anthoni Grill (and to a lesser extent\nhis brother Andries) worked on refining and transmutational processes with impressive chymical expertise and eventually achieved international notoriety and social\nand financial success. Grill built large laboratories, managed laborants, engaged in]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=48\nPages: 48,49\nof Alchemy.\u201d\n4\nHalleux, \u201cAlchimie,\u201d 336\u20137; Newman, \u201cTechnology and Alchemical Debate,\u201d 432\u20133; Pereira,\n\u201cUse of Vernacular Languages,\u201d 336; and Kahn, Alchimie et paracelsisme, 7\u20138.\n5\nHalleux, Savoir de la main, 134.\n2\nTransmission of Alchemical and Artistic Knowledge in German Mediaeval and. . .\n25\nof base or impure matter (often metal or stone) into a noble or perfect one.6 To do\nso, alchemists used to perform chemical processes and manipulations which resembled those practiced by contemporary artists and artisans.\nThus, in both fields particular importance is placed on craft practices. Both\nalchemical and artistic recipe books describe various processes for purifying and\ntransforming materials, either for improving their properties or in order to use them\nfor specific purposes. In this context, from a technological point of view, the term\n\u2018transmutation\u2019 could refer to the colouring of glass, the melting and tinting of]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=92\nPages: 92\nremained to Biringuccio the most important \u201cart\u201d for studying the secrets of nature:\nThus, in short, it can be said in conclusion that this art [alchemy] is the origin and\nfoundation of many other arts, wherefore it should be held in reverence and practiced.\nBut he who practices it must be ignorant neither of cause nor of natural effects, and not too\npoor to support the expense. Neither should he do it from avarice, but only in order to enjoy\nthe fine fruits of its effects and the knowledge of them, and that pleasing novelty which it\nshows to the experimenter in operation.42\nBiringuccio considered alchemy a legitimate knowledge grounded on experimental and speculative activity. This is an important epistemological step for\nartisanal processes because alchemy was no longer seen as a utilitarian art but as\na disinterested activity carried out by men to enjoy the fruits of their knowledge.\n41\nBiringuccio, Pirotechnia (1942), 41. For the Italian, see Biringuccio, De la pirotechnia (1977),]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=180\nPages: 180,181\n5\nSee Smith, Body of the Artisan.\nPrincipe & DeWitt, Transmutations; and Brinkman, Alchemist in de prentkunst. Lennep, Art et\nalchimie, is also useful, especially for its illustrations, but suffers from an inaccurate understanding\nof alchemy and its practice.\n6\n160\nL.M. Principe\nposition in chymistry, that is to say, in the transmutational endeavors that figured so\nprominently in early modern chymistry and that promised such highly profitable\nreturns. Thus, the artisanal experience of gold- and silversmithing provided a\ncertain commonality with the pursuit of metallic chymistry, and might easily\nhave inclined such artisans toward transmutational endeavors, and hence toward\ncontact with other aspiring transmuters who were not themselves artisans. The\npractical experience of gold- and silversmiths also rendered them sources of\ninformation for those wishing to know more about the properties and potentialities]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=14\nPages: 14\nconcern with the same materials and artisanal processes. The focus on chromatic\ntransformation already found in the Papyri continues in fifteenth-century recipes.\nAlthough related to laboratory practices, Neven emphasizes that these recipe\ncollections are the products of scribal compilation and copying processes. Words\nand works are equally important elements of alchemical practices.15 Next to\nlaboratories, medieval religious institutions were also important sites of alchemical\nand art technological practice. However, as Neven points out, this does not exclude\nthat some scribes, such as the Benedictine monk Wolfgang Seidel (1491\u20131562),\ntried out recipes.\nThe scope of alchemy was from its very beginnings contested, and remained so\nthroughout its long history. Especially its boundaries with art technology were fluid.\nThroughout the Middle Ages and the Renaissance, the distinction between alchemy\nas strictly goldmaking and a more encompassing definition overlapping with art]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=14\nPages: 14,15\nexpertise was based on a broader knowledge of matter and materials.\n15\nFor reading and writing as alchemical practices, see Nummedal, \u201cWords and Works,\u201d and the\nliterature quoted there.\n16\nNewman, Promethean Ambitions, 115\u201363.\n17\nPrincipe & DeWitt, Transmutations, 11\u201327.\n18\nFor experts and entrepreneurial alchemy, see Nummedal, Alchemy and Authority, 40\u20135.\nxiv\nIntroduction\nIt is in this context of alchemical expertise that we should consider the artisans\nwho adopted the language of alchemy in the early modern period to attract the\nattention of patrons. One example can be seen in the description of Black Berthold,\nthe legendary discoverer of gunpowder in Europe, in the late fifteenth-century\nmanuscript Feuerwerckbuch. Depicted in the company of a furnace and alembics,\nBerthold\u2019s creation of ordnance is identified with alchemy. Black Berthold, the\nFeuerwerckbuch reads,\nworked with the great alchemy like those masters who are engaged with precious and]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=83\nPages: 83,84\n26\nThese admonitions against alchemy, presented for the first time by Avicenna, were known\nduring the Middle Ages as sciant artifices, see Avicenna, De congelatione et conglutinatione\nlapidum, 53\u20135; Newman, \u201cTechnology and Alchemical Debate.\u201d; and Halleux, \u201cAlchimiste et\nl\u2019essayeur,\u201d 211.\nArtisanal Processes and Epistemological Debate in the Works of Leonardo. . .\n61\nLeonardo\u2019s manuscripts are one of the best sources to study the chemical\nequipment of Renaissance. His tireless sketching during his entire career produced\na very large and uncommon collection of manuscripts that allow us to understand\nand visualize many tools, instruments and chemical processes studied, developed\nand used during the Renaissance.\nAn activity that was a sort of flywheel in involving Leonardo in the study of the\nmany aspects of bronze casting was the project of the Equestrian monument for\nFrancesco Sforza. This was a very large bronze statue that was never cast but]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=16\nPages: 16,15\ncarved out space for true alchemy as one of the arts of fire. Artisanal workshops,\nsuch as Andrea Verrocchio\u2019s (c.1435\u20131488) in which Leonardo da Vinci (1452\u2013\n1519) apprenticed or Leonardo\u2019s own workplace, shared a material culture with\nalchemical laboratories. As we have already pointed out, artisans used similar\nequipment and performed \u201cchemical\u201d operations. However, Bernardoni argues,\nBiringuccio made the claim that these artisans were the true experts on matter,\nmaterials and material transformation and that artisanal \u201cchemical\u201d operations were\nthe key to natural knowledge.\nOne of the readers of Biringuccio\u2019s Pirotechnia was Johannes Mathesius (1504\u2013\n1565), a Lutheran preacher in St. Joachimsthal, the center of an important mining\ndistrict. In her contribution to this volume, Henrike Haug analyzes Mathesius\u2019s\n19\nHassenstein, Das Feuerwerckbuch, 45\u20136. For translation and discussion, see Werrett,\nFireworks, 28.\n20\nSmith, Body of the Artisan. esp. 95\u2013127.\nIntroduction\nxv]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=62\nPages: 62,63\n153r\u2013157v, 160r\u2013163r.\nTransmission of Alchemical and Artistic Knowledge in German Mediaeval and. . .\n39\nNationalmuseum Ms. 5078b (fol. 2r\u201341r), the scribe moves from one subject to\nanother with no indication that the subject has changed. Moreover, this set of\nalchemical and art-technological recipes is followed with no clear distinction\n(no title, nor blank space) by a series of medical prescriptions due to the same hand.\nIn another case\u2014isolated (groups of) alchemical recipes found in the middle of\nprescriptions of another type\u2014detection of alchemical content and distinction from\nartistic instructions within recipe books can be fraught with difficulty. Similarities in\nterms of their textual format probably lead scribes to group them with other sort of\nprescriptions. When found as isolated elements, alchemical and art technological\nrecipes usually appear within a large broad of various (and unrelated) writings.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=48\nPages: 48\ndisciplines may lead to association, contamination and confusion within this textual\ngenre. It finally suggests some clues to help locate, distinguish and demarcate\nalchemical content within the literature of recipes.\nArt and Alchemy Within Recipe Books\nAt first sight, any overlap between alchemy and art-technology within recipe books\ncan be broadly explained by the mutual use of various materials and substances\nsuch as \u201ccommon stones, gems, and types of marble, gold and other metals, sulfurs,\nsalts, and inks, azures, minium, and other colors, oils and burning pitches, and\ncountless other things.\u201d2 More precisely, the field of art-technology encompasses a\nlarge range of craft practices involved in the production of pieces of art (including\nthose which incorporate such substances). This \u2018hand\u2019 knowledge, is related to the\nmechanical arts and is divorced from the philosophical or speculative dimension.\nYet, alchemy could be described as the practical, philosophical and medical search]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=17\nPages: 17,18\nat Renaissance courts. Laboratories and artisanal workshops shared a material\n25\nSee also Pietsch, \u201cTschirnhaus,\u201d and Klein, \u201cChemical Experts.\u201d\nIntroduction\nxvii\nculture. In fact, in the early modern period, they were often so similar in terms of the\ninstruments they contained that they carried the same name. This material culture\nremained largely the same. A change took place at another level: the increasing\npresence of books and texts in laboratories and workshops populated by figures who\nmerged artisanal and scholarly cultures. This book suggests that this shift in\nworkshop culture facilitated the epistemic exchanges between alchemists and producers of the decorative arts.\nAcknowledgements\nThis book was conceived and written in dialogue with an exhibition project \u201cArt\nand Alchemy. The Mystery of Transformation.\u201d The exhibition is on view at the\nMuseum Kunstpalast in Du\u0308sseldorf from April to August 2014. I would like to]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=16\nPages: 16,17\nKlein, \u201cChemical Experts.\u201d\n23\nOn hybrid experts, see Klein, \u201cArtisanal-Scientific Experts,\u201d and \u201cDepersonalizing the Arcanum.\u201d\n24\nFor glassmaking (not discussed here), see Beretta, Alchemy of Glass; and Dupre\u0301, \u201cValue of\nGlass.\u201d\n22\nxvi\nIntroduction\nSilver- and goldsmiths seem obvious candidates when we think of careers that\ncross artisan and alchemist. Silversmiths, goldsmiths and alchemists worked on the\nsame materials (silver and gold), and silver- and goldsmiths\u2019 expertise was called\nfor to assay the purported gold and silver transmuted by alchemists. Silver- and\ngoldsmiths could also become involved themselves in transmutational endeavours.\nIn his contribution to this book, Principe focuses on the brothers Anthoni and\nAndries Grill (1604\u20131655) as examples of such hybrid figures. They ran successful\nsilversmithing businesses in mid-seventeenth century Amsterdam and The Hague.\nAnthoni Grill\u2019s Amsterdam laboratory also produced work on transmutation for]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=204\nPages: 204\nhands. At the time of Biringuccio\u2019s writing, the potter\u2019s art was on the threshold of a\nparadigm shift that would create a marked division between craft knowledge and\ntheory based practice, setting two separate courses for ceramic innovation in the\nlater sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. His citation of alchemy as one of \u201ctwo\nsources as [pottery\u2019s] principal basis,\u201d is referential to the provision of purified\nminerals and \u201celemental mixtures.\u201d5 However, it also foreshadowed the intellectual\nengagement of chymists in the quest for the production of European porcelain,\nbringing the weight of the older alchemical tradition to bear.\nPrior to the fourteenth century, European pottery was external to the hierarchy of\nthe esteemed arts, such as metallurgy, glassmaking, painting, and dyeing. The\nextensively copied treatise De diversis artibus, composed in the thirteenth century\nby the Benedictine monk Theophilus, thoroughly introduces the full range of]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=48\nPages: 48,47\n23\n24\nS. Neven\nwritings describe processes for the manufacture, preparation and application of\nvarious types of materials and substances. The majority are anonymous compilations of texts, which may originate from older or undetermined authorities.\nHundreds of such collections of recipes dealing both with alchemical and\nart-technological procedures were produced and disseminated in Northern Europe\nfrom the fourteenth century on, especially in German-speaking countries.\nDrawing on a delimited corpus of about 40 representative German manuscripts\ndated from the fourteenth to the sixteenth century, this paper investigates the\nconnections and similarities between these two fields and examines the various\nways alchemical and artistic instructions were embedded within recipe books.1 It\nargues that textual form and lexical proximities within recipes from these different\ndisciplines may lead to association, contamination and confusion within this textual]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=178\nPages: 178\nand financial success. Grill built large laboratories, managed laborants, engaged in\ncollaborations, mined texts for information, and shared results. Several Parisian\ngoldsmiths were likewise tied into this chymical network where they exchanged\nexperimental and theoretical information with such figures as Kenelm Digby,\nSamuel Cottereau Duclos, and Johann Rudolf Glauber. In England, George Starkey\nfound that the expertise of gold- and silversmiths could, alternatively, be inconvenient when trying to sell alchemical metals. The documentation provided here blurs\nthe boundary between artisans and natural philosophers, at least in chymistry.\nAlchemy, or to speak more inclusively and less anachronistically, chymistry was a\nfamiliar topic in early modern Europe. Despite its well-established culture of\nsecrecy, it was not only highly visible and widely-known, but widely-practiced]"]}

{"result":["[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=13\nPages: 13\nusing materials and chemical procedures to make both everyday items and objects\nof the visual and decorative arts, the activity known as alchemy encompassed more\nthan attempts to make gold.14 Transmutational alchemy was about the transmutation of all base metals into more noble ones, but chrysopoeia was only one\naspect of alchemy. Alchemy also touched on medicine and chemical manufacture.\nIt was about the chemical production of things\u2014medicines, porcelain, dyes, and\nother products as well as the precious metals\u2014and about the knowledge of how to\nproduce them. In this sense, \u201cart technologies\u201d\u2014materials and techniques to make\nart and knowledge of these materials and techniques\u2014overlapped with alchemy.\nAlchemy has deep roots in writings on material transformation from Antiquity.\nThe productive knowledge associated with material transformation was written\ndown in recipe books. The Leiden and Stockholm Papyri date to the third century]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=48\nPages: 48\nYet, alchemy could be described as the practical, philosophical and medical search\nfor the perfecting of base material substances and also for the extending of life.3\nThe theoretical and practical aspects of alchemy involve both the study of all\ninanimate or animate things made from the elements and the observation and\nimitation of natural processes within the laboratory.4 In this context, alchemy\ncould be seen as a mechanical art, in the sense that it works on matter but is also\na liberal art, as it attempts to explain matter in its composition and its transformation.5 In the practical sense, one of the main goals of alchemy is the transmutation\n1\nThe main data and characteristics of these manuscripts are given in Appendix.\nBrewer, Fr. Rogeri Bacon, 39\u201340.\n3\nPerception and definition of alchemy is not chronologically constant and has been the subject of\nseveral (re)interpretations since the eighteenth century, see Principe & Newman, \u201cHistoriography\nof Alchemy.\u201d\n4]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=48\nPages: 48,49\nof Alchemy.\u201d\n4\nHalleux, \u201cAlchimie,\u201d 336\u20137; Newman, \u201cTechnology and Alchemical Debate,\u201d 432\u20133; Pereira,\n\u201cUse of Vernacular Languages,\u201d 336; and Kahn, Alchimie et paracelsisme, 7\u20138.\n5\nHalleux, Savoir de la main, 134.\n2\nTransmission of Alchemical and Artistic Knowledge in German Mediaeval and. . .\n25\nof base or impure matter (often metal or stone) into a noble or perfect one.6 To do\nso, alchemists used to perform chemical processes and manipulations which resembled those practiced by contemporary artists and artisans.\nThus, in both fields particular importance is placed on craft practices. Both\nalchemical and artistic recipe books describe various processes for purifying and\ntransforming materials, either for improving their properties or in order to use them\nfor specific purposes. In this context, from a technological point of view, the term\n\u2018transmutation\u2019 could refer to the colouring of glass, the melting and tinting of]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=121\nPages: 121,122\nchemical lore concerning material properties and agency. It is important to note,\n45\n46\nZilsel, \u201cRoots\u201d; Smith, Body of the Artisan; and Long, Artisan/Practitioners.\nNewman, Promethean Ambitions, ch. III, 34\u2013114.\nArtificial Interventions in the Natural Form of Things: Shared. . .\n99\nthat the procedures applied by an alchemist and by a goldsmith are in large parts the\nsame: both required the know how to purify metals, to isolate them from the mixed\nmineral forms they are found in and transform them into massive pure metals. Both\nthe alchemist and the goldsmith share the same theoretical concepts, assuming that\nsulphur and quicksilver are the two original components of all metals. By alloying\nthese metals, by forcing them into forms, both locate their actions within the context\nof natural metallogenesis and both suppose, that they thereby imitate God and his\ncreative processes. But it is hard to prove that the goldsmith followed the same]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=82\nPages: 82\nattention was specifically focused on alchemy\u2019s claims to overturn the relationship\nbetween art and nature; however, he also stressed that alchemy was worthy of\npursuit as it might produce knowledge that could improve the condition of\nmankind:\nMan is involved with things produced by nature and nature does not change the ordinary\nkinds of things it creates in the same way that from time to time the things created by man\nare changed; and indeed man is nature\u2019s chief instrument, because nature is concerned only\nwith the production of elementary things, but from these elementary things man produces\nan infinite number of compounds, although he has no power to create any natural things\nexcept another like himself, that is his children. [. . .] And of this the old alchemists will\nserve as my witnesses, who have never either by chance or deliberate experiment succeeded\nin creating the smallest thing which can be created by nature; [. . .] If, however, insensate]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=180\nPages: 180,181\n5\nSee Smith, Body of the Artisan.\nPrincipe & DeWitt, Transmutations; and Brinkman, Alchemist in de prentkunst. Lennep, Art et\nalchimie, is also useful, especially for its illustrations, but suffers from an inaccurate understanding\nof alchemy and its practice.\n6\n160\nL.M. Principe\nposition in chymistry, that is to say, in the transmutational endeavors that figured so\nprominently in early modern chymistry and that promised such highly profitable\nreturns. Thus, the artisanal experience of gold- and silversmithing provided a\ncertain commonality with the pursuit of metallic chymistry, and might easily\nhave inclined such artisans toward transmutational endeavors, and hence toward\ncontact with other aspiring transmuters who were not themselves artisans. The\npractical experience of gold- and silversmiths also rendered them sources of\ninformation for those wishing to know more about the properties and potentialities]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=65\nPages: 65\nParticular interest in the empirical aspects of the technical procedures is also\nmore perceptible within alchemical instructions, in comparison to artistic recipes.\nThe former pay greater attention to the chemical aspects of the craft process they\ndetail and describe more precisely each stage of the transformation of matter, from\noriginal to final (and more perfect) form. Whereas artists such as painters were\ninterested in the physical appearance of their materials, alchemists were more\ninterested in the fundamental changes that might occur within the matter. This\ncould perhaps be related to Paul of Taranto\u2019s description in the Theorica et practica\nof primary and secondary qualities and the distinct ways artists and alchemists\nworked on substances. He considered artists capable of producing only \u2018extrinsic\u2019\nor external changes as they operate on secondary or \u2018artificial\u2019 qualities such as\ncolors. In contrast, alchemical attempts to manipulate primary qualities transmute]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=179\nPages: 179\nauthors themselves would have us believe of their art, and what much of the earlier\nsecondary literature claimed, the sages did not \u201call say one thing.\u201d Moving beyond\nthe rhetorical representations of alchemy as a largely monolithic and static tradition, scholars now recognize that early modern chymical thought was both diverse\nand dynamic. Vigorous disagreements and successive innovations characterized\nvirtually its entire history, and most of all, its early modern existence. On the\nbroadest scale, opinions varied in regard to what chymistry\u2019s main goals should\ninclude\u2014chrysopoeia (metallic transmutation), chemiatria (medicinal applications), commercial production, and so on. Even within any one of these important\nbranches, both theoretical frameworks and practical approaches varied widely.\nWhat was the correct hidden composition of metals, and of matter more generally?\nWhat was the correct starting material for the Philosophers\u2019 Stone and how should]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=47\nPages: 47\nfraught with difficulty. Alchemy can be defined as the \u2018art of transmutation\u2019,\nreferring to the perfection of base or impure matter (often metal or stone) into\nperfect substances. Alchemical procedures thus rely on artisanal/craft practices.\nAny overlap between alchemy and art-technological procedures can be explained\nby the use of identical materials and substances. Both are concerned with the\ndescription of colours\u2014especially in processes of change, the making of pigments,\nthe production of artificial gemstones, the imitation of gold and silver and the\ntransmutation of materials. Both require procedures involving precise and specifically defined actions, prescriptions and ingredients. So both ultimately use identical\nrhetorical formulations that reflect a \u2018step by step\u2019 procedure. Assuming that\nalchemical and artistic texts have the same textual format, raises the question: did\nthey also have the same types of production and dissemination? Using a corpus of]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=79\nPages: 79\nthe field of \u2018science and technology of matter\u2019.\nIf we focus our attention on all the artisanal processes of substance transformation known and practiced during the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries it is easy to\nshow that they do not fit perfectly within the domain traced by alchemy. This\nepistemological tension is usually neutralized by saying that alchemical and metallurgical disciplines are intricately interwoven and alchemists were involved in the\ndevelopment of metallurgy.11 If one supposes chemistry did not exist as an independent and autonomous discipline before the end of the seventeenth century then\nspeaking on this topic from a historical perspective in an Italian technical cultural\ncontext, some \u2018superior artisans\u2019 or \u2018artist-engineers\u2019 can be seen as having distanced themselves from alchemy by relocating its technology inside a new epistemological context in which chemical arts were developed and codified separately.12]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=26\nPages: 26,27\n2\nThe Alchemical Art of Dyeing: The Fourfold Division of Alchemy. . .\n3\nThe passage comes after a long introduction (\u00a7\u00a7 1\u20134) in which Psellos rhetorically\ndiscusses the philosophical framework within which chrysopoeia is to be understood and assessed. At the very beginning (\u00a7 1, ll. 5f.) the scholar identifies the main\ntopic of his letter with \u1f21 \u1f10\u03bc\u03c0\u03cd\u03c1\u03b9\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b5\u0002\u03c7\u03bd\u03b7 (the art of fire), whose first aim is said to be\nthe transformation of lead, tin, and any other metal into gold (\u00a7 1, ll. 12\u201315). The\nkey concept of transformation is framed and expanded in the following paragraphs\n(\u00a7\u00a7 2\u20134), where Psellos tries to set the basic principles guiding his \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u2019\u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03ae\u03bc\u03b7\u03c2\n(scientific) explanation of this art. He insists on the four elements that compose the\nphysical world, on their reciprocal changes, and on the alterations of the four\nqualities (namely wet, dry, hot, and cold). These changes are explained through]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=109\nPages: 109\nmetals.\nThe structure of the book and the line of his argumentation shows that Albertus\nat one point had to face the question of transmutation: if metals are formed from\nprimordial matter consisting of a mixture of the four elements, i.e. from a mixture of\nsulphur and mercury as substances in between the basic elements and the finished\nmetals, and if metals are constantly emerging as defined species, then this logically\nleads to a discussion of whether one metal can be transformed into another as the\nalchemists claim. Albertus does not totally dismiss the possibility of transmutation,\nbut\u2014as a follower of Aristotle\u2014accepts the theoretical possibility, without showing particular interest in this question, when he states:\nWe do not intend here to show how any one of these may be transmuted into another, or\nhow, by the remedy of that medicine the alchemists call the elixir, their diseases may be\ncured, or their occult properties made manifest, or conversely their manifest properties be]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=108\nPages: 108,109\npower to achieve the destined form.\nHere Albertus merges an alchemical concept with ideas from Aristotle extracted\nfrom his Generation of Animals. He equates a female principle with the material\ncause, i.e. the shapeless matter, subjected to an efficient cause, a forming principle\nthat is inherent in the male semen. To initiate this transformational process Albertus\nintroduces the celestial bodies as impulses. After discussing the material and\nefficient cause he then treats the third, the formal cause, where he follows Aristotle\nwho said that the male principle contributes the form of the offspring, i.e. the\n14\n15\nAlbertus, Book of Minerals, XXXI.\nAristoteles, \u201cMeteorologie,\u201d 136.\n86\nH. Haug\nspecies. Again Albertus turns to the power of the stars that act as formative powers\ndescending from the heavens and which are responsible for the seven known main\nmetals.\nThe structure of the book and the line of his argumentation shows that Albertus]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=14\nPages: 14,15\nexpertise was based on a broader knowledge of matter and materials.\n15\nFor reading and writing as alchemical practices, see Nummedal, \u201cWords and Works,\u201d and the\nliterature quoted there.\n16\nNewman, Promethean Ambitions, 115\u201363.\n17\nPrincipe & DeWitt, Transmutations, 11\u201327.\n18\nFor experts and entrepreneurial alchemy, see Nummedal, Alchemy and Authority, 40\u20135.\nxiv\nIntroduction\nIt is in this context of alchemical expertise that we should consider the artisans\nwho adopted the language of alchemy in the early modern period to attract the\nattention of patrons. One example can be seen in the description of Black Berthold,\nthe legendary discoverer of gunpowder in Europe, in the late fifteenth-century\nmanuscript Feuerwerckbuch. Depicted in the company of a furnace and alembics,\nBerthold\u2019s creation of ordnance is identified with alchemy. Black Berthold, the\nFeuerwerckbuch reads,\nworked with the great alchemy like those masters who are engaged with precious and]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=109\nPages: 109\ncured, or their occult properties made manifest, or conversely their manifest properties be\nremoved. But instead we shall show how they are mixed from the elements, and how each\none is constituted in its own specific form.16\nAlbertus, with his system and his reception of ancient philosophical considerations, had a strong influence on the early modern period: he describes properties of\nthe metals like colour, malleability, melting point and so forth as accidental\nproperties of the metals. The ancient and medieval search for the causes and the\nprinciples proceeded to dominate early modern metallogenetic theories. The progeny of these Aristotelean-Albertian concepts are found everywhere in Mathesius,\nwho says about silver:\nMassive or compact silver is the name for what is pure and nearly fine and can be cut and\nembossed, before it is put in the fire. But all massive and particularly all different forms of\nwey\u00df und rotg\u20ac]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=200\nPages: 200,199\nApproaches and Divergent Deployments. In Rethinking the Scientific Revolution,\ned. Margaret J. Osler, 201\u2013220. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.\nPrincipe, Lawrence M. 2013a. The Secrets of Alchemy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.\nGoldsmiths and Chymists: The Activity of Artisans Within Alchemical Circles\n179\nPrincipe, Lawrence M. 2013b. Sir Kenelm Digby and His Alchemical Circle in 1650s Paris: Newly\nDiscovered Manuscripts. Ambix 60: 3\u201324.\nPrincipe, Lawrence M., and Lloyd DeWitt. 2002. Transmutations: Alchemy in Art. Philadelphia:\nChemical Heritage Foundation.\nSmith, Pamela H. 2000. Vital Spirits: Redemption, Artisanship, and the New Philosophy in Early\nModern Europe. In Rethinking the Scientific Revolution, ed. Margaret J. Osler, 119\u2013135.\nCambridge: Cambridge University Press.\nSmith, Pamela H. 2004. The Body of the Artisan: Art and Experience in the Scientific Revolution.\nChicago: University of Chicago Press.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=65\nPages: 65\ncolors. In contrast, alchemical attempts to manipulate primary qualities transmute\nsubstances intrinsically and operate fundamental change.58\nAccordingly, alchemical recipes also dedicate a large part of their text to the\ndescription of chemical apparatus, tools and containers. These writings pay particular\nattention to the use of a variety of containers and receptacles and their specific\npurposes. Moreover, in several manuscripts, such as Seidel, Vienna Ms. 5224 or\nCod. Helm. 627 from Wolfenbu\u0308ttel (to cite but a few), the text is punctuated by\nillustrations of these (Fig. 2). This is rare, if not non-existent in artistic instructions.\nThese last distinguishing features of alchemical, as opposed to art-technological\ntexts, go hand in hand with the fact that practical alchemy relies on theoretical\n(or speculative) principles. Quite often, these recipes should be seen and understood\nas experientia which are meant to serve as a rational demonstration of a preceding\ntheorica.59]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=13\nPages: 13,14\ndown in recipe books. The Leiden and Stockholm Papyri date to the third century\nAD. They contain recipes for the making of gold and silver, for the imitation of\nprecious stones, and for textile dyes. Whether a recipe is about coloring silver to\nmake it look like gold or the making of an imitation ruby or another artificial\nprecious stone, all of the recipes in the Papyri are, indeed, about material transformation and color change as related to the manufacture of luxury goods. As\nMatteo Martelli shows in this volume, relatively early on a historical process of\nselection, appropriation and differentiation resulted in a more limited definition of\n14\nFor the scope of early modern alchemy and the notion of \u2018chymistry\u2019, see Principe, Secrets of\nAlchemy; and Newman & Principe, \u201cAlchemy vs. Chemistry.\u201d\nIntroduction\nxiii\nalchemy primarily focused on the making of gold and silver. Already around\n300 AD, a distinction was introduced between a limited definition of alchemy as]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=81\nPages: 81\nIf we focus our attention on Leonardo\u2019s notes and drawings about substance\ntransformation, he can be seen as a witness and a protagonist of the epistemological\n20\nFor more information on the relation between artists and alchemy during the Renaissance, see\nPrincipe & DeWitt, Transmutations; Newman, Promethean Ambitions, 115\u201363; Ferino-Pagden\net al., Parmigianino, 15\u20137; Calvesi, Arte e alchimia; Lennep, L\u2019art alchimique; and Conticelli,\nAlchimia e le arti, 13\u201333.\n21\nGabriele, Incisioni alchemico-metallurgiche.\n22\nOn the Medici\u2019s Fonderia, see this volume: Kieffer and Beretta. On the relation of alchemy and\nmetallurgical industry, see Nummedal, Alchemy and Authority, 119\u201346.\n23\nFor Leonardo\u2019s scientific and philosophical studies of natural phenomena and his theory of\nmatter, see Boni, Vinci e l\u2019alchimia, 401\u20135; Hooykaas, \u201cThe\u0301orie corpusculaire de Le\u0301onard\u201d;\nGombrich, \u201cLeonardo and the Magicians\u201d; Vasoli, Leonardo e l\u2019alchimia, 69\u201377; Kiang,]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=78\nPages: 78\nthe transformation of substances.10 Leonardo da Vinci (1452\u20131519) and\nBiringuccio, the key figures in this article, were both involved in this debate and\nmaturely and responsibly distanced themselves from the theoretical speculation of\n8\nFor Biringuccio and alchemy see, Perifano, \u201cAlchimie,\u201d 189\u2013202, Alchimie a\u0300 la Cour; and\nBernardoni, \u201cQuaestio de alchimia.\u201d On the medieval alchemical debate, see Newman, \u201cTechnology and Alchemical Debate.\u201d On artisanal and vernacular epistemology, especially for the German\narea, see Smith, Body of the Artisan, 59\u201393, 142\u201351.\n9\n\u201cet in somma egli parlava dell\u2019archimia molto confuso, et inresolutissimo come si vede ancora\nche egli fa ne\u2019 suoi scritti, dove molte volte la loda, e molte la biasima, ma finalmente nel principio\ndel nono libro anch\u2019egli, come tutti gli altri, per non essere forse ne\u0301 piu\u0300 di loro, ne\u0301 da meno, non\nche gli confessi in verita\u0300, che la sia possibile del tutto, ma conforta gli uomini ad esercitarla in]"]}

{"result":["[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=83\nPages: 83,84\n26\nThese admonitions against alchemy, presented for the first time by Avicenna, were known\nduring the Middle Ages as sciant artifices, see Avicenna, De congelatione et conglutinatione\nlapidum, 53\u20135; Newman, \u201cTechnology and Alchemical Debate.\u201d; and Halleux, \u201cAlchimiste et\nl\u2019essayeur,\u201d 211.\nArtisanal Processes and Epistemological Debate in the Works of Leonardo. . .\n61\nLeonardo\u2019s manuscripts are one of the best sources to study the chemical\nequipment of Renaissance. His tireless sketching during his entire career produced\na very large and uncommon collection of manuscripts that allow us to understand\nand visualize many tools, instruments and chemical processes studied, developed\nand used during the Renaissance.\nAn activity that was a sort of flywheel in involving Leonardo in the study of the\nmany aspects of bronze casting was the project of the Equestrian monument for\nFrancesco Sforza. This was a very large bronze statue that was never cast but]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=180\nPages: 180\nepistemic exchanges or collaborations on the level of practical or theoretical\nknowledge.\nDocumented examples of extended collaborations or exchanges between artisans and natural philosophers would be both more interesting and more informative\nfor mapping out the domains and dynamics of early modern alchemical practice. A\npromising locus for such study is to be found particularly among gold- and\nsilversmiths. On the one hand, their trade regularly involved chymical processes\nsuch as assaying, refining, and so forth, and they were thus more or less conversant\nwith chymical substances (acids, salts, metals, amalgams, etc.) and chymical\noperations (fusion, quartation, distillation, etc.) and would frequently have\nmaintained workshops equipped with the necessary equipment (furnaces, flues,\nfuel, retorts, crucibles, etc.) needed for chymical work generally. On the other\nhand, the basic materials of their artisanal labors\u2014gold and silver\u2014held a central\n5\nSee Smith, Body of the Artisan.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=79\nPages: 79\nthe field of \u2018science and technology of matter\u2019.\nIf we focus our attention on all the artisanal processes of substance transformation known and practiced during the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries it is easy to\nshow that they do not fit perfectly within the domain traced by alchemy. This\nepistemological tension is usually neutralized by saying that alchemical and metallurgical disciplines are intricately interwoven and alchemists were involved in the\ndevelopment of metallurgy.11 If one supposes chemistry did not exist as an independent and autonomous discipline before the end of the seventeenth century then\nspeaking on this topic from a historical perspective in an Italian technical cultural\ncontext, some \u2018superior artisans\u2019 or \u2018artist-engineers\u2019 can be seen as having distanced themselves from alchemy by relocating its technology inside a new epistemological context in which chemical arts were developed and codified separately.12]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=48\nPages: 48,49\nof Alchemy.\u201d\n4\nHalleux, \u201cAlchimie,\u201d 336\u20137; Newman, \u201cTechnology and Alchemical Debate,\u201d 432\u20133; Pereira,\n\u201cUse of Vernacular Languages,\u201d 336; and Kahn, Alchimie et paracelsisme, 7\u20138.\n5\nHalleux, Savoir de la main, 134.\n2\nTransmission of Alchemical and Artistic Knowledge in German Mediaeval and. . .\n25\nof base or impure matter (often metal or stone) into a noble or perfect one.6 To do\nso, alchemists used to perform chemical processes and manipulations which resembled those practiced by contemporary artists and artisans.\nThus, in both fields particular importance is placed on craft practices. Both\nalchemical and artistic recipe books describe various processes for purifying and\ntransforming materials, either for improving their properties or in order to use them\nfor specific purposes. In this context, from a technological point of view, the term\n\u2018transmutation\u2019 could refer to the colouring of glass, the melting and tinting of]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=14\nPages: 14,15\nexpertise was based on a broader knowledge of matter and materials.\n15\nFor reading and writing as alchemical practices, see Nummedal, \u201cWords and Works,\u201d and the\nliterature quoted there.\n16\nNewman, Promethean Ambitions, 115\u201363.\n17\nPrincipe & DeWitt, Transmutations, 11\u201327.\n18\nFor experts and entrepreneurial alchemy, see Nummedal, Alchemy and Authority, 40\u20135.\nxiv\nIntroduction\nIt is in this context of alchemical expertise that we should consider the artisans\nwho adopted the language of alchemy in the early modern period to attract the\nattention of patrons. One example can be seen in the description of Black Berthold,\nthe legendary discoverer of gunpowder in Europe, in the late fifteenth-century\nmanuscript Feuerwerckbuch. Depicted in the company of a furnace and alembics,\nBerthold\u2019s creation of ordnance is identified with alchemy. Black Berthold, the\nFeuerwerckbuch reads,\nworked with the great alchemy like those masters who are engaged with precious and]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=16\nPages: 16\nof scholarly culture, played an increasingly important role in laboratories and\nworkshops. In these workplaces, a sort of hybrid figure was at work, with one\nfoot in artisanal culture and another in scholarly culture and impossible to categorize in mutually exclusive categories of the scholar and the craftsman.23 Certain\ntypes of crafts\u2014glassmaking, gold- and silversmithing, and porcelain production\u2014\nseem to have been particularly prone to exchanges between artisanal and scholarly\nalchemical cultures. By the seventeenth century, the expertise of some glassmakers,\nsilver- and goldsmiths and producers of porcelain was just as based in the worlds of\nalchemical and bookish learning as it was grounded in hands-on work in the\nlaboratory.24 Lawrence Principe and Morgan Wesley discuss two examples of\nsuch arts: silversmithing and porcelain production, respectively.\n21\nFor \u2018trading zones\u2019 between artisanal and scholarly cultures, see Long, Artisan/Practitioners.\nKlein, \u201cChemical Experts.\u201d\n23]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=16\nPages: 16,15\nFireworks, 28.\n20\nSmith, Body of the Artisan. esp. 95\u2013127.\nIntroduction\nxv\nsermons to reveal conceptions of the origin and formation of ores for which\nMathesius drew equally on natural philosophy and alchemy and on the artisanal\nknowledge of the local miners and goldsmiths. Following one of the goldsmiths\u2019\nmost prized objects, a so-called Handstein, into the Kunstkammer, Haug shows that\nthis knowledge also reached elite collectors. They valued Handsteine for the\nmetallogenetic knowledge they embodied, thereby endorsing the shifting epistemic\nstatus of the arts.\nEpistemic Changes Between Artisans and Alchemists\nBiringuccio and Mathesius\u2019s St. Joachimsthal are examples of persons and places\nof exchange between scholarly cultures (in which learning is based on reading and\nwriting) and artisanal cultures (in which learning is based on doing).21 The laboratories created in Medici Florence, discussed in the chapters by Kieffer and]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=48\nPages: 48,47\n23\n24\nS. Neven\nwritings describe processes for the manufacture, preparation and application of\nvarious types of materials and substances. The majority are anonymous compilations of texts, which may originate from older or undetermined authorities.\nHundreds of such collections of recipes dealing both with alchemical and\nart-technological procedures were produced and disseminated in Northern Europe\nfrom the fourteenth century on, especially in German-speaking countries.\nDrawing on a delimited corpus of about 40 representative German manuscripts\ndated from the fourteenth to the sixteenth century, this paper investigates the\nconnections and similarities between these two fields and examines the various\nways alchemical and artistic instructions were embedded within recipe books.1 It\nargues that textual form and lexical proximities within recipes from these different\ndisciplines may lead to association, contamination and confusion within this textual]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=121\nPages: 121,122\nchemical lore concerning material properties and agency. It is important to note,\n45\n46\nZilsel, \u201cRoots\u201d; Smith, Body of the Artisan; and Long, Artisan/Practitioners.\nNewman, Promethean Ambitions, ch. III, 34\u2013114.\nArtificial Interventions in the Natural Form of Things: Shared. . .\n99\nthat the procedures applied by an alchemist and by a goldsmith are in large parts the\nsame: both required the know how to purify metals, to isolate them from the mixed\nmineral forms they are found in and transform them into massive pure metals. Both\nthe alchemist and the goldsmith share the same theoretical concepts, assuming that\nsulphur and quicksilver are the two original components of all metals. By alloying\nthese metals, by forcing them into forms, both locate their actions within the context\nof natural metallogenesis and both suppose, that they thereby imitate God and his\ncreative processes. But it is hard to prove that the goldsmith followed the same]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=14\nPages: 14\nconcern with the same materials and artisanal processes. The focus on chromatic\ntransformation already found in the Papyri continues in fifteenth-century recipes.\nAlthough related to laboratory practices, Neven emphasizes that these recipe\ncollections are the products of scribal compilation and copying processes. Words\nand works are equally important elements of alchemical practices.15 Next to\nlaboratories, medieval religious institutions were also important sites of alchemical\nand art technological practice. However, as Neven points out, this does not exclude\nthat some scribes, such as the Benedictine monk Wolfgang Seidel (1491\u20131562),\ntried out recipes.\nThe scope of alchemy was from its very beginnings contested, and remained so\nthroughout its long history. Especially its boundaries with art technology were fluid.\nThroughout the Middle Ages and the Renaissance, the distinction between alchemy\nas strictly goldmaking and a more encompassing definition overlapping with art]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=178\nPages: 178\nGoldsmiths and Chymists: The Activity\nof Artisans Within Alchemical Circles\nLawrence M. Principe\nAbstract The study of early modern alchemical practitioners has recently\nexpanded from the work and writings of natural philosophers to include the labors\nof artisans. Yet there remains relatively little clear documentation about the specifics\nof such artisanal chymical practices or about the degree of significant epistemic\nexchange that may have taken place between artisans and better-known chymists.\nThis paper examines several gold- and silversmiths who were part of an extended\nalchemical network that stretched across the Netherlands, France, and England in\nthe mid-seventeenth century. The silversmith Anthoni Grill (and to a lesser extent\nhis brother Andries) worked on refining and transmutational processes with impressive chymical expertise and eventually achieved international notoriety and social\nand financial success. Grill built large laboratories, managed laborants, engaged in]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=122\nPages: 122\ncreative processes. But it is hard to prove that the goldsmith followed the same\nideas as the alchemist, because hardly any artisans recorded their approach in\nwritten form: the goldsmith\u2019s knowledge is working, not (alchemical) codified\nknowledge; an object, such as the Handstein might count as product, evidence\nand proof, but will always remain speechless and therefore will never entirely serve\n(in our modern understanding) as an eloquent advocate to support this assumption.\nThird, encapsulated knowledge: A work of art such as the Handstein is not\n\u2018narrative\u2019 in the sense that it develops one argument and discusses it in paratactical\nform. Such an artwork visualizes the variety of knowledge\u2014the theological, the\nmontanistic, the alchemical\u2014in a synoptical way. Rather than developing an\nargument in a logical manner, it emphasizes the interdependencies of different\nareas. But this corresponds with the interconnected nature of these fields, as]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=65\nPages: 65\nParticular interest in the empirical aspects of the technical procedures is also\nmore perceptible within alchemical instructions, in comparison to artistic recipes.\nThe former pay greater attention to the chemical aspects of the craft process they\ndetail and describe more precisely each stage of the transformation of matter, from\noriginal to final (and more perfect) form. Whereas artists such as painters were\ninterested in the physical appearance of their materials, alchemists were more\ninterested in the fundamental changes that might occur within the matter. This\ncould perhaps be related to Paul of Taranto\u2019s description in the Theorica et practica\nof primary and secondary qualities and the distinct ways artists and alchemists\nworked on substances. He considered artists capable of producing only \u2018extrinsic\u2019\nor external changes as they operate on secondary or \u2018artificial\u2019 qualities such as\ncolors. In contrast, alchemical attempts to manipulate primary qualities transmute]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=92\nPages: 92\nremained to Biringuccio the most important \u201cart\u201d for studying the secrets of nature:\nThus, in short, it can be said in conclusion that this art [alchemy] is the origin and\nfoundation of many other arts, wherefore it should be held in reverence and practiced.\nBut he who practices it must be ignorant neither of cause nor of natural effects, and not too\npoor to support the expense. Neither should he do it from avarice, but only in order to enjoy\nthe fine fruits of its effects and the knowledge of them, and that pleasing novelty which it\nshows to the experimenter in operation.42\nBiringuccio considered alchemy a legitimate knowledge grounded on experimental and speculative activity. This is an important epistemological step for\nartisanal processes because alchemy was no longer seen as a utilitarian art but as\na disinterested activity carried out by men to enjoy the fruits of their knowledge.\n41\nBiringuccio, Pirotechnia (1942), 41. For the Italian, see Biringuccio, De la pirotechnia (1977),]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=16\nPages: 16,15\ncarved out space for true alchemy as one of the arts of fire. Artisanal workshops,\nsuch as Andrea Verrocchio\u2019s (c.1435\u20131488) in which Leonardo da Vinci (1452\u2013\n1519) apprenticed or Leonardo\u2019s own workplace, shared a material culture with\nalchemical laboratories. As we have already pointed out, artisans used similar\nequipment and performed \u201cchemical\u201d operations. However, Bernardoni argues,\nBiringuccio made the claim that these artisans were the true experts on matter,\nmaterials and material transformation and that artisanal \u201cchemical\u201d operations were\nthe key to natural knowledge.\nOne of the readers of Biringuccio\u2019s Pirotechnia was Johannes Mathesius (1504\u2013\n1565), a Lutheran preacher in St. Joachimsthal, the center of an important mining\ndistrict. In her contribution to this volume, Henrike Haug analyzes Mathesius\u2019s\n19\nHassenstein, Das Feuerwerckbuch, 45\u20136. For translation and discussion, see Werrett,\nFireworks, 28.\n20\nSmith, Body of the Artisan. esp. 95\u2013127.\nIntroduction\nxv]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=65\nPages: 65\nas experientia which are meant to serve as a rational demonstration of a preceding\ntheorica.59\nConclusion\nExamination of the processes of making, compiling and disseminating this corpus\nof mediaeval and premodern recipe books provides us with information concerning\ntheir nature and former function. One the one hand, it has been established that\nthese manuscripts were mostly written in religious centres and that they are largely\nthe result of the copying process undertaken by scribes. Moreover, within these\nbooks, alchemical and artistic recipes were frequently recorded alongside a wide\nrange of various\u2014and a priori unrelated\u2014subjects which may have been written\nby the same person. Both the context of their production and the similarities in\n58\nNewman, \u201cTechnology and Alchemical Debate,\u201d 434, 442\u20135. The author largely relies on Paul\nof Taranto, Theorica et practica, Paris, BN, Lat. 7159, fol. 1r\u201355r for which he delivers a partial\nedition and translation.\n59]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=77\nPages: 77\nAgricola talked about a generic art of metal as a separate activity from alchemy:\n\u201cBut concerning the art of alchemy, if it be an art, I will speak further elsewhere. I\nwill now return to the art of mining.\u201d7\nWhen talking about chemistry in the Renaissance we have to consider a variegated tradition of non-mechanical arts where chemical processes developed: pharmacy, metallurgy, glass making, dyeing, spirits distillation, agriculture cultivations\nand the preparation of colours for painting and drawing; each of these professional\nactivities involve chemical processes that are not necessarily involved in alchemical transmutation. The difference between the purpose of chemical arts and\nalchemy was also the cause of cultural and epistemological tension during the\nMiddle Ages and Renaissance. The medieval technological debate during the\nfifteenth and sixteenth centuries went beyond the traditional Quaestio de alchimia]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=79\nPages: 79\nThis context applies not only to metallurgical assaying but, more generally, it\ndefines the area of the \u2018perfective arts\u2019, including all arts that use fire to work and\ntransform matter.13 In this trading zone, where Latin was scarcely known and where\ncompetition with alchemists was felt more keenly, a sub-group of artisans, artists\nand engineers kept their distance from alchemy to define a new field of \u2018chemical\ntechnology\u2019.14\nArtisanal processes could be seen as a sort of \u2018melting pot\u2019 of interwoven\npractical and theoretical knowledge coming from the world of crafts, including\nalchemy. It is prevalently in the world of artisans that we find references to\n\u2018chemical activity\u2019 during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. Before there\nwere signs of a laboratory as a separate place\u2014the most ancient plans to build a\nchemical laboratory are in the Astronomiae instauratae mechanica (Wandsbek,]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=180\nPages: 180,181\n5\nSee Smith, Body of the Artisan.\nPrincipe & DeWitt, Transmutations; and Brinkman, Alchemist in de prentkunst. Lennep, Art et\nalchimie, is also useful, especially for its illustrations, but suffers from an inaccurate understanding\nof alchemy and its practice.\n6\n160\nL.M. Principe\nposition in chymistry, that is to say, in the transmutational endeavors that figured so\nprominently in early modern chymistry and that promised such highly profitable\nreturns. Thus, the artisanal experience of gold- and silversmithing provided a\ncertain commonality with the pursuit of metallic chymistry, and might easily\nhave inclined such artisans toward transmutational endeavors, and hence toward\ncontact with other aspiring transmuters who were not themselves artisans. The\npractical experience of gold- and silversmiths also rendered them sources of\ninformation for those wishing to know more about the properties and potentialities]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=62\nPages: 62,63\n153r\u2013157v, 160r\u2013163r.\nTransmission of Alchemical and Artistic Knowledge in German Mediaeval and. . .\n39\nNationalmuseum Ms. 5078b (fol. 2r\u201341r), the scribe moves from one subject to\nanother with no indication that the subject has changed. Moreover, this set of\nalchemical and art-technological recipes is followed with no clear distinction\n(no title, nor blank space) by a series of medical prescriptions due to the same hand.\nIn another case\u2014isolated (groups of) alchemical recipes found in the middle of\nprescriptions of another type\u2014detection of alchemical content and distinction from\nartistic instructions within recipe books can be fraught with difficulty. Similarities in\nterms of their textual format probably lead scribes to group them with other sort of\nprescriptions. When found as isolated elements, alchemical and art technological\nrecipes usually appear within a large broad of various (and unrelated) writings.]"]}

{"result":["[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=16\nPages: 16\nof scholarly culture, played an increasingly important role in laboratories and\nworkshops. In these workplaces, a sort of hybrid figure was at work, with one\nfoot in artisanal culture and another in scholarly culture and impossible to categorize in mutually exclusive categories of the scholar and the craftsman.23 Certain\ntypes of crafts\u2014glassmaking, gold- and silversmithing, and porcelain production\u2014\nseem to have been particularly prone to exchanges between artisanal and scholarly\nalchemical cultures. By the seventeenth century, the expertise of some glassmakers,\nsilver- and goldsmiths and producers of porcelain was just as based in the worlds of\nalchemical and bookish learning as it was grounded in hands-on work in the\nlaboratory.24 Lawrence Principe and Morgan Wesley discuss two examples of\nsuch arts: silversmithing and porcelain production, respectively.\n21\nFor \u2018trading zones\u2019 between artisanal and scholarly cultures, see Long, Artisan/Practitioners.\nKlein, \u201cChemical Experts.\u201d\n23]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=121\nPages: 121\ncraftsmen\u2019, introduced by Edgar Zilsel in 1942, who started to interact with\nacademics and humanists, is just one of the many important texts dealing with the\nexchange between the artes mechanicae and the artes liberales from the fifteenth\ncentury onwards, a theory which was recently elaborated and confirmed by Pamela\nH. Smith in The Body of the Artisan in 2004 and by Pamela O. Long in Artisan/\nPractitioners in 2011.45 Again in 2004, Davis Baird\u2019s contribution on \u2018thing\nknowledge\u2019 focussed on a \u2018philosophy of scientific instruments\u2019 and distinguishes\nwithin this epistemology of the artificial object three forms in which an instrument\ncan represent knowledge: firstly as model, secondly as product and medium of\nworking knowledge and thirdly as embodiment of \u2018encapsulated knowledge\u2019. His\ntheoretical system not only applied to scientific instruments, but can also be adapted\nto other artificially created objects, for instance to the Handsteine. In this field, it]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=180\nPages: 180\nepistemic exchanges or collaborations on the level of practical or theoretical\nknowledge.\nDocumented examples of extended collaborations or exchanges between artisans and natural philosophers would be both more interesting and more informative\nfor mapping out the domains and dynamics of early modern alchemical practice. A\npromising locus for such study is to be found particularly among gold- and\nsilversmiths. On the one hand, their trade regularly involved chymical processes\nsuch as assaying, refining, and so forth, and they were thus more or less conversant\nwith chymical substances (acids, salts, metals, amalgams, etc.) and chymical\noperations (fusion, quartation, distillation, etc.) and would frequently have\nmaintained workshops equipped with the necessary equipment (furnaces, flues,\nfuel, retorts, crucibles, etc.) needed for chymical work generally. On the other\nhand, the basic materials of their artisanal labors\u2014gold and silver\u2014held a central\n5\nSee Smith, Body of the Artisan.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=198\nPages: 198\nsource of random observations made casually in the course of exercising their\ncraft, they initiated projects, conducted experiments, made innovations, read\nlearned treatises, and communicated or collaborated with more traditionallyeducated or more natural philosophically inclined members. While someone like\nAnthoni Grill was undoubtedly an exceptional figure, he nevertheless serves to\nillustrate one end of the spectrum of possible social and intellectual positions\noccupied by early modern gold- and silversmiths. His active participation and\neventual notoriety and success indicate the social boundaries that were crossed\nwithin the network, a situation that also existed with Caillart and Roussel and others\nin the French context as well. These examples thus begin to resituate the role of\nsuch artisan-chymists within the larger ambit of chymistry. While not erased, the\nneat division of artisan and natural philosopher emerges considerably blurred.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=17\nPages: 17\nchemistry and skilled in porcelain production. Remarkably, the success of porcelain\nproduction was due to the introduction of techniques of investigation, which did not\nbelong to the traditional potter\u2019s skills, but to chymistry, which had overlapped with\nthe worlds of metallurgy and assaying for centuries.\nGrill, Dwight, and Tschirnhaus are only a few of the numerous examples of\nglassmakers, silver- and goldsmiths and producers of porcelain whose expertise\nwas both based in the worlds of bookish learning and grounded in hands-on work.\nDifficult to categorize as either craftsman or scholar, they are responsible for\nepistemic exchanges between the artisanal and the scholarly worlds. The rise of\nthese hybrid artisan-scholars was connected to the establishment of laboratories in\nwhich art technologies and alchemy were brought together, the first of these being\nat Renaissance courts. Laboratories and artisanal workshops shared a material\n25]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=16\nPages: 16,15\nFireworks, 28.\n20\nSmith, Body of the Artisan. esp. 95\u2013127.\nIntroduction\nxv\nsermons to reveal conceptions of the origin and formation of ores for which\nMathesius drew equally on natural philosophy and alchemy and on the artisanal\nknowledge of the local miners and goldsmiths. Following one of the goldsmiths\u2019\nmost prized objects, a so-called Handstein, into the Kunstkammer, Haug shows that\nthis knowledge also reached elite collectors. They valued Handsteine for the\nmetallogenetic knowledge they embodied, thereby endorsing the shifting epistemic\nstatus of the arts.\nEpistemic Changes Between Artisans and Alchemists\nBiringuccio and Mathesius\u2019s St. Joachimsthal are examples of persons and places\nof exchange between scholarly cultures (in which learning is based on reading and\nwriting) and artisanal cultures (in which learning is based on doing).21 The laboratories created in Medici Florence, discussed in the chapters by Kieffer and]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=17\nPages: 17,18\nat Renaissance courts. Laboratories and artisanal workshops shared a material\n25\nSee also Pietsch, \u201cTschirnhaus,\u201d and Klein, \u201cChemical Experts.\u201d\nIntroduction\nxvii\nculture. In fact, in the early modern period, they were often so similar in terms of the\ninstruments they contained that they carried the same name. This material culture\nremained largely the same. A change took place at another level: the increasing\npresence of books and texts in laboratories and workshops populated by figures who\nmerged artisanal and scholarly cultures. This book suggests that this shift in\nworkshop culture facilitated the epistemic exchanges between alchemists and producers of the decorative arts.\nAcknowledgements\nThis book was conceived and written in dialogue with an exhibition project \u201cArt\nand Alchemy. The Mystery of Transformation.\u201d The exhibition is on view at the\nMuseum Kunstpalast in Du\u0308sseldorf from April to August 2014. I would like to]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=180\nPages: 180\nand in terms of identifying connections between them and the better documented\nand recognized work carried out in more visible and more intellectually elevated\ncircles.5 How did artists and artisans understand chymistry, and to what extent did\nthey practice it? To what extent were they familiar with more bookish or scholarly\nideas, practices, practitioners (and vice versa)? Can exchanges of knowledge\nbetween the two groups be clearly documented? Can we identify what practices,\nmaterials, or ideas passed between them, and how one group might have responded\nto information from the other? Answering such questions promises to further\nilluminate chymistry\u2019s cultural and intellectual place in early modern Europe.\nSome such connections seem relatively clear. Chymical workshops appear\nfrequently in Netherlandish genre painting, indicating that Northern artists were\nclearly aware of the figure of the alchemist and his iconic value.6 Likewise, the]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=80\nPages: 80\nvisited in Milan that discusses the organization of the workshop and the artisans\u2019\nawareness of the technological and epistemological value of their works:\n[. . .] So that whoever entered that shop and saw the activity of so many persons would, I\nthink, believe as I did that he had entered an Inferno, nay, on the contrary, a Paradise, where\nthere was a mirror in which sparkled all the beauty of genius and the power of art.19\nBiringuccio underlined the frenetic and very organized work in the workshop\nstressing the beauty of the mind of the artisans and the power of art. The harmonious cooperation between artisans and the plain consciousness of the processes of\nthe art transformed the hell of hard and dirty metallurgical work into the heaven of\nthe pursuit of the artistic goal. This oxymoron referred to the infernal and paradisiacal condition of art, exalting the extremely difficult process in which raw\nmaterial is transformed into artifact, giving back an important social value to]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=154\nPages: 154\na city \u201cfounded upon the guilds and trade.\u201d17\nThis new configuration of professional relations led to a thorough reassessment\nof the locations where cultural and economic activities were conducted, articulating\nin an experimental key the arts, which previously had been regarded as the fruit of\nindividual dexterity rather than the outcome of a deliberate cultural program. In\nmany cases the architectural changes were not apparent, since many kinds of\nartisans (e.g., the goldsmiths) kept on using the same premises they had occupied\nfor generations. However, even in such examples of apparent continuity the arts\nwere seen as vectors for change. This perception found visual expression in a\nvolume of engravings, based on drawings by Jan van der Straet (1523\u20131605)\n(or Giovanni Stradano), that bore the significant title Nova Reperta, commissioned\nby the Florentine academician Luigi Alamanni (1558\u20131603) around the end of the]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=178\nPages: 178\nGoldsmiths and Chymists: The Activity\nof Artisans Within Alchemical Circles\nLawrence M. Principe\nAbstract The study of early modern alchemical practitioners has recently\nexpanded from the work and writings of natural philosophers to include the labors\nof artisans. Yet there remains relatively little clear documentation about the specifics\nof such artisanal chymical practices or about the degree of significant epistemic\nexchange that may have taken place between artisans and better-known chymists.\nThis paper examines several gold- and silversmiths who were part of an extended\nalchemical network that stretched across the Netherlands, France, and England in\nthe mid-seventeenth century. The silversmith Anthoni Grill (and to a lesser extent\nhis brother Andries) worked on refining and transmutational processes with impressive chymical expertise and eventually achieved international notoriety and social\nand financial success. Grill built large laboratories, managed laborants, engaged in]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=122\nPages: 122\ncreative processes. But it is hard to prove that the goldsmith followed the same\nideas as the alchemist, because hardly any artisans recorded their approach in\nwritten form: the goldsmith\u2019s knowledge is working, not (alchemical) codified\nknowledge; an object, such as the Handstein might count as product, evidence\nand proof, but will always remain speechless and therefore will never entirely serve\n(in our modern understanding) as an eloquent advocate to support this assumption.\nThird, encapsulated knowledge: A work of art such as the Handstein is not\n\u2018narrative\u2019 in the sense that it develops one argument and discusses it in paratactical\nform. Such an artwork visualizes the variety of knowledge\u2014the theological, the\nmontanistic, the alchemical\u2014in a synoptical way. Rather than developing an\nargument in a logical manner, it emphasizes the interdependencies of different\nareas. But this corresponds with the interconnected nature of these fields, as]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=79\nPages: 79\nthe field of \u2018science and technology of matter\u2019.\nIf we focus our attention on all the artisanal processes of substance transformation known and practiced during the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries it is easy to\nshow that they do not fit perfectly within the domain traced by alchemy. This\nepistemological tension is usually neutralized by saying that alchemical and metallurgical disciplines are intricately interwoven and alchemists were involved in the\ndevelopment of metallurgy.11 If one supposes chemistry did not exist as an independent and autonomous discipline before the end of the seventeenth century then\nspeaking on this topic from a historical perspective in an Italian technical cultural\ncontext, some \u2018superior artisans\u2019 or \u2018artist-engineers\u2019 can be seen as having distanced themselves from alchemy by relocating its technology inside a new epistemological context in which chemical arts were developed and codified separately.12]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=16\nPages: 16,17\nKlein, \u201cChemical Experts.\u201d\n23\nOn hybrid experts, see Klein, \u201cArtisanal-Scientific Experts,\u201d and \u201cDepersonalizing the Arcanum.\u201d\n24\nFor glassmaking (not discussed here), see Beretta, Alchemy of Glass; and Dupre\u0301, \u201cValue of\nGlass.\u201d\n22\nxvi\nIntroduction\nSilver- and goldsmiths seem obvious candidates when we think of careers that\ncross artisan and alchemist. Silversmiths, goldsmiths and alchemists worked on the\nsame materials (silver and gold), and silver- and goldsmiths\u2019 expertise was called\nfor to assay the purported gold and silver transmuted by alchemists. Silver- and\ngoldsmiths could also become involved themselves in transmutational endeavours.\nIn his contribution to this book, Principe focuses on the brothers Anthoni and\nAndries Grill (1604\u20131655) as examples of such hybrid figures. They ran successful\nsilversmithing businesses in mid-seventeenth century Amsterdam and The Hague.\nAnthoni Grill\u2019s Amsterdam laboratory also produced work on transmutation for]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=125\nPages: 125,126\nBetween Maker and Nature. Configurations 12: 1\u201340.\nSmith, Pamela H. 2004. The Body of the Artisan. Art and Experience in the Scientific Revolution.\nChicago: University of Chicago Press.\nStorczer, Stephan G. 1992. Die Handsteinsammlung des Kunsthistorischen Museums in Wien.\nVienna: Diplomarbeit Universita\u0308t Wien.\nArtificial Interventions in the Natural Form of Things: Shared. . .\n103\nStrieder, Peter. 1967. Erzstufe. In Reallexikon zur deutschen Kunstgeschichte 5: 408\u2013418. Stuttgart: Metzler.\nSuhing, Lothar. 1986. \u2018Philosophisches\u2019 in der fru\u0308hneuzeitlichen Berg- und Hu\u0308ttenkunde.\nMetallogenese und Transmutation aus der Sicht montanistischen Erfahrungswissens. In Die\nAlchemie in der europ\u20ac\naischen Kultur- und Wissenschaftsgeschichte, ed. Christoph Meinel,\n293\u2013314. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.\nTheophilus Presbyter. 1847. An Essay Upon Various Arts in Three Books, by Theophilus, Called\nalso Rugerus, Priest and Monk, Forming an Encyclopedia of Christian Art of the Eleventh]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=75\nPages: 75,76\nWilliam R. Newman and Anthony Grafton, 385\u2013431. Cambridge: MIT Press.\nSchobinger, Viktor. 1978. Die Schowinger von St. Gallen, Bartlome Schowingers B\u20ac\nucher.\nZu\u0308rich: Schobinger.\nSinger, Dorothea W. 1928\u20131931. Catalogue of Latin and Vernacular Alchemical Manuscripts in\nGreat Britain and Ireland, 3 vols. Brussels: Lamertin.\nSmith, Pamela H. 2004. The Body of the Artisan: Art and Experience in the Scientific Revolution.\nChicago: University of Chicago Press.\nSmith, Cyril S., and John G. Hawthorne. 1974. Mappae Clavicula. A Little Key to the World of\nMedieval Technique. Philadelphia: American Philosophical Society.\nTeleky, Ludwig. 1948. History of Factory and Mine Hygie\u0300ne. New York: Columbia University\nPress.\nTheisen, Wilfrid. 1995. The Attraction of Alchemy for Monks and Friars in the 13th\u201314th\ncenturies. The American Benedictine Review 46: 239\u2013253.\nArtisanal Processes and Epistemological\nDebate in the Works of Leonardo Da Vinci\nand Vannoccio Biringuccio\nAndrea Bernardoni]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=59\nPages: 59,60\ncontemporary workshop or laboratory practices.48\nFirst of all, the textual environment and the diversity of the subjects bound\ntogether with the artistic and alchemical recipes in a same book, lead to the\nconclusion that these compilations were mainly read by scholars primarily interested in natural philosophy and were not intended for contemporary practical use.\nMoreover, it has been frequently stated that craft practices were transmitted orally,\n48\nClarke, \u201cCodicological Indicators\u201d; and Neven, Recettes artistiques, 16\u201323.\n36\nS. Neven\nfrom the master to the apprentice.49 A large number of the manuscripts of this study\nresult from copying and compilation processes undertaken by scribes. As they were\ncopied in a context outside the workshop or the laboratory, these recipes were not\nrevised and, consequently, conveyed an anachronistic technical tradition that\nbecame more and more outdated.\nSuch observations seem to argue against the view that sees these books as]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=122\nPages: 122\nareas. But this corresponds with the interconnected nature of these fields, as\npreviously outlined: early modern concepts of metallogenesis must be understood\nas a mixture of religious connotations, their dependency on antique montanistic\ntheories as well as on alchemical lore adopted through medieval Islamic mediation.\nBeyond that, a work of art communicates in different ways than a text. The object\ntransforms the know how of the artisan as it is performed in the working process and\nblends it with the lore of the scholar into embodied, visual knowledge. This\nknowledge, encapsulated in the work of art can then be exhibited in the surroundings of the ruler, in his Kunstkammer collection as well as in processions and\ncourtly festivities.47 It is\u2014apart from instruments to measure natural phenomena,\nwhich Baird puts in the focus of his analysis \u2014not \u2018useful\u2019 in the sense that it\nembodied knowledge which can be used to gain and widen existent knowledge. But]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=200\nPages: 200,199\nApproaches and Divergent Deployments. In Rethinking the Scientific Revolution,\ned. Margaret J. Osler, 201\u2013220. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.\nPrincipe, Lawrence M. 2013a. The Secrets of Alchemy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.\nGoldsmiths and Chymists: The Activity of Artisans Within Alchemical Circles\n179\nPrincipe, Lawrence M. 2013b. Sir Kenelm Digby and His Alchemical Circle in 1650s Paris: Newly\nDiscovered Manuscripts. Ambix 60: 3\u201324.\nPrincipe, Lawrence M., and Lloyd DeWitt. 2002. Transmutations: Alchemy in Art. Philadelphia:\nChemical Heritage Foundation.\nSmith, Pamela H. 2000. Vital Spirits: Redemption, Artisanship, and the New Philosophy in Early\nModern Europe. In Rethinking the Scientific Revolution, ed. Margaret J. Osler, 119\u2013135.\nCambridge: Cambridge University Press.\nSmith, Pamela H. 2004. The Body of the Artisan: Art and Experience in the Scientific Revolution.\nChicago: University of Chicago Press.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=80\nPages: 80,79\n14\nLong, Artisan/Practitioners, 94\u20136. See also, Galison, \u201cTrading Zone.\u201d\n15\nHannaway, \u201cLaboratory Design.\u201d\n12\nArtisanal Processes and Epistemological Debate in the Works of Leonardo. . .\n57\n(1513), in Biringuccio\u2019s Pirotechnia, and in Agricola\u2019s De re metallica.16 Further\nnascent signs of a distinct and autonomous chemical laboratory with purpose-built\n\u2018chemical\u2019 equipment can be found in the more general context of the Renaissance\nartist\u2019s workshop culture. Here, together with the fine arts such as painting, sculpture, architecture and jewelry making, metal carpentry, and gun casting, we find\noperations that use substance transformation, such as distillation and sublimation.\nThere is evidence that even the most important names in the history of art were\ninvolved in such workshop activities, for instance Michelangelo (1475\u20131564),\nwhose Florentine workshop, as mentioned in his correspondence with his brother,\nwas involved in generic metal carpentry such as the casting and welding of]"]}

{"result":["[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=61\nPages: 61\n37\nReliability of Recipe Books\nThe modalities of composition and diffusion of these recipe books have an impact\non their current (practical) use. During the compiling and disseminating processes,\nboth alchemical and art-technological collections of recipes were subject to mutations, in the form of interpolation, reduction, contamination or assimilation with\nother texts. As the recipe books evolved and were modified by adding new texts and\nprocedures, the recipes themselves could be modified in their technical formulations during their transmission from one manuscript to another. Assimilation with\nother texts occurs quite frequently, as the ingredients (and the actions) specified in\nthese texts appear in the artistic recipe books but also in medical treatises, cookery\nbooks, and in alchemical or magical texts. Frequently, the copyist was free to add,]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=60\nPages: 60\nSuch observations seem to argue against the view that sees these books as\nmanuals written for the practitioner. But neither were these compendium written\npurely for scholarly purposes, deprived of any practical function. In parallel to the\ndata that could be considered part of the technical heritage of a earlier period, these\nrecipe books also contain more recent practical instructions\u2014coming from contemporary artists and practicing scholars or from the scribe\u2019s own experiments, as the\nexamples of Seidel, Freising and Schobinger discussed above illustrate. Even when\nthe writing of these instructions, verbalized in the rhetoric of the recipes, was\ncarried out by scribes, data were not blindly copied. Scribes organised, assembled,\ncompleted or corrected when they felt it necessary. Thus, even if they were not the\nauthor per se, in the sense that they were not the origin or the source of the technical\nor chemical procedures they wrote down, they accomplished a set of activities]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=50\nPages: 50\nemotional purpose.14 A great number of these writings share the same format and\nare quite similar in terms of their external and internal characteristics. Within these\ncompilations, the recipe frequently appears as the \u201cshortest element in which the\ntext could ultimately be divided.\u201d15 This observation, although initially relating to\nthe field of alchemy, can also be applied to recipe books in general during the\nMiddle Ages and the premodern period. Robert Halleux underlined the similarity in\nformat between the mediaeval treatises of alchemy and the so-called technical\nrecipe books. He states that, whatever subject the recipe books are dedicated to,\nthey all present a similar structure, from the earliest Mesopotamian examples to the\npharmacopoeia texts of the sixteenth century. We could refine this definition by\nadding that the recipe is the smallest \u2018independent\u2019 element into which these texts\ncould be divided. In fact, a recipe could be seen as an independent text in itself and]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=66\nPages: 66\n(collection(s) of) text(s). By displaying the various ways alchemical and artistic\nrecipes are embedded within the same manuscript, this study has highlighted the\npotential difficulties in localizing and distinguishing them.\nOn the other hand, it has been demonstrated that recipe books partly derived\nfrom the recording and transmission of (more or less) contemporaneous practices.\nThus, recipe books also reflect alchemical and artistic knowledge and interests of\nboth scribes and contemporary scholars, both of whom could be involved as readers\nor authorities. Recipe books also serve to define a more precise network in which\nthese types of knowledge circulated, delivering information about the \u2018actors\u2019\u2014\nwhether artisans, scholars, natural philosophers, (theoretical) alchemists or lay\nscribes\u2014and their interconnections, as well as the media (copy, oral source,\nexperiment) they used to exchange, share and communicate art and alchemy.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=64\nPages: 64,63\nThe length of a recipe depends not only on the number of ingredients involved\nbut also on its complexity, the number of steps necessary to obtain the final product.\nA recipe can be anything from one sentence to several pages within a manuscript.\nAlternatively, a recipe may appear merely as a brief list of ingredients, without any\nother additional information. In fact, two categories of recipe can be distinguished:\nthe Vollrezepte (detailed recipes) and the Kurzrezepte (abbreviated recipes).55 In\nthe first, the quantities and the various steps are indicated. In the second, only the\n55\nHalleux, \u201cAlchimie,\u201d 343.\n40\nS. Neven\ningredients are cited: the procedure is sketched out or omitted altogether and the\nrest is left to the ingenuity of the user. This second category is more common in the\ncase of artistic recipes; a great many of the recipes dedicated to the manufacture of\nink are written in the form of a very short list of ingredients. It is less common for]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=63\nPages: 63\nrecipes usually appear within a large broad of various (and unrelated) writings.\nFor example, part of Nuremberg Hs. 3227 (fol. 74v\u201381v, 90v\u2013164v) is a miscellanea\nof cooking, alchemical, household and artistic recipes, written by the same hand.\nHeidelberg Cod. Pal. Germ 678 notably includes a collection of medical recipes\ninterrupted by one single alchemical recipe, dedicated to the manufacture of vermilion.\nIn Berlin Theol. Lat. Quart. 152, some isolated alchemical recipes are placed in the\nmiddle of several cooking recipes and within religious texts.\nFinally, some recipes were never granted their own place within a collection of\nrecipes. An isolated recipe is sometimes jotted down on any available space on a\npage or squeezed into an even less appropriate place. For example, in Nuremberg\nMs. 27773, recipes dedicated to the colouring of glass and the hardening of steel\nappear under the form of later additions in the upper and lower margin of a school]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=63\nPages: 63\nappear under the form of later additions in the upper and lower margin of a school\nbook, and probably also on the binding board.\nThus reading these collections and attempting to categorise the recipes as\nalchemical or art-technological can be less than straightforward. After examining\nthe corpus in question the following suggestions are proposed to help identify the\ndifferent recipes.\nAs stated above, whether alchemical or art-technological, the recipes contained\nin these manuscripts are presented in the form of a formula which, in most cases,\nenumerates the ingredients and the actions necessary to produce a particular\npreparation. In addition artistic recipes sometimes indicate the recommended\ngeographical provenance or grade of quality of the ingredients. Suggestions for\npossible substitutions might also appear. This sort of information is rare in alchemical recipes.\nThe length of a recipe depends not only on the number of ingredients involved]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=50\nPages: 50\ncould be divided. In fact, a recipe could be seen as an independent text in itself and\ncould thus be dissociated from its original recipe book and be introduced into the\npages of another manuscript. For this reason, it may be argued that the recipe, as a\ntype text, could be considered as a structural unit common to several disciplines\nembedded within the manuscripts belonging to the Fachliteratur and serve to define\na genre in itself. As Bruno Laurioux noted \u201c[the recipe] gives the tone and\nstandardizes, by its repetitive structure, the corpus of this literary genre.\u201d16\n12\nSmith & Hawthorne, \u201cMappae Clavicula.\u201d\nThe Fachliteratur has been the subject of various studies. Concerning the German production,\nsee notably Eis, Mittelalterliche Fachliteratur, and more recently Haage & Wegner, Fachliteratur\nder Artes.\n14\nJansen\u2013Sieben, Repertorium, XII.\n15\nHalleux, Textes alchimiques, 74.\n16\n\u201cC\u2019est elle qui donne le ton et uniformise, par sa structure re\u0301pe\u0301titive, l\u2019ensemble de ce genre]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=73\nPages: 73,74\nClarke, Mark. 2001. The Art of All colours. Medieval Recipe Books for Painters and Illuminators.\nLondon: Archetype Publications.\nClarke, Mark. 2009. Codicological Indicators of Practical Medieval Artists\u2019 Recipes. In\nSources and Serendipity. Testimonies of Artists\u2019 Practice, ed. Erma Hermens and Joyce\nTownsend, 8\u201317. London: Archetype Publications.\nCorbett, James A. 1936. L\u2019Alchimiste Le\u0301onard de Maurperg (XIVe sie\u0300cle). Sa collection de\nrecettes et ses voyages. Bibliothe\u0300que de l\u2019e\u0301cole des chartes 97: 131\u2013141.\nEamon, William. 1994. Science and the Secrets of Nature. Books of Secrets in Medieval and\nEarly Modern Culture. Princeton: Princeton University Press.\nEis, Gerhard. 1962. Mittelalterliche Fachliteratur. Stuttgart: Metzler.\n50\nS. Neven\nEisermann, Falk, and Eckhard Graf. 1998. Johannes Hartlieb: Das Buch der verbotenen K\u20ac\nunste.\nMu\u0308nchen: Diederichs.\nFox, Adam, and Daniel Woolf. 2002. The Spoken Word. Oral Culture in Britain, 1500\u20131850.\nManchester: Manchester University Press.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=49\nPages: 49,50\nvol. I.\n26\nS. Neven\nand descriptions of miscellaneous chemical operations, including instructions for\nthe manufacture of dyes and pigments, for the gilding and painting on glass, as well\nas, among others, metalwork, chrysography, distilling alcohol, making candy, and\ncreating military devices.12\nMediaeval and Premodern Recipe Books\nIn mediaeval and premodern times, artistic and alchemical procedures were often\ndescribed within compilations of texts that may concurrently address various fields\nsuch as medicine, cooking, botany or pharmacology. They also include magical\nrecipes, dietetical instructions or advice on home-economics. All these various\ndisciplines are embedded within the genre of the Fachliteratur.13 This kind of\nliterature regroups all texts of a utilitarian and informative nature whose content\ndoes not principally concern aesthetic or religious issues, or matters relating to\nemotional purpose.14 A great number of these writings share the same format and]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=59\nPages: 59,60\ncontemporary workshop or laboratory practices.48\nFirst of all, the textual environment and the diversity of the subjects bound\ntogether with the artistic and alchemical recipes in a same book, lead to the\nconclusion that these compilations were mainly read by scholars primarily interested in natural philosophy and were not intended for contemporary practical use.\nMoreover, it has been frequently stated that craft practices were transmitted orally,\n48\nClarke, \u201cCodicological Indicators\u201d; and Neven, Recettes artistiques, 16\u201323.\n36\nS. Neven\nfrom the master to the apprentice.49 A large number of the manuscripts of this study\nresult from copying and compilation processes undertaken by scribes. As they were\ncopied in a context outside the workshop or the laboratory, these recipes were not\nrevised and, consequently, conveyed an anachronistic technical tradition that\nbecame more and more outdated.\nSuch observations seem to argue against the view that sees these books as]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=61\nPages: 61,62\ninstructions are recorded in the Cgm 822 (fol. 64v) where the scribe correctly\nindicates the use of cretam rasam (scraped chalk).\nSuch phenomena\u2014reduction, amplification, variation\u2014may result in a procedure whose description can seem vague or unclear and thus thwart the current use\nand relevance of recipe books in the study and the reconstruction of historical\nartistic practices.\n53\nMy italics.\n38\nS. Neven\nAlchemical and Art-Technological Recipes Within\na Manuscript: Location, Relationship and Distinction\nSimilarities of format and modalities of composition and diffusion may have had an\nimpact on the recording and assembling of alchemical and art-technological recipes\nwithin the same manuscript. This could notably result in the mixing and grouping of\ndifferent types of unrelated instructions.\nMore precisely, in the corpus under scrutiny, alchemical instructions appear\neither as independent pieces of work, or as isolated (groups of) recipe(s) embedded]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=62\nPages: 62\npractica, all of which are delineated and separated by blank spaces or folios. These\ntexts were written by several hands, on paper from different origins dated from the\nfifteenth and the sixteenth centuries. The main contribution comes from an anonymous scribe who is responsible for a number of independent collections of recipes\nbut also for some additions throughout other parts of the volume.54 Perhaps this\ncontributor was at the root of both the (partial) writing and the collecting and\nassembling of these data into one single volume. This theory is supported by the\nfact that his hand dates from the sixteenth century, which coincides with the\nestimated date of the binding and the titles written on the cover. Once all the diverse\nparts were bound together, the manuscript was subject to later additions by the main\nscribe, who wrote these on previously blank space (fol. 143v\u2013144r and fol. 158r,\n163v), both at the beginning and the end of two distinct treatises.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=61\nPages: 61\nbooks, and in alchemical or magical texts. Frequently, the copyist was free to add,\nto remove or to omit some words or even some parts of the text. These modifications or omissions sometimes concern primary data, such as the name of the\ningredients or materials, or may be related to some of the steps of the procedure.\nAt each stage of the copying process, variations or errors can occur. This phenomenon can be explained in several ways: it could be an attempt to improve or to\ndiversify a previous formula; it could be a quid pro quo, in which an unknown or\nexpensive ingredient is substituted with a more well known or less expensive one; it\nmay have been a voluntary reduction of the recipe text.\nIf we suppose that the function of a recipe book was practical or instructive, this\nfunction could be the motivation behind changes to the recipes. An author or a scribe\nmay, voluntarily, have corrected the text, or added information to it. However,]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=58\nPages: 58,59\n47\n\u201cSum magistri Iohannis Hartliep, alias Walsporn, Vangionensis\u201d; on Hartlieb, see Fu\u0308rbeth,\nJohannes Hartlieb; for the edition of the text, see Eisermann & Graf, Johannes Hartlieb.\n45\nTransmission of Alchemical and Artistic Knowledge in German Mediaeval and. . .\n35\nFig. 1 Additional instruction due to Seidel, Munchen, Cgm 4117, fol. 1rv (Courtesy of\nMu\u0308nchener Digitalierungszentrum)\nThe Function(s) of Recipe Books\nThe complex modalities of composition and diffusion of these texts raises some\nquestions regarding their nature and their original function. At this stage, two\ndifferent hypotheses have been put forward regarding the aim of this type of\nliterature. On the one hand, these texts have been seen as manuals that may have\nbeen used by practitioners. On the other hand, the recipes often seem to have been\ntransmitted for the purposes of literary preservation, not directly connected with\ncontemporary workshop or laboratory practices.48]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=58\nPages: 58\nContextualising the production and reception of these recipe books thus serves to\nhighlight a large range of individual\u2019s personal\u2019s interest in alchemical and artisanal, as well as other types of knowledge. In this regard, a number of the recipe\nbooks produced in a religious institution are documented as having been later kept\nin a religious context. For example, Berlin Staatsbibliothek Theol. Lat. Quart.\n152, written by \u201cFrater Nicolaus lector\u201d between 1408 and 1412, was owned by\n\u201cFrater Polonus lector principalis\u201d (Johannes Polonus), lector in the Thorn cloister\nduring the fifteenth century. These manuscripts were usually moved to libraries at\nthe beginning of the nineteenth century, during the period of secularisation that\nfollowed the French Revolution. In parallel, several examples of our corpus are\ndocumented as being part of private collections and were probably executed for or\ncommissioned by a patron. This is notably the case for the Kodex Berleburg (Bad]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=58\nPages: 58\nto be found in Seidel\u2019s Kunstb\u20ac\nucher. For example, in Cgm 4117, fol. 1v, a recipe is\nstated as coming from a certain Thomas, caster in Munich, and transmitted via\nFreising to Seidel.45 This instruction was placed in an available blank space,\nsituated between the title of one of the book\u2019s sections and the table of contents\n(Fig. 1). It is credited to Seidel, but the handwriting is slightly different from the rest\nof the manuscript text. These observations suggest that this recipe, coming from a\ncontemporary\u2014perhaps oral\u2014source is an isolated and later addition. Moreover,\nscribes sometimes even relate how contemporaneous authorities delivered their\n\u2018secret(s)\u2019 and even divulge the price they had to pay to obtain it. In other cases,\nrecipes are recorded as being offered as a gift pro memoria.46\nContextualising the production and reception of these recipe books thus serves to]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=65\nPages: 65\nas experientia which are meant to serve as a rational demonstration of a preceding\ntheorica.59\nConclusion\nExamination of the processes of making, compiling and disseminating this corpus\nof mediaeval and premodern recipe books provides us with information concerning\ntheir nature and former function. One the one hand, it has been established that\nthese manuscripts were mostly written in religious centres and that they are largely\nthe result of the copying process undertaken by scribes. Moreover, within these\nbooks, alchemical and artistic recipes were frequently recorded alongside a wide\nrange of various\u2014and a priori unrelated\u2014subjects which may have been written\nby the same person. Both the context of their production and the similarities in\n58\nNewman, \u201cTechnology and Alchemical Debate,\u201d 434, 442\u20135. The author largely relies on Paul\nof Taranto, Theorica et practica, Paris, BN, Lat. 7159, fol. 1r\u201355r for which he delivers a partial\nedition and translation.\n59]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=52\nPages: 52\n(c.1190\u20131280), Arnaldus de Villa Nova (c.1240\u20131311) or Roger Bacon (1214\u2013\n1294). Previous studies have established that, quite often, such writings correspond\nto apocryphal or pseudepigraphical works.21 As most recipe books are compilations, it is possible that some anonymous texts were (sometimes involuntarily)\nassembled together under the name of an authority cited in another part of the\nmanuscript and subsequently disseminated under that name. Generally, these citations acted as a testimony of authority; they legitimised the alchemical knowledge\nrecorded in these books. No doubt, the typical attraction and reverence for ancient\nauthorities on the one hand, and the opportunity to record a (presumably) non\nanonymous text on the other hand, favoured the dissemination of these writings.22\nThe association with the name of an authority gave rise to a tradition of works\nwhich, due to the processes of copying and compilation, circulated under various]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=60\nPages: 60,61\nhim as a better (method) is delivered on 219.51 Then on folio 219, he indicates\nanother method for the same technical procedure, giving as title \u201cHow one should\nmasterfully melt crystal.\u201d52\nIn this sense, the scribes at the root of these recipe books created not simply a\ncopy but a unique work, which reflected their own interests, their cultural and life\ncontext and sometimes their intention, which was to deliver practical and useful\ninstruction.\n49\nHalleux, Entre technologie et alchimie, 7.\nFor this definition of authorship, see notably Love, Attributing Authorship, 32\u201340.\n51\n\u201cDise kunst prauchet ich nit hinden amm 219 hastu vil pessere.\u201d (Munich, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Cgm 4117, fol. 53r)\n52\n\u201cWie man christallen maisterlich giessen soll.\u201d (Munich, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Cgm\n4117, fol. 219)\n50\nTransmission of Alchemical and Artistic Knowledge in German Mediaeval and. . .\n37\nReliability of Recipe Books]"]}

{"result":["[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=16\nPages: 16\nof scholarly culture, played an increasingly important role in laboratories and\nworkshops. In these workplaces, a sort of hybrid figure was at work, with one\nfoot in artisanal culture and another in scholarly culture and impossible to categorize in mutually exclusive categories of the scholar and the craftsman.23 Certain\ntypes of crafts\u2014glassmaking, gold- and silversmithing, and porcelain production\u2014\nseem to have been particularly prone to exchanges between artisanal and scholarly\nalchemical cultures. By the seventeenth century, the expertise of some glassmakers,\nsilver- and goldsmiths and producers of porcelain was just as based in the worlds of\nalchemical and bookish learning as it was grounded in hands-on work in the\nlaboratory.24 Lawrence Principe and Morgan Wesley discuss two examples of\nsuch arts: silversmithing and porcelain production, respectively.\n21\nFor \u2018trading zones\u2019 between artisanal and scholarly cultures, see Long, Artisan/Practitioners.\nKlein, \u201cChemical Experts.\u201d\n23]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=121\nPages: 121\ncraftsmen\u2019, introduced by Edgar Zilsel in 1942, who started to interact with\nacademics and humanists, is just one of the many important texts dealing with the\nexchange between the artes mechanicae and the artes liberales from the fifteenth\ncentury onwards, a theory which was recently elaborated and confirmed by Pamela\nH. Smith in The Body of the Artisan in 2004 and by Pamela O. Long in Artisan/\nPractitioners in 2011.45 Again in 2004, Davis Baird\u2019s contribution on \u2018thing\nknowledge\u2019 focussed on a \u2018philosophy of scientific instruments\u2019 and distinguishes\nwithin this epistemology of the artificial object three forms in which an instrument\ncan represent knowledge: firstly as model, secondly as product and medium of\nworking knowledge and thirdly as embodiment of \u2018encapsulated knowledge\u2019. His\ntheoretical system not only applied to scientific instruments, but can also be adapted\nto other artificially created objects, for instance to the Handsteine. In this field, it]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=16\nPages: 16,15\nFireworks, 28.\n20\nSmith, Body of the Artisan. esp. 95\u2013127.\nIntroduction\nxv\nsermons to reveal conceptions of the origin and formation of ores for which\nMathesius drew equally on natural philosophy and alchemy and on the artisanal\nknowledge of the local miners and goldsmiths. Following one of the goldsmiths\u2019\nmost prized objects, a so-called Handstein, into the Kunstkammer, Haug shows that\nthis knowledge also reached elite collectors. They valued Handsteine for the\nmetallogenetic knowledge they embodied, thereby endorsing the shifting epistemic\nstatus of the arts.\nEpistemic Changes Between Artisans and Alchemists\nBiringuccio and Mathesius\u2019s St. Joachimsthal are examples of persons and places\nof exchange between scholarly cultures (in which learning is based on reading and\nwriting) and artisanal cultures (in which learning is based on doing).21 The laboratories created in Medici Florence, discussed in the chapters by Kieffer and]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=180\nPages: 180\nepistemic exchanges or collaborations on the level of practical or theoretical\nknowledge.\nDocumented examples of extended collaborations or exchanges between artisans and natural philosophers would be both more interesting and more informative\nfor mapping out the domains and dynamics of early modern alchemical practice. A\npromising locus for such study is to be found particularly among gold- and\nsilversmiths. On the one hand, their trade regularly involved chymical processes\nsuch as assaying, refining, and so forth, and they were thus more or less conversant\nwith chymical substances (acids, salts, metals, amalgams, etc.) and chymical\noperations (fusion, quartation, distillation, etc.) and would frequently have\nmaintained workshops equipped with the necessary equipment (furnaces, flues,\nfuel, retorts, crucibles, etc.) needed for chymical work generally. On the other\nhand, the basic materials of their artisanal labors\u2014gold and silver\u2014held a central\n5\nSee Smith, Body of the Artisan.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=198\nPages: 198\nsource of random observations made casually in the course of exercising their\ncraft, they initiated projects, conducted experiments, made innovations, read\nlearned treatises, and communicated or collaborated with more traditionallyeducated or more natural philosophically inclined members. While someone like\nAnthoni Grill was undoubtedly an exceptional figure, he nevertheless serves to\nillustrate one end of the spectrum of possible social and intellectual positions\noccupied by early modern gold- and silversmiths. His active participation and\neventual notoriety and success indicate the social boundaries that were crossed\nwithin the network, a situation that also existed with Caillart and Roussel and others\nin the French context as well. These examples thus begin to resituate the role of\nsuch artisan-chymists within the larger ambit of chymistry. While not erased, the\nneat division of artisan and natural philosopher emerges considerably blurred.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=75\nPages: 75,76\nWilliam R. Newman and Anthony Grafton, 385\u2013431. Cambridge: MIT Press.\nSchobinger, Viktor. 1978. Die Schowinger von St. Gallen, Bartlome Schowingers B\u20ac\nucher.\nZu\u0308rich: Schobinger.\nSinger, Dorothea W. 1928\u20131931. Catalogue of Latin and Vernacular Alchemical Manuscripts in\nGreat Britain and Ireland, 3 vols. Brussels: Lamertin.\nSmith, Pamela H. 2004. The Body of the Artisan: Art and Experience in the Scientific Revolution.\nChicago: University of Chicago Press.\nSmith, Cyril S., and John G. Hawthorne. 1974. Mappae Clavicula. A Little Key to the World of\nMedieval Technique. Philadelphia: American Philosophical Society.\nTeleky, Ludwig. 1948. History of Factory and Mine Hygie\u0300ne. New York: Columbia University\nPress.\nTheisen, Wilfrid. 1995. The Attraction of Alchemy for Monks and Friars in the 13th\u201314th\ncenturies. The American Benedictine Review 46: 239\u2013253.\nArtisanal Processes and Epistemological\nDebate in the Works of Leonardo Da Vinci\nand Vannoccio Biringuccio\nAndrea Bernardoni]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=17\nPages: 17,18\nat Renaissance courts. Laboratories and artisanal workshops shared a material\n25\nSee also Pietsch, \u201cTschirnhaus,\u201d and Klein, \u201cChemical Experts.\u201d\nIntroduction\nxvii\nculture. In fact, in the early modern period, they were often so similar in terms of the\ninstruments they contained that they carried the same name. This material culture\nremained largely the same. A change took place at another level: the increasing\npresence of books and texts in laboratories and workshops populated by figures who\nmerged artisanal and scholarly cultures. This book suggests that this shift in\nworkshop culture facilitated the epistemic exchanges between alchemists and producers of the decorative arts.\nAcknowledgements\nThis book was conceived and written in dialogue with an exhibition project \u201cArt\nand Alchemy. The Mystery of Transformation.\u201d The exhibition is on view at the\nMuseum Kunstpalast in Du\u0308sseldorf from April to August 2014. I would like to]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=122\nPages: 122\ncreative processes. But it is hard to prove that the goldsmith followed the same\nideas as the alchemist, because hardly any artisans recorded their approach in\nwritten form: the goldsmith\u2019s knowledge is working, not (alchemical) codified\nknowledge; an object, such as the Handstein might count as product, evidence\nand proof, but will always remain speechless and therefore will never entirely serve\n(in our modern understanding) as an eloquent advocate to support this assumption.\nThird, encapsulated knowledge: A work of art such as the Handstein is not\n\u2018narrative\u2019 in the sense that it develops one argument and discusses it in paratactical\nform. Such an artwork visualizes the variety of knowledge\u2014the theological, the\nmontanistic, the alchemical\u2014in a synoptical way. Rather than developing an\nargument in a logical manner, it emphasizes the interdependencies of different\nareas. But this corresponds with the interconnected nature of these fields, as]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=19\nPages: 19\nEarly Industrialisation, eds. Lissa Roberts, Simon Schaffer, and Peter Dear, 247\u2013276. Amsterdam: Koninklijke Nederlandse Akademie van Wetenschappen.\nKlein, Ursula. 2008. The Laboratory Challenge: Some Revisions of the Standard View of\nEarly Modern Experimentation. Isis 99: 769\u2013782.\nKlein, Ursula. 2012. Artisanal-Scientific Experts in Eighteenth-Century France and Germany.\nAnnals of Science 69: 303\u2013306.\nKlein, Ursula. 2013. Chemical Experts at the Royal Prussian Porcelain Manufactory. Ambix 60:\n99\u2013121.\nKlein, Ursula. Forthcoming. Depersonalizing the Arcanum. Technology and Culture.\nLibavius, Andreas. 1606. Commentariorum alchymiae Andreae Libavii Med. D. Pars prima,\nsex libris declarata. In Alchymia. Andreae Libavii recognita, emendata, et aucta. Frankfurt:\nJ Saurius.\nLong, Pamela O. 2011. Artisan/Practitioners and the Rise of the New Sciences, 1400\u20131600.\nCorvallis: Oregon State University Press.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=59\nPages: 59,60\ncontemporary workshop or laboratory practices.48\nFirst of all, the textual environment and the diversity of the subjects bound\ntogether with the artistic and alchemical recipes in a same book, lead to the\nconclusion that these compilations were mainly read by scholars primarily interested in natural philosophy and were not intended for contemporary practical use.\nMoreover, it has been frequently stated that craft practices were transmitted orally,\n48\nClarke, \u201cCodicological Indicators\u201d; and Neven, Recettes artistiques, 16\u201323.\n36\nS. Neven\nfrom the master to the apprentice.49 A large number of the manuscripts of this study\nresult from copying and compilation processes undertaken by scribes. As they were\ncopied in a context outside the workshop or the laboratory, these recipes were not\nrevised and, consequently, conveyed an anachronistic technical tradition that\nbecame more and more outdated.\nSuch observations seem to argue against the view that sees these books as]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=17\nPages: 17\nchemistry and skilled in porcelain production. Remarkably, the success of porcelain\nproduction was due to the introduction of techniques of investigation, which did not\nbelong to the traditional potter\u2019s skills, but to chymistry, which had overlapped with\nthe worlds of metallurgy and assaying for centuries.\nGrill, Dwight, and Tschirnhaus are only a few of the numerous examples of\nglassmakers, silver- and goldsmiths and producers of porcelain whose expertise\nwas both based in the worlds of bookish learning and grounded in hands-on work.\nDifficult to categorize as either craftsman or scholar, they are responsible for\nepistemic exchanges between the artisanal and the scholarly worlds. The rise of\nthese hybrid artisan-scholars was connected to the establishment of laboratories in\nwhich art technologies and alchemy were brought together, the first of these being\nat Renaissance courts. Laboratories and artisanal workshops shared a material\n25]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=122\nPages: 122\nareas. But this corresponds with the interconnected nature of these fields, as\npreviously outlined: early modern concepts of metallogenesis must be understood\nas a mixture of religious connotations, their dependency on antique montanistic\ntheories as well as on alchemical lore adopted through medieval Islamic mediation.\nBeyond that, a work of art communicates in different ways than a text. The object\ntransforms the know how of the artisan as it is performed in the working process and\nblends it with the lore of the scholar into embodied, visual knowledge. This\nknowledge, encapsulated in the work of art can then be exhibited in the surroundings of the ruler, in his Kunstkammer collection as well as in processions and\ncourtly festivities.47 It is\u2014apart from instruments to measure natural phenomena,\nwhich Baird puts in the focus of his analysis \u2014not \u2018useful\u2019 in the sense that it\nembodied knowledge which can be used to gain and widen existent knowledge. But]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=79\nPages: 79\nthe field of \u2018science and technology of matter\u2019.\nIf we focus our attention on all the artisanal processes of substance transformation known and practiced during the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries it is easy to\nshow that they do not fit perfectly within the domain traced by alchemy. This\nepistemological tension is usually neutralized by saying that alchemical and metallurgical disciplines are intricately interwoven and alchemists were involved in the\ndevelopment of metallurgy.11 If one supposes chemistry did not exist as an independent and autonomous discipline before the end of the seventeenth century then\nspeaking on this topic from a historical perspective in an Italian technical cultural\ncontext, some \u2018superior artisans\u2019 or \u2018artist-engineers\u2019 can be seen as having distanced themselves from alchemy by relocating its technology inside a new epistemological context in which chemical arts were developed and codified separately.12]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=125\nPages: 125,126\nBetween Maker and Nature. Configurations 12: 1\u201340.\nSmith, Pamela H. 2004. The Body of the Artisan. Art and Experience in the Scientific Revolution.\nChicago: University of Chicago Press.\nStorczer, Stephan G. 1992. Die Handsteinsammlung des Kunsthistorischen Museums in Wien.\nVienna: Diplomarbeit Universita\u0308t Wien.\nArtificial Interventions in the Natural Form of Things: Shared. . .\n103\nStrieder, Peter. 1967. Erzstufe. In Reallexikon zur deutschen Kunstgeschichte 5: 408\u2013418. Stuttgart: Metzler.\nSuhing, Lothar. 1986. \u2018Philosophisches\u2019 in der fru\u0308hneuzeitlichen Berg- und Hu\u0308ttenkunde.\nMetallogenese und Transmutation aus der Sicht montanistischen Erfahrungswissens. In Die\nAlchemie in der europ\u20ac\naischen Kultur- und Wissenschaftsgeschichte, ed. Christoph Meinel,\n293\u2013314. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.\nTheophilus Presbyter. 1847. An Essay Upon Various Arts in Three Books, by Theophilus, Called\nalso Rugerus, Priest and Monk, Forming an Encyclopedia of Christian Art of the Eleventh]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=102\nPages: 102\nmodern times with the aim of reconstructing the common Diskursrahmen and\nVorstellungshorizont, in which mining professionals, as well as alchemists and\ngoldsmiths worked and in which they localized their practices and self-conception.\nThe mining city St. Joachimsthal in the Erzgebirge is introduced as a space where\npractitioners and scholars worked side by side. Here natural philosophical conceptions were mediated to artisans and craftsmen and empirical know-how and knowledge of materials was conveyed to academics.\nHow much natural philosophical knowledge and how many alchemical concepts\nare encapsulated in a sixteenth-century Kunstkammer object? And how did goldsmiths come in contact with these ideas: from whom, mediated through which\nsources and in which setting? Might the goldsmiths have been involved in the\ndevelopment and dissemination of these theories? When goldsmiths loaded an\nobject with references to natural philosophical discourse what was the motivation,]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=80\nPages: 80,79\n14\nLong, Artisan/Practitioners, 94\u20136. See also, Galison, \u201cTrading Zone.\u201d\n15\nHannaway, \u201cLaboratory Design.\u201d\n12\nArtisanal Processes and Epistemological Debate in the Works of Leonardo. . .\n57\n(1513), in Biringuccio\u2019s Pirotechnia, and in Agricola\u2019s De re metallica.16 Further\nnascent signs of a distinct and autonomous chemical laboratory with purpose-built\n\u2018chemical\u2019 equipment can be found in the more general context of the Renaissance\nartist\u2019s workshop culture. Here, together with the fine arts such as painting, sculpture, architecture and jewelry making, metal carpentry, and gun casting, we find\noperations that use substance transformation, such as distillation and sublimation.\nThere is evidence that even the most important names in the history of art were\ninvolved in such workshop activities, for instance Michelangelo (1475\u20131564),\nwhose Florentine workshop, as mentioned in his correspondence with his brother,\nwas involved in generic metal carpentry such as the casting and welding of]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=79\nPages: 79\nThis context applies not only to metallurgical assaying but, more generally, it\ndefines the area of the \u2018perfective arts\u2019, including all arts that use fire to work and\ntransform matter.13 In this trading zone, where Latin was scarcely known and where\ncompetition with alchemists was felt more keenly, a sub-group of artisans, artists\nand engineers kept their distance from alchemy to define a new field of \u2018chemical\ntechnology\u2019.14\nArtisanal processes could be seen as a sort of \u2018melting pot\u2019 of interwoven\npractical and theoretical knowledge coming from the world of crafts, including\nalchemy. It is prevalently in the world of artisans that we find references to\n\u2018chemical activity\u2019 during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. Before there\nwere signs of a laboratory as a separate place\u2014the most ancient plans to build a\nchemical laboratory are in the Astronomiae instauratae mechanica (Wandsbek,]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=6\nPages: 6\nSylvie Neven\n23\nArtisanal Processes and Epistemological Debate in the Works of\nLeonardo Da Vinci and Vannoccio Biringuccio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\nAndrea Bernardoni\n53\nArtificial Interventions in the Natural Form of Things: Shared\nMetallogenetical Concepts of Goldsmiths and Alchemists . . . . . . . . . . . .\nHenrike Haug\n79\nThe Laboratories of Art and Alchemy at the Uffizi Gallery\nin Renaissance Florence: Some Material Aspects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105\nFanny Kieffer\nMaterial and Temporal Powers at the Casino di San Marco\n(1574\u20131621) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129\nMarco Beretta\nGoldsmiths and Chymists: The Activity of Artisans Within\nAlchemical Circles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 157\nLawrence M. Principe\nIgne refutata: Thermal Analysis in the Laboratory Practices]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=154\nPages: 154\na city \u201cfounded upon the guilds and trade.\u201d17\nThis new configuration of professional relations led to a thorough reassessment\nof the locations where cultural and economic activities were conducted, articulating\nin an experimental key the arts, which previously had been regarded as the fruit of\nindividual dexterity rather than the outcome of a deliberate cultural program. In\nmany cases the architectural changes were not apparent, since many kinds of\nartisans (e.g., the goldsmiths) kept on using the same premises they had occupied\nfor generations. However, even in such examples of apparent continuity the arts\nwere seen as vectors for change. This perception found visual expression in a\nvolume of engravings, based on drawings by Jan van der Straet (1523\u20131605)\n(or Giovanni Stradano), that bore the significant title Nova Reperta, commissioned\nby the Florentine academician Luigi Alamanni (1558\u20131603) around the end of the]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=48\nPages: 48,47\nthey also have the same types of production and dissemination? Using a corpus of\nabout 40 manuscripts produced in Northern Europe between the fourteenth and the\nsixteenth centuries, this paper investigates the context behind these writings, and the\nvarious ways alchemical and artisanal recipes were embedded within recipe books.\nIt also proposes some clues to assist in locating, identifying and demarcating\nalchemical writings within the literature of recipes.\nIn the Middle Ages and premodern period, alchemical knowledge and practice was\nfrequently transmitted via collections of recipes grouped concomitantly with artistic\ninstructions. Presented in the form of a succession of more or less short notes, these\nS. Neven (*)\nFRS-F.N.R.S, University of Lie\u0300ge (ULg), \u2018Transitions\u2019 Lie\u0300ge, Belgium\ne-mail: Sylvie.Neven@ulg.ac.be\nS. Dupre\u0301 (ed.), Laboratories of Art, Archimedes 37,\nDOI 10.1007/978-3-319-05065-2_2, \u00a9 Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014\n23\n24\nS. Neven]"]}

{"result":["[Summary from page 51 to page 73 out of a total of 220:\nPages 51:\nTransmission of Alchemical and Artistic Knowledge in German Mediaeval and. . .\n27\nCraft practices, alchemical treatises and artists\u2019 recipe books thus share parts of\nthe same specific syntax, the frequent use of the imperative form but also some\nparticular verbs (such as \u2018grind\u2019, \u2018mix\u2019, \u2018purify\u2019) and vocabulary. For example, the\nfirst alchemists used the word tinctura to refer to the tinting or the dyeing of metals,\nstones or clothes.17 These methods notably explained how to dye metals yellow or\nwhite\u2014so (apparently) how to transmute them into gold or silver. They also\ndescribed various ways to counterfeit precious stones.18 In this context, the term\ntinctura does not relate to the artisanal practice of dyeing, but instead describes the\nprocedure for executing the transition from one colour to another, through the steps\nof the alchemical process. Another example is provided by the terms \u2018mercury\u2019 and\n\u2018sulfur\u2019. According to the context, these may alternatively designate the common\nsubstances used for making vermilion or the two principles of which all metals were\nthought to be composed in different proportions.19\nThus, both artistic practices and alchemy required procedures involving precise\nand specifically defined actions, prescriptions and ingredients. So both used an\nidentical rhetorical recipe formulation that reflects a \u2018step by step\u2019 procedure.\nAssuming that alchemical and artistic texts have the same format and were\nassembled within the same sort of compilation raises the question: were they\nproduced, diffused and read by the same people? Previous research has demonstrated that investigating questions related to the authorship and the context of\nproduction behind these texts, as well as their compilation and dissemination,\nelucidates information about the former nature and the previous and current function of these writings.20 Answering these questions would: first, help to better\nestimate the relevance of these books when using them as a historical source for\nreconstructing part of mediaeval and premodern alchemical and artistic knowledge.\nAnd second, examining the various connections and similarities between these two\nfields, as described within recipe books, would serve to (re)situate them in their\nhistorical and cultural contexts.\nThe Sources and the Context of Production\nFirst of all, the wide diversity of subjects and fields embedded within the corpus begs\nthe question: were they written by several authors? A priori, palaeographical examination tends to confirm this: as with a large number of recipe books produced during\nmediaeval and premodern times, the manuscripts examined were written by several\n17\nPrincipe, Secrets of Alchemy, 17; and Clarke, Art of All Colours, 37.\nSee in this volume Matteo Martelli.\n19\nBucklow, \u201cParadigms and Pigment Recipes\u201d; and Principe, Secrets of Alchemy, 35\u20136.\n20\nNeven, Recettes artistiques.\n18\n\nPages 52:\n28\nS. Neven\nhands, and these hands are predominately anonymous. These works thus appear to\nbe the result of collaboration, or at least intervention, by several distinct persons.\nHowever, each person\u2019s contribution cannot necessarily be allocated according to\nthe different subjects in the book. The same hand might be responsible for both a\nmedical treatise and a collection of alchemical or art technological recipes.\nThe manuscripts under consideration were, in fact, the result of copying and\ncompiling of various sources and contributors. More precisely, these recipe books\nwere compiled from three different types of source:\n1. content produced by copying and compiling of other written sources;\n2. practical information obtained from personalities (practitioner or not) cited by\nthe scribes;\n3. content possibly derived from personal contributions made by the scribes.\nIn some instances, most of the content came from the copying and compilation of\nother written sources. This process can be followed by tracing the repeated appearances of certain popular texts found in the manuscripts of that period. Taking a\nwider view, these books have a great number of texts in common\u2014dedicated to\nmedicine, pharmacology, herbal, cosmetic, etc.\u2014which were widely copied and\ndisseminated in mediaeval and premodern times. These texts are quite often\nassociated with the name of older or quoted authorities. Within our corpus several\nalchemical treatises and recipes are attributed to (pseudo) Albertus Magnus\n(c.1190\u20131280), Arnaldus de Villa Nova (c.1240\u20131311) or Roger Bacon (1214\u2013\n1294). Previous studies have established that, quite often, such writings correspond\nto apocryphal or pseudepigraphical works.21 As most recipe books are compilations, it is possible that some anonymous texts were (sometimes involuntarily)\nassembled together under the name of an authority cited in another part of the\nmanuscript and subsequently disseminated under that name. Generally, these citations acted as a testimony of authority; they legitimised the alchemical knowledge\nrecorded in these books. No doubt, the typical attraction and reverence for ancient\nauthorities on the one hand, and the opportunity to record a (presumably) non\nanonymous text on the other hand, favoured the dissemination of these writings.22\nThe association with the name of an authority gave rise to a tradition of works\nwhich, due to the processes of copying and compilation, circulated under various\ntitles and were sometimes attributed to diverse authorities.23\nAt this stage, it should be noted that there are also a significant number of texts\ndedicated to religious content bound together with the recipe books under scrutiny.\nThese are theological works, liturgies, extracts from the bible and hagiographies.\nIn fact, a great number of recipe books appear to have been written or compiled within\n21\nMinnis, Theory of Authorship. Concerning the alchemical works attributed to Albertus Magnus\nsee notably Kibre, \u201cAlchemical Writings.\u201d See also Newman, \u201cAlchemy of Roger Bacon.\u201d For\nArnaldus de Villa Nova, see notably Calvet, \u201cTradition alchimique latine.\u201d\n22\nMinnis, Theory of Authorship, 9.\n23\nCalvet, \u201cTradition alchimique latine,\u201d 42.\n\nPages 53:\nTransmission of Alchemical and Artistic Knowledge in German Mediaeval and. . .\n29\nreligious institutions, as attested by the citations of ownership. Signatures or monograms within these compilations indicate that these books were copied by scribes and\nmembers of this community. Obviously, the religious institutions\u2014and their libraries\u2014were privileged places, offering scribes the opportunity to copy and compile this\nkind of collection. The Munich Bayerische Staatsbibliothek Cgm 821, Cgm 822 and\nClm 20174, formerly preserved in the Tegernsee monastery library, are good examples: they present not only similarities in terms of the different writings they contain\nbut also, thanks to palaeographical analysis undertaken in the present study, it has\nbeen confirmed that several parts of their respective texts were recorded by the same\nscribe. This would imply that these manuscripts were (at least partially) copied in the\nsame scriptorium, from similar written sources and by the same \u2018hand\u2019.\nReligious institutions may also appear as a contextual factor explaining the\nrapprochement of the various disciplines embedded within the manuscripts. Indeed,\nin general, medical and pharmaceutical recipes had an important place within\nreligious communities. In this regard, art\u2013technological recipes also found their\nplace and could be linked with the art of writing and illuminating involved in\nscriptorial activity. The tables of contents of recipe books can be quite edifying on\nthis point. For example, the table of contents in Munich Bayerische Staatsbibliothek\nClm 20174 informs us that the artistic instructions were intended for the use of the\nscribes and illuminators of the scriptorium (Et alia multa utilia per scriptoribus et\nilluministarum, Clm 20174, fol. 1). In this context, scribe and illuminator, when not\nrepresented by the same person, worked side by side to produce manuscripts.24 This\ncollaboration led to enhanced communication and the development of a mutual\ninterest in artistic practices among the monastic community.25\nPractical or concrete interest and use of alchemical recipes in religious institutions is less obvious. It has been stated that writers of religious literature sometimes\ndrew parallels with alchemical theories and processes.26 Such writings, which\nobviously borrow alchemical vocabulary and imagery, are not included within our\ncorpus. None of the alchemical texts under scrutiny were found to contain obvious\nreligious connotations. But religious scribes\u2019 personal interest in alchemical craft\nprocedures and practical alchemy in general can be attested by the large number of\nmanuscripts produced that comprise both alchemical treatises and recipes. The\npresence of such instructions is more probably related to a certain attraction of\nalchemy for some monks or friars. Previous studies indeed have established that,\neven if the practice of alchemy was forbidden by several monastic orders, many of\ntheir members were at the root of alchemical (compilations of) texts and Practica.27\nInventories of their library also inform us that they possessed alchemical treatises\n24\nCe\u0301zard, \u201cAlchimie et les recettes techniques,\u201d 6.\nEamon, Secrets of Nature, 36.\n26\nPrincipe & Newman, \u201cHistoriography of Alchemy,\u201d 398\u2013400.\n27\nTheisen, \u201cAttraction of Alchemy.\u201d See also Barthe\u0301lemy, Alchimie de Guillaume Sedacer, 26\u20138.\n25\n\nPages 54:\n30\nS. Neven\nand recipe books.28 Within our corpus, a relevant example is that of Wolfgang Seidel\n(1491\u20131562), prior but also copyist at Tegernsee monastery, who notably wrote two\nKunstb\u20ac\nucher (Munich Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Cgm 4117 and Cgm 4118)\nbetween 1540 and 1550.29 Cgm 4117 and 4118 reflect Seidel\u2019s interests in mathematics, astronomy, natural sciences and alchemy\u2014disciplines in which he acquired\ntheoretical but also practical knowledge. To do so, Seidel is known to have notably\ncollected data from the libraries of Tegernsee but also from the neighbouring\ncloisters. During his stay at St. Ulrich\u2019s and St. Afra\u2019s Abbey (Augsburg), he\nmade use of the abbey\u2019s vast collection of books, as attested in his commentaries\nrecorded in Cgm 4118: \u201cSo many presents I have let copy from the library of the\nCloister St Ulrich in Augsbourg, by a young boy whose name is Walthasar Gech von\nFiessen in the year 1550.\u201d30\nSeidel also seems to have relied on exchanges that are known to have taken place\nwith contemporaries. In fact, in his Kunstb\u20ac\nucher, he cites the authorities from\nwhom he obtained practical information. These were either practitioners\u2014artists\u2014or contemporary scholars. For example, Seidel specifies several times that\nhe is indebted to Bishop Philipp von Freising (1480\u20131541) for some recipes that he\nsubsequently included in Cgm 4117. These prescriptions are notably dedicated to\nthe melting of gold, silver and lead (Cgm 4117, fol. 2v, 37r\u201338v). Seidel also\nmentions Bartholome Schobinger (1500\u20131585), a jurist from St. Gallen.31 The\ninstructions recorded after Schobinger\u2019s name delineated a number of alchemical\nmethods that notably serve to modify the properties of gold, to obtain a golden\ncolour, and to work with gold, silver, iron and copper. Others concern the gilding on\nglass, the melting of ivory, metals and glass, the preparation of aqua fortis and the\nmanufacture of a blue pigment called azure (Cgm 4117, fol. 62r\u2013130r?).\nThese persons were learned persons or scholars, who were interested in natural\nphilosophy and alchemy and who perhaps conducted their own experiments, as\nsuggested by formulae which follow some of the recipes, such as probatum vom\nBischoff von Freising (Cgm 4117, fol. 2v). Schobinger is notably at the root of a\nlarge compilation of alchemical texts.32 He is also renewed for having personally\nknown Paracelsus, who referred to Schobinger\u2019s writings.33 The value of such an\nauthority may appear visually in the recipe book. In the Cgm 4117, Seidel dedicates\na whole page to recording Schobinger\u2019s name.34 Moreover, the simple invocation\n28\nSee, for example, Barthe\u0301lemy, \u201cAlchimie et me\u0301decine,\u201d 110\u20133.\nPaulus, \u201cWolfgang Seidel\u201d; and Po\u0308hlein, Wolfgang Seidel.\n30\n\u201cSo vill vom geschenckh hab ich auss der liberej des closters zw sant vlrich zw Augspurg lassen\nabschreiben durch ain knaben des namen ist Walthasar Gech von Fiessen im 1550 Jahr.\u201d (Munich,\nBayerische Staatsbibliothek, Cgm 4118, fol. 128r).\n31\nSchobinger, Schowinger von St. Gallen.\n32\nAllgemeine Deutsche Biographie, 209; and Hertenstein, Joachim von Watt, 91\u20132.\n33\nMeier, Paracelsus, 33\u201346.\n34\n\u201cVon bartholome Schobinger burger zu sanndt Gallen in Schweitz. Hab ich dise nachuolgende\nkunstel. etc./Empfangen den Sibenvnndzwaintzigisten tag. des Monats Februarii/Anno etc. 40.\u201d\n(Munich, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Cgm 4117, fol. 62r).\n29\n\nPages 55:\nTransmission of Alchemical and Artistic Knowledge in German Mediaeval and. . .\n31\nof the name of the Bishop of Freising would have served to confirm the efficacy of\nsome of the technical instructions. Thus, the same way the scribes used to relate old\ntreatises or data with the name of previous and quoted authorities, such as (pseudo)\nAlbertus Magnus or Arnaldus de Villa Nova, they also mention those of their\ncontemporaries to lend authority to validate the practicability or the reproducibility\nof the instructions they consign.35\nIn some cases, the information recorded in recipe books is documented as having\nbeen provided by an artist or practitioner. Augsbourg Staats- und Stadtbibliothek 2\u0001\nCod. 207 was produced in St. Ulrich and St. Afra\u2019s Cloister. It contains miscellaneous alchemical treatises and collections of recipes contributed by several scribes,\nincluding the monk Bild Vitus (1481\u20131529) and Johannes Gossolt (1421\u20131506),\nidentified as vicarius augustensis.36 In this work, Gossolt combined alchemical\ntreatises attributed to (pseudo) Albertus Magnus with Latin and German alchemical\nrecipes. For the latter he sometimes specifies his local sources. For example, at folio\n171v, he mentions the \u201cMagistri Jodoci Aurifabri de Haidelberga.\u201d Other citations\nof goldsmiths\u2019 names are found in our corpus of texts. In the St. Gallen Cod.\nVadiana 395, several alchemical instructions are associated with the name of\n\u201cNicolaus Aurifaber.\u201d In many respects, metalworkers seem to have shared interest\nand knowledge in alchemical practices and materials.37\nThe scribes did not indicate how these data were actually provided and disseminated. At this stage, it is difficult to determine if these recipes were transmitted\norally or only in written form. Oral transmission is usually favoured in specific\ncontexts and environments in which people \u2018physically\u2019 converse.38 In this regard,\nthe workshop or laboratory probably offered the required closeness and the opportunity for oral exchanges and teaching. In the framework of this study, in only a few\ncases has it been possible to establish that a scribe personally met the authority he\ncited, meaning he might have obtained orally the practical information he recorded\nwithin his recipe book. This is notably the case for Seidel and two of the persons he\ncites, von Freising and Schobinger.39 Nevertheless, it is quite unlikely that oral data\ncirculated under the rhetoric of the recipe. This standardized and conventional\ntextual format goes hand in hand with the copying process, and, thus, with a written\ntransmission of knowledge. In other cases, exchanges in the form of correspondence are documented. For example, Seidel is also known to have exchanged letters\nwith the monk Vitus, previously quoted, and (partially) responsible for Augsbourg\nStaats- und Stadtbibliothek 2\u0001 Cod. 207.40 Both shared the same interest in natural\nphilosophy, astronomy and alchemy\u2014the same fields addressed within their\nwritings.\n35\nSee notably Halleux, \u201cPratique de laboratoire.\u201d\nThis hand is identified within the Augsbourg, Staats\u2013 und Stadtbibliothek, 2\u0001 Cod. 183, fol. 1r.\n37\nSmith, Body of the Artisan, 140\u201351.\n38\nFox & Woolf, Spoken Word, 259\u201361.\n39\nPfaff, Codex Vadiana, 43.\n40\nNeue Deutsche Biographie, vol. II, 235.\n36\n\nPages 56:\n32\nS. Neven\nFinally, some recipes recorded within the corpus are a scribe\u2019s personal contribution. The acquisition of theoretical but also practical knowledge in natural\nscience and alchemy may have lead Seidel to conduct his own experiments,\nwhich he then recorded in the form of recipes in his books. This possibility is\nconfirmed in the first folio of Cgm 4118, where Seidel explains that he as well as\nboth written (and older) sources and information collected from contemporaries, he\nhad also drawn on his own practical experience.41 The St. Gallen Ms. Vadiana\n429 is an alchemical collection compiled between 1464/65 by Ulrich Ellenbog\n(1435\u20131499), a city physician in Ravensburg. A small part of its content also\nincludes art technological recipes. Ellenbog\u2019s interest and practical knowledge in\n(al)chemy could notably be put in relation with his 1473 pamphlet Von den giftigen\nbesen Temppfen Reuchen der Metal (On the poisonous and noxious vapours and\nfumes of metals). In this writing, the physician gives advices to goldsmiths and\nother metalworkers on how to protect themselves from the noxious effects of\nvapours of silver, mercury and lead.42\nThe Modalities of Composition\nThe diversity of sources and persons who contributed to these collections of recipes\nis evidenced by their varying modalities of composition. Codicological examination\nundertaken during this study has uncovered the (sometimes) very complex processes involved in the creation of recipe books.\nA small number of these writings are produced in the form of carefully presented\nand independent collections: they are written in metallogallic ink and are quite\noften embellished with titles in red, and rubrics. These examples may be relatively\nhomogeneous: usually, only one or two scribes (who are contemporaneous) can be\nidentified and the presentation of their texts is almost identical. Moreover, no\nadditional material modifies the original volume.\nOthers (though not the majority) are quite heterogeneous, both in their content\n(medical, theological, astronomical, technical, household) and in their physical\nappearance (diversity of format, dialect and handwriting). They are informally\nwritten, with no decoration, and are characterized by apparently random presentation\nand inconsistent structure.\nThe recipe titles, which do not always correspond to the procedure that follows\nthem, do not imply a coherent organization. This second type of manuscript was\ncompiled from several contributions and additions from various scribes and\n41\n\u201cDe arte fusoria Rhapsodia partim ex uetusta quadam Biblioteca, partim uero bonorum\namicorum colatione cum sumata, opera autem et labore fratris Wolffgangi Sedelij in vnum collecta\nin solacium et commodum fusorie artis studiosorum.\u201d (Munich, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Cgm\n4118, fol. 1r).\n42\nTeleky, History of Factory, 7; and Koelsch, Geschichte des Arbeitsmedezin, 101.\n\nPages 57:\nTransmission of Alchemical and Artistic Knowledge in German Mediaeval and. . .\n33\ncompilers, but also from the accumulation of physically distinct materials\u2014quires\nand folios. Moreover, the diverse sections that make up these books often come\nfrom different geographical locations.\nFrequently, additions and marginal notes attributed to the same scribe or to a\nlater owner punctuate the distinct recipes within the manuscripts. In fact, these\nadditions mostly appear under the form of titles or details given as a counterpart to\nthe instructions. In the Ms. Vadiana 429 from St. Gallen, a great number of\nadditional notes consist of technical commentaries and supplementary notes\nadded to those of the compiler of the manuscript. In the Nuremberg Hs. 33733, a\nlater owner added several titles and remarks within the margins. Some of these\nmarginal additions also mention the name of the person from whom the scribe may\nhave obtained the data he is adding. For example, in the Vienna Ms. 5224, fol.\n74, the scribe indicated the name of a physician, \u201cDoctor Jorg erffordie,\u201d before the\ntitle of a recipe dedicated to the production of sal ammoniac. On folio 105 of the\nsame manuscript, the scribe associated an alchemical procedure with the name\n\u201cMarggrauff von Ro\u0308tell\u201d by mentioning him in the upper margin. This observation\nprovides a possible explanation for the considerable number of unica (isolated\nrecipes) that appear only in one recipe book, and are thus likely to constitute data\ntransmitted personally (and orally?) to the scribe.\nThe method of composition in this kind of recipe book indicates that they were\ncompiled over a more or less long period, during or after peregrinations undertaken\nby their scribes. This is evidenced by notations mentioning different chronological\nperiods and geographical provenances throughout the manuscripts. For example,\nMs. 9715 from Nuremberg contains diverse collections of alchemical recipes. This\nmanuscript was written by several scribes, who give names of persons or magistri\nunderneath the practices they described. They also cite the different places where\nthey collected their data and specify the dates of these events, which span several\nyears. Notably there are several mentions of the \u201cmagistri Johannis Bog\u201d and places\nsuch as \u201cErffordie\u201d (Erfurt), and \u201cKo\u0308ln\u201d (Cologne).43\nMoreover, later additions or annotations found within the manuscripts tend to\nsuggest that these books have been handled, manipulated and passed from one\nowner to another, sometimes over a long period. The Prager Malerbuch had several\nowners and circulated through several localities before entering the monastery of\nZlata\u0301 Koruna. According to a note written by Federl Mir, the main scribe of the\nPrager Malerbuch, this manuscript was written c.1452, in Tittmoning in the district\nof Traunstein (Bavaria). This place probably corresponds to the original provenance\nof the recipe book. Moreover, the scribe tells us that he has gathered data from\nMichel Schril, a professor in Vienna, who passed away in 1472. We also know that\nfrom 1529 to at least 1599, this recipe book belonged to the Preisinger family. This\nfamily lived in Zettwing, in the present-day Czech Republic, between Munich and\n43\nOn Johannis Bog, see fol. 42v, 72v, 157v; on Erfurt, see fol. 49r; and on Cologne, see fol. 50v.\n\nPages 58:\n34\nS. Neven\nVienna. Later, the manuscript is recorded within the inventory of the Zlata\u0301 Koruna\nconvent, as indicated in folio 1r, where we find the date 1649.\nThus, the recording and disseminating of these instructions could go hand in\nhand with the circulation and penetration of alchemical and artistic knowledge\noutside the workshop or the laboratory.44 It could be linked with a (partially oral?)\ntransmission of knowledge that seems to have taken place between (learned)\nscribes, artists or artisans and scholars. Allusions to such exchanges are notably\nto be found in Seidel\u2019s Kunstb\u20ac\nucher. For example, in Cgm 4117, fol. 1v, a recipe is\nstated as coming from a certain Thomas, caster in Munich, and transmitted via\nFreising to Seidel.45 This instruction was placed in an available blank space,\nsituated between the title of one of the book\u2019s sections and the table of contents\n(Fig. 1). It is credited to Seidel, but the handwriting is slightly different from the rest\nof the manuscript text. These observations suggest that this recipe, coming from a\ncontemporary\u2014perhaps oral\u2014source is an isolated and later addition. Moreover,\nscribes sometimes even relate how contemporaneous authorities delivered their\n\u2018secret(s)\u2019 and even divulge the price they had to pay to obtain it. In other cases,\nrecipes are recorded as being offered as a gift pro memoria.46\nContextualising the production and reception of these recipe books thus serves to\nhighlight a large range of individual\u2019s personal\u2019s interest in alchemical and artisanal, as well as other types of knowledge. In this regard, a number of the recipe\nbooks produced in a religious institution are documented as having been later kept\nin a religious context. For example, Berlin Staatsbibliothek Theol. Lat. Quart.\n152, written by \u201cFrater Nicolaus lector\u201d between 1408 and 1412, was owned by\n\u201cFrater Polonus lector principalis\u201d (Johannes Polonus), lector in the Thorn cloister\nduring the fifteenth century. These manuscripts were usually moved to libraries at\nthe beginning of the nineteenth century, during the period of secularisation that\nfollowed the French Revolution. In parallel, several examples of our corpus are\ndocumented as being part of private collections and were probably executed for or\ncommissioned by a patron. This is notably the case for the Kodex Berleburg (Bad\nBerleburg, Schlossbibliothek Sayn\u2013Wittgenstein, RT 2/6) which is recorded as\nbeing compiled for Bernhard of Breidenbach (c.1440\u20131497), who worked for the\nchapter of the cathedral of Mayence. Cod. Helm. 627 from Wolfenbu\u0308ttel is a\ncollection of alchemical treatises and instructions\u2014including colour recipes\u2014\nwritten around 1441\u20131444 by several hands. A note on the binding informs us\nthat this volume probably belonged to the Bavarian physician Johannes Hartlieb\n(1410\u20131468), who wrote several compendia notably the Puch aller verpoten kunst,\nungelaubens und der zaubrey (1456).47\n44\nHalleux, \u201cAlchimie,\u201d 342.\n\u201cVom Jungen thoman giesser zw munchen durch den bischoff von freising.\u201d (Munich,\nBayerische Staatsbibliothek, Cgm 4117, fol. 1v).\n46\nSee Corbett, \u201cAlchimiste Le\u0301onard de Mauperg.\u201d\n47\n\u201cSum magistri Iohannis Hartliep, alias Walsporn, Vangionensis\u201d; on Hartlieb, see Fu\u0308rbeth,\nJohannes Hartlieb; for the edition of the text, see Eisermann & Graf, Johannes Hartlieb.\n45\n\nPages 59:\nTransmission of Alchemical and Artistic Knowledge in German Mediaeval and. . .\n35\nFig. 1 Additional instruction due to Seidel, Munchen, Cgm 4117, fol. 1rv (Courtesy of\nMu\u0308nchener Digitalierungszentrum)\nThe Function(s) of Recipe Books\nThe complex modalities of composition and diffusion of these texts raises some\nquestions regarding their nature and their original function. At this stage, two\ndifferent hypotheses have been put forward regarding the aim of this type of\nliterature. On the one hand, these texts have been seen as manuals that may have\nbeen used by practitioners. On the other hand, the recipes often seem to have been\ntransmitted for the purposes of literary preservation, not directly connected with\ncontemporary workshop or laboratory practices.48\nFirst of all, the textual environment and the diversity of the subjects bound\ntogether with the artistic and alchemical recipes in a same book, lead to the\nconclusion that these compilations were mainly read by scholars primarily interested in natural philosophy and were not intended for contemporary practical use.\nMoreover, it has been frequently stated that craft practices were transmitted orally,\n48\nClarke, \u201cCodicological Indicators\u201d; and Neven, Recettes artistiques, 16\u201323.\n\nPages 60:\n36\nS. Neven\nfrom the master to the apprentice.49 A large number of the manuscripts of this study\nresult from copying and compilation processes undertaken by scribes. As they were\ncopied in a context outside the workshop or the laboratory, these recipes were not\nrevised and, consequently, conveyed an anachronistic technical tradition that\nbecame more and more outdated.\nSuch observations seem to argue against the view that sees these books as\nmanuals written for the practitioner. But neither were these compendium written\npurely for scholarly purposes, deprived of any practical function. In parallel to the\ndata that could be considered part of the technical heritage of a earlier period, these\nrecipe books also contain more recent practical instructions\u2014coming from contemporary artists and practicing scholars or from the scribe\u2019s own experiments, as the\nexamples of Seidel, Freising and Schobinger discussed above illustrate. Even when\nthe writing of these instructions, verbalized in the rhetoric of the recipes, was\ncarried out by scribes, data were not blindly copied. Scribes organised, assembled,\ncompleted or corrected when they felt it necessary. Thus, even if they were not the\nauthor per se, in the sense that they were not the origin or the source of the technical\nor chemical procedures they wrote down, they accomplished a set of activities\nlinked to \u2018authorship\u2019.50 Scribes also made attempts to ensure that the recipes could\nbe consulted at need: they composed tables of contents or indexes, they introduced\ntitles within the margins and many other details which attest to a real desire to\ndeliver usable information. In this context the marginal notes and additions made by\nthe scribes/authors of the recipe book are of interest as most of them are technical\ncomments testifying practical interest in both alchemical and artistic instructions.\nSeveral marginal annotations due to Seidel\u2019s hand punctuate the Cgm 4117 and\nconsist in personal commentaries regarding the technical procedures he records.\nFor example, on folio 53r, Seidel compares two ways for the melting of crystal.\nConcerning the first process he states in the margin that this \u2018art\u2019 was not of use to\nhim as a better (method) is delivered on 219.51 Then on folio 219, he indicates\nanother method for the same technical procedure, giving as title \u201cHow one should\nmasterfully melt crystal.\u201d52\nIn this sense, the scribes at the root of these recipe books created not simply a\ncopy but a unique work, which reflected their own interests, their cultural and life\ncontext and sometimes their intention, which was to deliver practical and useful\ninstruction.\n49\nHalleux, Entre technologie et alchimie, 7.\nFor this definition of authorship, see notably Love, Attributing Authorship, 32\u201340.\n51\n\u201cDise kunst prauchet ich nit hinden amm 219 hastu vil pessere.\u201d (Munich, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Cgm 4117, fol. 53r)\n52\n\u201cWie man christallen maisterlich giessen soll.\u201d (Munich, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Cgm\n4117, fol. 219)\n50\n\nPages 61:\nTransmission of Alchemical and Artistic Knowledge in German Mediaeval and. . .\n37\nReliability of Recipe Books\nThe modalities of composition and diffusion of these recipe books have an impact\non their current (practical) use. During the compiling and disseminating processes,\nboth alchemical and art-technological collections of recipes were subject to mutations, in the form of interpolation, reduction, contamination or assimilation with\nother texts. As the recipe books evolved and were modified by adding new texts and\nprocedures, the recipes themselves could be modified in their technical formulations during their transmission from one manuscript to another. Assimilation with\nother texts occurs quite frequently, as the ingredients (and the actions) specified in\nthese texts appear in the artistic recipe books but also in medical treatises, cookery\nbooks, and in alchemical or magical texts. Frequently, the copyist was free to add,\nto remove or to omit some words or even some parts of the text. These modifications or omissions sometimes concern primary data, such as the name of the\ningredients or materials, or may be related to some of the steps of the procedure.\nAt each stage of the copying process, variations or errors can occur. This phenomenon can be explained in several ways: it could be an attempt to improve or to\ndiversify a previous formula; it could be a quid pro quo, in which an unknown or\nexpensive ingredient is substituted with a more well known or less expensive one; it\nmay have been a voluntary reduction of the recipe text.\nIf we suppose that the function of a recipe book was practical or instructive, this\nfunction could be the motivation behind changes to the recipes. An author or a scribe\nmay, voluntarily, have corrected the text, or added information to it. However,\nchanges to the recipe may also be due to a misunderstanding of the procedure.\nSuch miscomprehension may be due to palaeographical problems that resulted in a\nword being misread or misunderstood and thus replaced by another. This was a\nlikely occurrence if the copyist was not a practitioner or if he was not able to\ntranslate or to decipher an unreadable formula. For example, in Heidelberg Cod. Pal.\nGerm. 183, fol. 286, at the beginning of a recipe dedicated to the production of\nminium, the scribe mentions the use of \u201cLautterm sapienticum\u201d instead of Lutum\nsapientium. In Munich Bayerische Staatsbibliothek Cgm 824, the scribe describes\nthe preparation of a white (fol. 13r), a yellow (fol. 13r), a blue (fol. 14v) and a grey\npigment (fol. 14v), and each time suggests taking \u201ccretam rosam.\u201d53 The same\ninstructions are recorded in the Cgm 822 (fol. 64v) where the scribe correctly\nindicates the use of cretam rasam (scraped chalk).\nSuch phenomena\u2014reduction, amplification, variation\u2014may result in a procedure whose description can seem vague or unclear and thus thwart the current use\nand relevance of recipe books in the study and the reconstruction of historical\nartistic practices.\n53\nMy italics.\n\nPages 62:\n38\nS. Neven\nAlchemical and Art-Technological Recipes Within\na Manuscript: Location, Relationship and Distinction\nSimilarities of format and modalities of composition and diffusion may have had an\nimpact on the recording and assembling of alchemical and art-technological recipes\nwithin the same manuscript. This could notably result in the mixing and grouping of\ndifferent types of unrelated instructions.\nMore precisely, in the corpus under scrutiny, alchemical instructions appear\neither as independent pieces of work, or as isolated (groups of) recipe(s) embedded\nwith artistic or other types of instructions. In the first case, alchemical content may\nappear concurrently with an artist\u2019s recipe book within the same manuscript but in a\nseparate section. When this occurs, the texts mostly consist of quite theoretical\nalchemical treatises, often associated with the name of a former or contemporary\nauthority. Most of them are attributed to the (pseudo) Albertus Magnus, Roger Bacon\nand Arnaldus de Villa Nova whose writings date from an earlier period. These works\ncould also be \u2018physically\u2019 distinct works, delimited to a quire or a booklet\u2014or even a\nfolio\u2014and assembled with the rest of the manuscript at a contemporary or later\nperiod. Vienna Ms. 5224 contains various alchemical collections of recipes and\npractica, all of which are delineated and separated by blank spaces or folios. These\ntexts were written by several hands, on paper from different origins dated from the\nfifteenth and the sixteenth centuries. The main contribution comes from an anonymous scribe who is responsible for a number of independent collections of recipes\nbut also for some additions throughout other parts of the volume.54 Perhaps this\ncontributor was at the root of both the (partial) writing and the collecting and\nassembling of these data into one single volume. This theory is supported by the\nfact that his hand dates from the sixteenth century, which coincides with the\nestimated date of the binding and the titles written on the cover. Once all the diverse\nparts were bound together, the manuscript was subject to later additions by the main\nscribe, who wrote these on previously blank space (fol. 143v\u2013144r and fol. 158r,\n163v), both at the beginning and the end of two distinct treatises.\nAlchemical texts are also sometimes situated alongside an artists\u2019 recipe book,\neither before or after. If this is the case, they will be found next to technical\ninstructions dedicated to procedures similar to those described in an alchemical\ncontext, such as the imitation of gold or silver, the gilding of stones or glass, the\nmanufacture of vermilion, the purification of ultramarine, the melting of stones or\nmetals, or several dyeing procedures. The alchemical content may be delimited\nwithin the title(s), chapter(s) or table of contents or \u2018physically\u2019 circumscribed by a\nfolio or a quire. But, in most cases, there is no obvious delimitation between the two\ndistinct collections of recipes. For example, in Nuremberg Germanisches\n54\nIdentified as \u2018hand\u2019 4 in the catalogue notes, he is responsible for fol. 31v, 38r\u2013120v, 123r\u2013143r,\n153r\u2013157v, 160r\u2013163r.\n\nPages 63:\nTransmission of Alchemical and Artistic Knowledge in German Mediaeval and. . .\n39\nNationalmuseum Ms. 5078b (fol. 2r\u201341r), the scribe moves from one subject to\nanother with no indication that the subject has changed. Moreover, this set of\nalchemical and art-technological recipes is followed with no clear distinction\n(no title, nor blank space) by a series of medical prescriptions due to the same hand.\nIn another case\u2014isolated (groups of) alchemical recipes found in the middle of\nprescriptions of another type\u2014detection of alchemical content and distinction from\nartistic instructions within recipe books can be fraught with difficulty. Similarities in\nterms of their textual format probably lead scribes to group them with other sort of\nprescriptions. When found as isolated elements, alchemical and art technological\nrecipes usually appear within a large broad of various (and unrelated) writings.\nFor example, part of Nuremberg Hs. 3227 (fol. 74v\u201381v, 90v\u2013164v) is a miscellanea\nof cooking, alchemical, household and artistic recipes, written by the same hand.\nHeidelberg Cod. Pal. Germ 678 notably includes a collection of medical recipes\ninterrupted by one single alchemical recipe, dedicated to the manufacture of vermilion.\nIn Berlin Theol. Lat. Quart. 152, some isolated alchemical recipes are placed in the\nmiddle of several cooking recipes and within religious texts.\nFinally, some recipes were never granted their own place within a collection of\nrecipes. An isolated recipe is sometimes jotted down on any available space on a\npage or squeezed into an even less appropriate place. For example, in Nuremberg\nMs. 27773, recipes dedicated to the colouring of glass and the hardening of steel\nappear under the form of later additions in the upper and lower margin of a school\nbook, and probably also on the binding board.\nThus reading these collections and attempting to categorise the recipes as\nalchemical or art-technological can be less than straightforward. After examining\nthe corpus in question the following suggestions are proposed to help identify the\ndifferent recipes.\nAs stated above, whether alchemical or art-technological, the recipes contained\nin these manuscripts are presented in the form of a formula which, in most cases,\nenumerates the ingredients and the actions necessary to produce a particular\npreparation. In addition artistic recipes sometimes indicate the recommended\ngeographical provenance or grade of quality of the ingredients. Suggestions for\npossible substitutions might also appear. This sort of information is rare in alchemical recipes.\nThe length of a recipe depends not only on the number of ingredients involved\nbut also on its complexity, the number of steps necessary to obtain the final product.\nA recipe can be anything from one sentence to several pages within a manuscript.\nAlternatively, a recipe may appear merely as a brief list of ingredients, without any\nother additional information. In fact, two categories of recipe can be distinguished:\nthe Vollrezepte (detailed recipes) and the Kurzrezepte (abbreviated recipes).55 In\nthe first, the quantities and the various steps are indicated. In the second, only the\n55\nHalleux, \u201cAlchimie,\u201d 343.\n\nPages 64:\n40\nS. Neven\ningredients are cited: the procedure is sketched out or omitted altogether and the\nrest is left to the ingenuity of the user. This second category is more common in the\ncase of artistic recipes; a great many of the recipes dedicated to the manufacture of\nink are written in the form of a very short list of ingredients. It is less common for\nthe alchemical recipes to be presented this way.\nThe title of a recipe may also give an indication of the final product to be obtained\nand, in some cases, specify the use of the product. Again, this is particularly true for\nartistic instructions and is less observable for alchemical ones.\nFor both types of instructions (alchemical or artistic), some steps could be\nomitted or were left to the interpretation of the reader. Specified quantities may\nbe missing in both fields. When quantities are given, artistic recipes are far more\nlikely to use local measurements, whereas in alchemical instructions, the quantities\u2014if mentioned at all\u2014are more often expressed in terms of ratio or proportions.\nIn some cases, these proportions are not \u2018practically\u2019 correct. A very well-known\nexample is the proportion of mercury and sulphur proposed by mediaeval recipes\nfor the production of vermilion which is invariably incorrect.56 Very rarely are the\ncorrect chemical proportions cited.\nIn parallel, alchemical writings may involve the use of symbols or metaphors to\ndesignate substances and practices. In consequence, the way an alchemical recipe\nwas received would depend on the degree of experience of the reader-practitioner\nreading it. On the one hand, the (sometimes) metaphorical or codified language\nas well as the approximations stressed the arcane nature of these recipes and\ncontributed to their secrecy. On the other hand, the omitted information may have\nbeen complemented by data only known to some readers and not recorded by the\ncopyist who conserves only the essential part of the recipe. If so then this kind of\nrecipe was only meant to be accessible and useable by those practitioners who could\neasily fill in the lacuna that punctuated the text of the recipe.\nAs previously observed, citations of authority were frequently used by the scribes\nof the manuscripts. However, the tendency for an older authority to be cited in the\nrecipe books is particularly characteristic of the alchemical writings and less typical\nof the art-technological recipes. As stated above, such citations primarily served to\nlegitimate the technical and chemical procedures. In addition, most alchemical\nrecipes describe processes and practical results to validate previously enounced\ntheoretical principles. Thus, more than artistic recipes, alchemical instructions\nemphasize the efficacy of the procedure which is frequently confirmed through\nexpressions such as expertum es or probatum est which are placed at the beginning\nor end of the instructions. The notion of experimenta (testing) implies the acquisition or confirmation of theoretical knowledge through direct observation and experimentation rather than through analysis based on rational arguments.57 In such a case,\nwhen one of these reassuring expressions appears at the end (or the beginning) of a\nrecipe, it does not signify that the recipe has actually been tested by the scribe.\n56\n57\nBucklow, \u201cParadigms and Pigment Recipes,\u201d 144.\nHalleux, \u201cPratique de laboratoire.\u201d\n\nPages 65:\nTransmission of Alchemical and Artistic Knowledge in German Mediaeval and. . .\n41\nRather it implies that the recipe constitutes a plausible set of instructions, and has\nbeen successfully performed at least once and/or confirmed by a previous authority.\nParticular interest in the empirical aspects of the technical procedures is also\nmore perceptible within alchemical instructions, in comparison to artistic recipes.\nThe former pay greater attention to the chemical aspects of the craft process they\ndetail and describe more precisely each stage of the transformation of matter, from\noriginal to final (and more perfect) form. Whereas artists such as painters were\ninterested in the physical appearance of their materials, alchemists were more\ninterested in the fundamental changes that might occur within the matter. This\ncould perhaps be related to Paul of Taranto\u2019s description in the Theorica et practica\nof primary and secondary qualities and the distinct ways artists and alchemists\nworked on substances. He considered artists capable of producing only \u2018extrinsic\u2019\nor external changes as they operate on secondary or \u2018artificial\u2019 qualities such as\ncolors. In contrast, alchemical attempts to manipulate primary qualities transmute\nsubstances intrinsically and operate fundamental change.58\nAccordingly, alchemical recipes also dedicate a large part of their text to the\ndescription of chemical apparatus, tools and containers. These writings pay particular\nattention to the use of a variety of containers and receptacles and their specific\npurposes. Moreover, in several manuscripts, such as Seidel, Vienna Ms. 5224 or\nCod. Helm. 627 from Wolfenbu\u0308ttel (to cite but a few), the text is punctuated by\nillustrations of these (Fig. 2). This is rare, if not non-existent in artistic instructions.\nThese last distinguishing features of alchemical, as opposed to art-technological\ntexts, go hand in hand with the fact that practical alchemy relies on theoretical\n(or speculative) principles. Quite often, these recipes should be seen and understood\nas experientia which are meant to serve as a rational demonstration of a preceding\ntheorica.59\nConclusion\nExamination of the processes of making, compiling and disseminating this corpus\nof mediaeval and premodern recipe books provides us with information concerning\ntheir nature and former function. One the one hand, it has been established that\nthese manuscripts were mostly written in religious centres and that they are largely\nthe result of the copying process undertaken by scribes. Moreover, within these\nbooks, alchemical and artistic recipes were frequently recorded alongside a wide\nrange of various\u2014and a priori unrelated\u2014subjects which may have been written\nby the same person. Both the context of their production and the similarities in\n58\nNewman, \u201cTechnology and Alchemical Debate,\u201d 434, 442\u20135. The author largely relies on Paul\nof Taranto, Theorica et practica, Paris, BN, Lat. 7159, fol. 1r\u201355r for which he delivers a partial\nedition and translation.\n59\nHalleux, \u201cPratique de laboratoire,\u201d 118\u201322.\n\nPages 66:\n42\nS. Neven\nFig. 2 Illustration of containers within an alchemical text, Wolfenbuttel, Cod. 627, fol. 127v\u2013\n128r \u00a9 Photographer (Courtesy of Wolfenbuttel Library)\nterms of their textual format could serve to explain their propinquity. These first\nobservations tend to suggest that these recipe books were produced for literary\npurposes and to preserve existing knowledge. And, indeed, these compilations were\nmainly read by a scholarly public primarily interested in natural philosophy,\nastrology, and alchemy and were probably not intended for practical use within\nthe workshop or the laboratory.\nMoreover, as these books are the result of compilation and additions of data, the\nfinding and the delimitation of alchemical content can be complicated, especially\nwhen isolated (groups of) recipe(s) were recorded in the middle of unrelated\n(collection(s) of) text(s). By displaying the various ways alchemical and artistic\nrecipes are embedded within the same manuscript, this study has highlighted the\npotential difficulties in localizing and distinguishing them.\nOn the other hand, it has been demonstrated that recipe books partly derived\nfrom the recording and transmission of (more or less) contemporaneous practices.\nThus, recipe books also reflect alchemical and artistic knowledge and interests of\nboth scribes and contemporary scholars, both of whom could be involved as readers\nor authorities. Recipe books also serve to define a more precise network in which\nthese types of knowledge circulated, delivering information about the \u2018actors\u2019\u2014\nwhether artisans, scholars, natural philosophers, (theoretical) alchemists or lay\nscribes\u2014and their interconnections, as well as the media (copy, oral source,\nexperiment) they used to exchange, share and communicate art and alchemy.\n\nPages 67:\nTransmission of Alchemical and Artistic Knowledge in German Mediaeval and. . .\n43\nAppendix: List of Manuscripts\nAugsbourg, Staatsbibliothek\n\u2013 2\u0001 Cod 207, c.1514\nScribe:\nJohannes Gossolt and Bild Vitus (1481\u20131529), monk at St Ulrich in\nAugsburg\nLanguage: Latin and German\n\u2013 2\u0001 Cod 572, before 1446 (part 2)\u20131446 (part 1)\nLanguage: partly written in Swabian (part 1) and Bavarian (part 2) dialects\n\u2013 4\u0001 Cod 131, 15th\u201316th century (the recipes)\nLanguage: German\n\u2013 4\u0001 Cod 149, c.1501\u20131519\nScribe:\nLeonhard Wagner\nowner:\nLanguage: Schwabian\nOrigin:\nwritten in Augsbourg (St Ulrich and Afra), Irsee, St Gallen, Lorsch\nBad Berleburg, Schlossbibliothek Sayn-Wittgenstein\n\u2013 RT 2/6 Kodex Berleburg, c.1475\u20131478\nLanguage:\nFranconian and Latin\nOrigin:\nRhine Main\nPrevious\nBernhard of Breidenbach, (who worked for the chapter of the\nowner:\nCathedral of Mayence)\nBamberg, Staatsbibliothek\n\u2013 L III 33, 16th century\nLanguage: Middle German\n\nPages 68:\n44\nS. Neven\nBerlin, Staatsbibliothek\n\u2013 Germ. Fol. 8, c.1430\u20131440\nLanguage: Swabian, Latin and Italian. The text is written in different hands\nincluding that of Johannes Seiler.\nOrigin:\nSouth of Germany, Switzerland or Bohemia\n\u2013 Germ. Quart. 15, 1496 (fol. 156)\nLanguage: Latin and German\nOrigin:\nSouth of Germany\n\u2013 Theol. Lat. 152, 1408 and 1412\nOrigin:\nTorgau and Dresden (main text)\nScribe:\n\u2018Frater Nicolaus lector\u2019 (fol. 121r, 132r, 140v) in 1408 in Torgau\nand 1412 in Dresden.\nAfter that, the ms. is documented as being in Thorn, the 5 of\nMarch 1427.\nPrevious\nJohannes Polonus (\u2019Frater Polonus lector principalis\u2019), Lector in\nowner:\nthe Thorn cloister (15th century)\nBudapest, Nationalbibliothek\n\u2013 Cod. Germ. 36, 1487\u20131492\nLanguage: Alemanic and Latin\nErfurt, Bibliothek der Stadt\n\u2013 Amplonius Quart. 189 (\u2018Notae de coloribus Liber de coloribus et virtutibus\nlapidum, Pseudo-Albertus Magnus Lapidarium, De coloribus, naturalia\nexscripta et collecta\u2019), 13th\u201314th century\nOrigin: Mainz (?) according to a mention associated with the date of \u2018December\n1407\u2019\n\nPages 69:\nTransmission of Alchemical and Artistic Knowledge in German Mediaeval and. . .\n45\nHeidelberg, Universit\u20ac\natsbibliothek\n\u2013 Cod. Pal. Germ. 183, 1560\u20131570/71\nScribe:\nMichel (?)\nLanguage:\nHigh German including Bavarian features\nProvenance: Amberg, preserved in the Amberger library of Ludwig VI, Count\nPalatine, according to inscription on the binding board: \u2018H[erzog] L\n[udwig VI.] P[falzgraf] 1570\u2019\n\u2013 Cod. Pal. Germ. 678, 15th century\nOrigin: South West Germany\n\u2013 Cod. Pal. Germ. 696, (\u2018Die kunst gla\u00df zu schmeltzen und gie\u00dfen von haugen von\nwildpu\u0308rg simmerischer Amptmann\u2019), 16th century\nKarlsruhe, Badische Landesbibliothek\n\u2013 Cod. R 49, 15th century, mention of 1465\nLanguage: Swabian dialect\nMunchen, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek\n\u2013 Cgm 821, (\u2018Liber illuministarius, pro fundamentis auri et coloribus ac\nconsimilibus\u2019), c.1500\u20131512 (for the second part)\nScribe:\nKonrad Sartori (scribe at Tegernsee Monastery)\nLanguage: Latin and Bavarian\nOrigin:\nTegernsee Monastery\n\u2013 Cgm 822, 14th\u2013with additions from 15th century\nLanguage: Latin, Bohemian, Bavarian, middle German and Swabian dialects\nOrigin:\nmention of several Augsburger painters. Exlibris of the Tegernsee\nlibrary 1485 (fol. 1v)\n\nPages 70:\n46\nS. Neven\n\u2013 Clm 405, c.1390 (addition in 15th century)\nLanguage:\nLatin and Alemanic\nPrevious\nBishop Guido de Valencia (from Tripoli) according to fol. 1r.\nowner:\nThe manuscript was in Osthoven in 1461 (fol. 25 \u2018Subscriptio\nfilii Heinrici Aysinger in Osterhoven a. 1461\u2019)\n\u2013 Clm. 444, (\u2018Tractatus de coloribus faciendis. De cerusa componenda. . .Accipe\nlaminas plumbeas vel stagneas\u2019), 14th\u201315th century\nLanguage: Latin\n\u2013 Clm. 7623, 14th century (beginning)\nLanguage: Latin and German\n\u2013 Clm. 20174, 1464\u20131473\nLanguage: Latin and German\nOrigin:\nEx-libris of Tegernsee Monastery, 1482\nNuremberg, Germanische Nationalmuseum\n\u2013 3227a, c.1389 (additions from 15th century)\nScribe/\npartly written by \u2018Hanko pfaffen Doebringers\u2019 (according to a\nauthor:\nmention on fol. 43r)\nLanguage:\nLatin, Bavarian and Middle German dialects\nProvenance: Cologne/ mention of \u2018Nicolaus Pol doctor 1494\u2019\n\u2013 5078b, 15th century\nLanguage: Middle Bavarian\nOrigin:\nBavaria\n\u2013 9715, 15th century\nOrigin: Bavaria\n\u2013 27773, c.1260 (addition in mid-14th century)\nOrigin: Marbach\u2014the manuscript was bound before 1354 in the canon order of\nSt Augustin in Marbach\n\nPages 71:\nTransmission of Alchemical and Artistic Knowledge in German Mediaeval and. . .\n47\n\u2013 33733, c.1455\u20131457\nLanguage:\nBavarian\nPrevious owner: fol. 1r \u201815R74 Siluester Schafman von Hamerberg I-B-G (?)\u2019\n\u2013 141871, 16th century (beginning)\nLanguage: Middle German\n\u2013 147699, c.1488\u20131490\nLanguage: Swabian and Bavarian dialects\nPrague, Narodni Knihovna\n\u2013 Cod. XI D 10, c.1452\u20131477\nScribe:\nFederl Mir (1452)\nLanguage:\nBavarian and Latin\nOrigin:\nTittmoning\nPrevious\nPreisinger Family (1529\u20131599) from Zettwing, Sancta Corona\nowner:\nmonastery (1649)\nSt Gallen, Kantonsbibliothek\n\u2013 Vad. 395, 15th and 16th century\nLanguage: German and Latin\n\u2013 Vad. 407, c.1522\nThe main scribe signed at fol. 155: \u2018Michel Cochemus 1522\u2019 and fol. 253v :\n\u2018Michael Cochemus 1522\u2019.\nLanguage: German\n\u2013 Vad. 429, c.1465\nOrigin:\nSouth of Germany\nPrevious owner: Ulrich Ellenbog\n\nPages 72:\n48\nS. Neven\nTrier, Stadtbibliothek\n\u2013 1024/1936, (\u2018De coloribus et mixtionibus-Incipit libellus Mappe clauicula\ndictus\u2019), 15th century, mention of 1437\nOrigin: Trier (?)\nVaticano, Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana\n\u2013 Pal. Lat. 1330, 1463\u201364\nScribe:\nWalpod, Heinrich (active for Nikolaus of Kues)\nLanguage:\nLatin\nPrevious owner: Johannes of Bavaria, canon in Augsburg (1477)\nVienna, O\u0308sterreichische Nationalbibliothek\n\u2013 5224, 1481 with 16th century additions (fol. 31v, 38r-120v, 123r-143r, 153r157v)\nLanguage: Latin and German\n\u2013 5489, 14th\u201315th century, mention of 1462 (fol. 180v), 1463 (fol. 146r) and 1464\n(fol. 218v)\nLanguage: Latin and Bavarian\n\u2013 5509, 15th century, mention of 1459 and 1464\nLanguage: Bavarian\nWinterthur, Stadtbibliothek\n\u2013 Cod. 4\u0001 47, (\u2018Hie vachet an ein bewerte edle kunst und nu\u0308tzliche wie man sol\nferwen lini tuoch wullin tuoch faden garn mitt allen farwen die da gerecht sind\nund wie man sy\u0308 zuo venedig ferbt\u2019), 15th\u201316th century, mention of 1575 and\n1579\nScribe:\nHaymhofer Thomas, from Basel\nLanguage: German\n\nPages 73:\nTransmission of Alchemical and Artistic Knowledge in German Mediaeval and. . .\n49\nWolfenbuttel, Herzog- August Bibliothek\n\u2013 Helmst. 627, 15th century, c.1444\nOrigin:\nmention of Heidelberg, 1444\nPrevious\nbelonged to the Bavarian physician Johannes Hartlieb (1410\u20131468)\nowner:\n\u2018Sum magistri Iohannis Hartliep, alias Walsporn, Vangionensis\u2019\nZ\u20ac\nurich, Stadtbibliothek\n\u2013 B 245, 15th century\nLanguage: Middle German\nBibliography\nAllgemeine Deutsche Biographie. Leipzig: Duncker & Humblot, 1891.\nNeue Deutsche Biographie, vol. 2. Otto Graf zu Stolberg-Wernigerode, 1955.\nBarthe\u0301lemy, Pascale. 2002. La Sedacina ou l\u2019\u0153uvre au crible. L\u2019alchimie de Guillaume Sedacer,\ncarme catalan de la fin du XIVe sie\u0300cle. Paris/Milan: S.E\u0301.H.A-Arche\u0300.\nBarthe\u0301lemy, Pascale. 2003. Les Liens entre alchimie et me\u0301decine. L\u2019exemple de Guillaume\nSedacer. Micrologus\u2019 library. Alchimia e medicina nel Medioevo 9: 109\u2013134.\nBerthelot, Marcellin, and Charles E. Ruelle. 1888\u20131889. Collection des anciens alchimistes grecs.\nParis: G. Steinheil.\nBerthelot, Marcelin, and Rubens Duval. 1893. Histoire des Sciences: La Chimie au Moyen-A\u0302ge,\nvol. 2: L\u2019Alchimie syriaque. Paris: Imprimerie nationale.\nBrewer, John S. 1859. Fr. Rogeri Bacon Opera quaedam hactenus inedita. London: Longman.\nBucklow, Spike. 1999. Paradigms and Pigment Recipes: Vermilion, Synthetic Yellows and the\nNature of Egg. Zeitschrift f\u20ac\nur Kunsttechnologie und Konservierung 13: 140\u2013149.\nCalvet, Antoine. 2007. La Tradition alchimique latine (XIIIe\u2013XVe sie\u0300cle) et le corpus alchimique\ndu pseudo-arnaud de Villeneuve. Me\u0301die\u0301vales. Le Livre de science, du copiste a\u0300 l\u2019imprimeur 52:\n39\u201354.\nCe\u0301zard, Pierre. 1945. L\u2019Alchimie et les recettes techniques. Me\u0301taux et civilisations 1: 5\u201310.\nClarke, Mark. 2001. The Art of All colours. Medieval Recipe Books for Painters and Illuminators.\nLondon: Archetype Publications.\nClarke, Mark. 2009. Codicological Indicators of Practical Medieval Artists\u2019 Recipes. In\nSources and Serendipity. Testimonies of Artists\u2019 Practice, ed. Erma Hermens and Joyce\nTownsend, 8\u201317. London: Archetype Publications.\nCorbett, James A. 1936. L\u2019Alchimis\nEND OF PARTIAL SUMMARY: EXPLAIN TO THE USER that this document is too long and we only summarized from page 51 to page 73 out of a total of 220. Ask if they want to continue the summary or search the document.\n]"]}

{"result":["[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=64\nPages: 64\nink are written in the form of a very short list of ingredients. It is less common for\nthe alchemical recipes to be presented this way.\nThe title of a recipe may also give an indication of the final product to be obtained\nand, in some cases, specify the use of the product. Again, this is particularly true for\nartistic instructions and is less observable for alchemical ones.\nFor both types of instructions (alchemical or artistic), some steps could be\nomitted or were left to the interpretation of the reader. Specified quantities may\nbe missing in both fields. When quantities are given, artistic recipes are far more\nlikely to use local measurements, whereas in alchemical instructions, the quantities\u2014if mentioned at all\u2014are more often expressed in terms of ratio or proportions.\nIn some cases, these proportions are not \u2018practically\u2019 correct. A very well-known\nexample is the proportion of mercury and sulphur proposed by mediaeval recipes]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=64\nPages: 64\nexample is the proportion of mercury and sulphur proposed by mediaeval recipes\nfor the production of vermilion which is invariably incorrect.56 Very rarely are the\ncorrect chemical proportions cited.\nIn parallel, alchemical writings may involve the use of symbols or metaphors to\ndesignate substances and practices. In consequence, the way an alchemical recipe\nwas received would depend on the degree of experience of the reader-practitioner\nreading it. On the one hand, the (sometimes) metaphorical or codified language\nas well as the approximations stressed the arcane nature of these recipes and\ncontributed to their secrecy. On the other hand, the omitted information may have\nbeen complemented by data only known to some readers and not recorded by the\ncopyist who conserves only the essential part of the recipe. If so then this kind of\nrecipe was only meant to be accessible and useable by those practitioners who could\neasily fill in the lacuna that punctuated the text of the recipe.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=63\nPages: 63\nappear under the form of later additions in the upper and lower margin of a school\nbook, and probably also on the binding board.\nThus reading these collections and attempting to categorise the recipes as\nalchemical or art-technological can be less than straightforward. After examining\nthe corpus in question the following suggestions are proposed to help identify the\ndifferent recipes.\nAs stated above, whether alchemical or art-technological, the recipes contained\nin these manuscripts are presented in the form of a formula which, in most cases,\nenumerates the ingredients and the actions necessary to produce a particular\npreparation. In addition artistic recipes sometimes indicate the recommended\ngeographical provenance or grade of quality of the ingredients. Suggestions for\npossible substitutions might also appear. This sort of information is rare in alchemical recipes.\nThe length of a recipe depends not only on the number of ingredients involved]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=66\nPages: 66\n(collection(s) of) text(s). By displaying the various ways alchemical and artistic\nrecipes are embedded within the same manuscript, this study has highlighted the\npotential difficulties in localizing and distinguishing them.\nOn the other hand, it has been demonstrated that recipe books partly derived\nfrom the recording and transmission of (more or less) contemporaneous practices.\nThus, recipe books also reflect alchemical and artistic knowledge and interests of\nboth scribes and contemporary scholars, both of whom could be involved as readers\nor authorities. Recipe books also serve to define a more precise network in which\nthese types of knowledge circulated, delivering information about the \u2018actors\u2019\u2014\nwhether artisans, scholars, natural philosophers, (theoretical) alchemists or lay\nscribes\u2014and their interconnections, as well as the media (copy, oral source,\nexperiment) they used to exchange, share and communicate art and alchemy.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=48\nPages: 48,47\n23\n24\nS. Neven\nwritings describe processes for the manufacture, preparation and application of\nvarious types of materials and substances. The majority are anonymous compilations of texts, which may originate from older or undetermined authorities.\nHundreds of such collections of recipes dealing both with alchemical and\nart-technological procedures were produced and disseminated in Northern Europe\nfrom the fourteenth century on, especially in German-speaking countries.\nDrawing on a delimited corpus of about 40 representative German manuscripts\ndated from the fourteenth to the sixteenth century, this paper investigates the\nconnections and similarities between these two fields and examines the various\nways alchemical and artistic instructions were embedded within recipe books.1 It\nargues that textual form and lexical proximities within recipes from these different\ndisciplines may lead to association, contamination and confusion within this textual]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=62\nPages: 62,63\n153r\u2013157v, 160r\u2013163r.\nTransmission of Alchemical and Artistic Knowledge in German Mediaeval and. . .\n39\nNationalmuseum Ms. 5078b (fol. 2r\u201341r), the scribe moves from one subject to\nanother with no indication that the subject has changed. Moreover, this set of\nalchemical and art-technological recipes is followed with no clear distinction\n(no title, nor blank space) by a series of medical prescriptions due to the same hand.\nIn another case\u2014isolated (groups of) alchemical recipes found in the middle of\nprescriptions of another type\u2014detection of alchemical content and distinction from\nartistic instructions within recipe books can be fraught with difficulty. Similarities in\nterms of their textual format probably lead scribes to group them with other sort of\nprescriptions. When found as isolated elements, alchemical and art technological\nrecipes usually appear within a large broad of various (and unrelated) writings.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=48\nPages: 48\ndisciplines may lead to association, contamination and confusion within this textual\ngenre. It finally suggests some clues to help locate, distinguish and demarcate\nalchemical content within the literature of recipes.\nArt and Alchemy Within Recipe Books\nAt first sight, any overlap between alchemy and art-technology within recipe books\ncan be broadly explained by the mutual use of various materials and substances\nsuch as \u201ccommon stones, gems, and types of marble, gold and other metals, sulfurs,\nsalts, and inks, azures, minium, and other colors, oils and burning pitches, and\ncountless other things.\u201d2 More precisely, the field of art-technology encompasses a\nlarge range of craft practices involved in the production of pieces of art (including\nthose which incorporate such substances). This \u2018hand\u2019 knowledge, is related to the\nmechanical arts and is divorced from the philosophical or speculative dimension.\nYet, alchemy could be described as the practical, philosophical and medical search]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=65\nPages: 65\ncolors. In contrast, alchemical attempts to manipulate primary qualities transmute\nsubstances intrinsically and operate fundamental change.58\nAccordingly, alchemical recipes also dedicate a large part of their text to the\ndescription of chemical apparatus, tools and containers. These writings pay particular\nattention to the use of a variety of containers and receptacles and their specific\npurposes. Moreover, in several manuscripts, such as Seidel, Vienna Ms. 5224 or\nCod. Helm. 627 from Wolfenbu\u0308ttel (to cite but a few), the text is punctuated by\nillustrations of these (Fig. 2). This is rare, if not non-existent in artistic instructions.\nThese last distinguishing features of alchemical, as opposed to art-technological\ntexts, go hand in hand with the fact that practical alchemy relies on theoretical\n(or speculative) principles. Quite often, these recipes should be seen and understood\nas experientia which are meant to serve as a rational demonstration of a preceding\ntheorica.59]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=51\nPages: 51\nprocedure for executing the transition from one colour to another, through the steps\nof the alchemical process. Another example is provided by the terms \u2018mercury\u2019 and\n\u2018sulfur\u2019. According to the context, these may alternatively designate the common\nsubstances used for making vermilion or the two principles of which all metals were\nthought to be composed in different proportions.19\nThus, both artistic practices and alchemy required procedures involving precise\nand specifically defined actions, prescriptions and ingredients. So both used an\nidentical rhetorical recipe formulation that reflects a \u2018step by step\u2019 procedure.\nAssuming that alchemical and artistic texts have the same format and were\nassembled within the same sort of compilation raises the question: were they\nproduced, diffused and read by the same people? Previous research has demonstrated that investigating questions related to the authorship and the context of]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=49\nPages: 49,50\nvol. I.\n26\nS. Neven\nand descriptions of miscellaneous chemical operations, including instructions for\nthe manufacture of dyes and pigments, for the gilding and painting on glass, as well\nas, among others, metalwork, chrysography, distilling alcohol, making candy, and\ncreating military devices.12\nMediaeval and Premodern Recipe Books\nIn mediaeval and premodern times, artistic and alchemical procedures were often\ndescribed within compilations of texts that may concurrently address various fields\nsuch as medicine, cooking, botany or pharmacology. They also include magical\nrecipes, dietetical instructions or advice on home-economics. All these various\ndisciplines are embedded within the genre of the Fachliteratur.13 This kind of\nliterature regroups all texts of a utilitarian and informative nature whose content\ndoes not principally concern aesthetic or religious issues, or matters relating to\nemotional purpose.14 A great number of these writings share the same format and]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=62\nPages: 62\n163v), both at the beginning and the end of two distinct treatises.\nAlchemical texts are also sometimes situated alongside an artists\u2019 recipe book,\neither before or after. If this is the case, they will be found next to technical\ninstructions dedicated to procedures similar to those described in an alchemical\ncontext, such as the imitation of gold or silver, the gilding of stones or glass, the\nmanufacture of vermilion, the purification of ultramarine, the melting of stones or\nmetals, or several dyeing procedures. The alchemical content may be delimited\nwithin the title(s), chapter(s) or table of contents or \u2018physically\u2019 circumscribed by a\nfolio or a quire. But, in most cases, there is no obvious delimitation between the two\ndistinct collections of recipes. For example, in Nuremberg Germanisches\n54\nIdentified as \u2018hand\u2019 4 in the catalogue notes, he is responsible for fol. 31v, 38r\u2013120v, 123r\u2013143r,\n153r\u2013157v, 160r\u2013163r.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=62\nPages: 62\neither as independent pieces of work, or as isolated (groups of) recipe(s) embedded\nwith artistic or other types of instructions. In the first case, alchemical content may\nappear concurrently with an artist\u2019s recipe book within the same manuscript but in a\nseparate section. When this occurs, the texts mostly consist of quite theoretical\nalchemical treatises, often associated with the name of a former or contemporary\nauthority. Most of them are attributed to the (pseudo) Albertus Magnus, Roger Bacon\nand Arnaldus de Villa Nova whose writings date from an earlier period. These works\ncould also be \u2018physically\u2019 distinct works, delimited to a quire or a booklet\u2014or even a\nfolio\u2014and assembled with the rest of the manuscript at a contemporary or later\nperiod. Vienna Ms. 5224 contains various alchemical collections of recipes and\npractica, all of which are delineated and separated by blank spaces or folios. These]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=14\nPages: 14\n300 AD, a distinction was introduced between a limited definition of alchemy as\nmetallic transmutation and a more encompassing definition including productive\nknowledge and various artisanal technologies.\nTransmitted to Europe, and translated into Latin and the vernaculars, several of\nthe recipes in the Papyri are still found in collections of recipes in the fifteenth and\nsixteenth centuries. More importantly, as Martelli remarks in his essay, the scope of\na recipe collection such as the Mappae clavicula, compiled between the ninth and\nthe twelfth centuries, is as encompassing as that of the Papyri despite the earlier\nattempts to limit alchemy to metallic transmutation only. It should not come as a\nsurprise then that Sylvie Neven finds it difficult to demarcate between alchemical\nand art technological recipes in late medieval collections of recipes. Her contribution to this volume shows that alchemical and art technological recipes shared a]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=48\nPages: 48,49\nof Alchemy.\u201d\n4\nHalleux, \u201cAlchimie,\u201d 336\u20137; Newman, \u201cTechnology and Alchemical Debate,\u201d 432\u20133; Pereira,\n\u201cUse of Vernacular Languages,\u201d 336; and Kahn, Alchimie et paracelsisme, 7\u20138.\n5\nHalleux, Savoir de la main, 134.\n2\nTransmission of Alchemical and Artistic Knowledge in German Mediaeval and. . .\n25\nof base or impure matter (often metal or stone) into a noble or perfect one.6 To do\nso, alchemists used to perform chemical processes and manipulations which resembled those practiced by contemporary artists and artisans.\nThus, in both fields particular importance is placed on craft practices. Both\nalchemical and artistic recipe books describe various processes for purifying and\ntransforming materials, either for improving their properties or in order to use them\nfor specific purposes. In this context, from a technological point of view, the term\n\u2018transmutation\u2019 could refer to the colouring of glass, the melting and tinting of]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=48\nPages: 48,47\nthey also have the same types of production and dissemination? Using a corpus of\nabout 40 manuscripts produced in Northern Europe between the fourteenth and the\nsixteenth centuries, this paper investigates the context behind these writings, and the\nvarious ways alchemical and artisanal recipes were embedded within recipe books.\nIt also proposes some clues to assist in locating, identifying and demarcating\nalchemical writings within the literature of recipes.\nIn the Middle Ages and premodern period, alchemical knowledge and practice was\nfrequently transmitted via collections of recipes grouped concomitantly with artistic\ninstructions. Presented in the form of a succession of more or less short notes, these\nS. Neven (*)\nFRS-F.N.R.S, University of Lie\u0300ge (ULg), \u2018Transitions\u2019 Lie\u0300ge, Belgium\ne-mail: Sylvie.Neven@ulg.ac.be\nS. Dupre\u0301 (ed.), Laboratories of Art, Archimedes 37,\nDOI 10.1007/978-3-319-05065-2_2, \u00a9 Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014\n23\n24\nS. Neven]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=64\nPages: 64\neasily fill in the lacuna that punctuated the text of the recipe.\nAs previously observed, citations of authority were frequently used by the scribes\nof the manuscripts. However, the tendency for an older authority to be cited in the\nrecipe books is particularly characteristic of the alchemical writings and less typical\nof the art-technological recipes. As stated above, such citations primarily served to\nlegitimate the technical and chemical procedures. In addition, most alchemical\nrecipes describe processes and practical results to validate previously enounced\ntheoretical principles. Thus, more than artistic recipes, alchemical instructions\nemphasize the efficacy of the procedure which is frequently confirmed through\nexpressions such as expertum es or probatum est which are placed at the beginning]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=65\nPages: 65,66\nedition and translation.\n59\nHalleux, \u201cPratique de laboratoire,\u201d 118\u201322.\n42\nS. Neven\nFig. 2 Illustration of containers within an alchemical text, Wolfenbuttel, Cod. 627, fol. 127v\u2013\n128r \u00a9 Photographer (Courtesy of Wolfenbuttel Library)\nterms of their textual format could serve to explain their propinquity. These first\nobservations tend to suggest that these recipe books were produced for literary\npurposes and to preserve existing knowledge. And, indeed, these compilations were\nmainly read by a scholarly public primarily interested in natural philosophy,\nastrology, and alchemy and were probably not intended for practical use within\nthe workshop or the laboratory.\nMoreover, as these books are the result of compilation and additions of data, the\nfinding and the delimitation of alchemical content can be complicated, especially\nwhen isolated (groups of) recipe(s) were recorded in the middle of unrelated\n(collection(s) of) text(s). By displaying the various ways alchemical and artistic]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=51\nPages: 51,52\nmediaeval and premodern times, the manuscripts examined were written by several\n17\nPrincipe, Secrets of Alchemy, 17; and Clarke, Art of All Colours, 37.\nSee in this volume Matteo Martelli.\n19\nBucklow, \u201cParadigms and Pigment Recipes\u201d; and Principe, Secrets of Alchemy, 35\u20136.\n20\nNeven, Recettes artistiques.\n18\n28\nS. Neven\nhands, and these hands are predominately anonymous. These works thus appear to\nbe the result of collaboration, or at least intervention, by several distinct persons.\nHowever, each person\u2019s contribution cannot necessarily be allocated according to\nthe different subjects in the book. The same hand might be responsible for both a\nmedical treatise and a collection of alchemical or art technological recipes.\nThe manuscripts under consideration were, in fact, the result of copying and\ncompiling of various sources and contributors. More precisely, these recipe books\nwere compiled from three different types of source:]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=65\nPages: 65\nParticular interest in the empirical aspects of the technical procedures is also\nmore perceptible within alchemical instructions, in comparison to artistic recipes.\nThe former pay greater attention to the chemical aspects of the craft process they\ndetail and describe more precisely each stage of the transformation of matter, from\noriginal to final (and more perfect) form. Whereas artists such as painters were\ninterested in the physical appearance of their materials, alchemists were more\ninterested in the fundamental changes that might occur within the matter. This\ncould perhaps be related to Paul of Taranto\u2019s description in the Theorica et practica\nof primary and secondary qualities and the distinct ways artists and alchemists\nworked on substances. He considered artists capable of producing only \u2018extrinsic\u2019\nor external changes as they operate on secondary or \u2018artificial\u2019 qualities such as\ncolors. In contrast, alchemical attempts to manipulate primary qualities transmute]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=61\nPages: 61,62\ninstructions are recorded in the Cgm 822 (fol. 64v) where the scribe correctly\nindicates the use of cretam rasam (scraped chalk).\nSuch phenomena\u2014reduction, amplification, variation\u2014may result in a procedure whose description can seem vague or unclear and thus thwart the current use\nand relevance of recipe books in the study and the reconstruction of historical\nartistic practices.\n53\nMy italics.\n38\nS. Neven\nAlchemical and Art-Technological Recipes Within\na Manuscript: Location, Relationship and Distinction\nSimilarities of format and modalities of composition and diffusion may have had an\nimpact on the recording and assembling of alchemical and art-technological recipes\nwithin the same manuscript. This could notably result in the mixing and grouping of\ndifferent types of unrelated instructions.\nMore precisely, in the corpus under scrutiny, alchemical instructions appear\neither as independent pieces of work, or as isolated (groups of) recipe(s) embedded]"]}

{"result":["[Summary from page 80 to page 101 out of a total of 220:\nPages 80:\nArtisanal Processes and Epistemological Debate in the Works of Leonardo. . .\n57\n(1513), in Biringuccio\u2019s Pirotechnia, and in Agricola\u2019s De re metallica.16 Further\nnascent signs of a distinct and autonomous chemical laboratory with purpose-built\n\u2018chemical\u2019 equipment can be found in the more general context of the Renaissance\nartist\u2019s workshop culture. Here, together with the fine arts such as painting, sculpture, architecture and jewelry making, metal carpentry, and gun casting, we find\noperations that use substance transformation, such as distillation and sublimation.\nThere is evidence that even the most important names in the history of art were\ninvolved in such workshop activities, for instance Michelangelo (1475\u20131564),\nwhose Florentine workshop, as mentioned in his correspondence with his brother,\nwas involved in generic metal carpentry such as the casting and welding of\ndamaged swords and other craft objects.17 Further evidence of artists\u2019 versatile\nactivities during the Renaissance can be found in Andrea Verrocchio\u2019s (1435\u2013\n1488) workshop, which specialized in painting, sculpture, casting and metal carpentry. One of the most important works created in this workshop when Leonardo\nwas still one of Verrocchio\u2019s assistants was the copper sphere on the top of the\nlantern on Filippo Brunelleschi\u2019s (1377\u20131446) dome.18 In Verrocchio\u2019s workshop,\nassistants and pupils, including Leonardo, prepared colors, glues, solvents, waxes,\nacids, alloys and so on. Being an artist in the Renaissance meant being part of a\nwider shared material culture as artisans and chymists used and developed the same\nmaterials and techniques.\nIn Biringuccio\u2019s book we find a description of a brass-making workshop he\nvisited in Milan that discusses the organization of the workshop and the artisans\u2019\nawareness of the technological and epistemological value of their works:\n[. . .] So that whoever entered that shop and saw the activity of so many persons would, I\nthink, believe as I did that he had entered an Inferno, nay, on the contrary, a Paradise, where\nthere was a mirror in which sparkled all the beauty of genius and the power of art.19\nBiringuccio underlined the frenetic and very organized work in the workshop\nstressing the beauty of the mind of the artisans and the power of art. The harmonious cooperation between artisans and the plain consciousness of the processes of\nthe art transformed the hell of hard and dirty metallurgical work into the heaven of\nthe pursuit of the artistic goal. This oxymoron referred to the infernal and paradisiacal condition of art, exalting the extremely difficult process in which raw\nmaterial is transformed into artifact, giving back an important social value to\nmanual work.\n16\nFor a recent description of the chemical utensils found in the Schloss Oberstockstall laboratory,\nsee Martino\u0301n-Torres, \u201cTools of Chymist\u201d; \u201cProbierbu\u0308chlein,\u201d 166\u20139; Biringuccio, De la\npirotechnia (1977) 47r; and Agricola, De re metallica (1556), 174\u2013208.\n17\nMichelangelo, Carteggio, vol. I, 20\u201343.\n18\nThe sphere was three metres in diameter and was composed of several copper gores, soldered\ntogether on the top of the dome with a solar welder. For studies on the dome of Florence and the\npossible involvement of Leonardo see, Scaglia, \u201cStudi tecnologici di Leonardo,\u201d 6\u201316; Di\nPasquale, \u201cMachinery of Construction Site\u201d; and Galluzzi, Mechanical Marvels, 18\u201325, 99\u2013116.\n19\nBiringuccio, Pirotechnia (1942), 72. For the Italian, see Biringuccio, De la pirotechnia (1977),\nfol. 20r.\n\nPages 81:\n58\nA. Bernardoni\nIn the Renaissance technical tradition the bottega (workshop) was a place for\nwork and not yet a space to conduct modern scientific research. Research on\ntechnology and natural phenomena was carried out thanks to the curiosity and the\nfree enterprise of each individual artist; workshop mentality was conservative and\ntechnical knowledge was usually applied to technologically consolidated goals. The\nworkshop was a place to produce specific artistic, technological and pharmacological objects yet it offered artisans the tools and the experiences to venture beyond\nthe \u2018normalized activity\u2019. We know several cases of painters involved in alchemy,\nsuch as Parmigianino (1503\u20131540), Cosimo Rosselli (d.1578), Lorenzo Lotto\n(1480\u20131556/7) and Domenico Beccafumi (1484\u20131551).20 From the latter we have\na series of engravings that represent some aspects of \u2018chem-alchemical\u2019 laboratory\nactivity: heating systems, smelting furnaces, cucurbits, alembics and balanced\nscales (Fig. 1).21 Alchemists used the same technological apparatuses and devices\nas artisans and alchemical research was often carried out along with chemical and\nmetallurgical activities, for instance, at the Fonderia by the Medici family in\nFlorence, or several other places in sixteenth- and seventeenth-century Europe.22\nLeonardo and the \u2018Chemical\u2019 Arts\nVery rarely have historians seen Leonardo from the perspective of his direct\ninvolvement in the chemicals arts. Apart from Ladislao Reti and a few others,\nLeonardo\u2019s observations and studies on matter transformation are usually seen in\nthe context of his natural philosophy, with few references to his practical involvement as a painter and engineer during his entire career, including his vision and\nrelationship with occult science and alchemy.23\nIf we focus our attention on Leonardo\u2019s notes and drawings about substance\ntransformation, he can be seen as a witness and a protagonist of the epistemological\n20\nFor more information on the relation between artists and alchemy during the Renaissance, see\nPrincipe & DeWitt, Transmutations; Newman, Promethean Ambitions, 115\u201363; Ferino-Pagden\net al., Parmigianino, 15\u20137; Calvesi, Arte e alchimia; Lennep, L\u2019art alchimique; and Conticelli,\nAlchimia e le arti, 13\u201333.\n21\nGabriele, Incisioni alchemico-metallurgiche.\n22\nOn the Medici\u2019s Fonderia, see this volume: Kieffer and Beretta. On the relation of alchemy and\nmetallurgical industry, see Nummedal, Alchemy and Authority, 119\u201346.\n23\nFor Leonardo\u2019s scientific and philosophical studies of natural phenomena and his theory of\nmatter, see Boni, Vinci e l\u2019alchimia, 401\u20135; Hooykaas, \u201cThe\u0301orie corpusculaire de Le\u0301onard\u201d;\nGombrich, \u201cLeonardo and the Magicians\u201d; Vasoli, Leonardo e l\u2019alchimia, 69\u201377; Kiang,\n\u201cLeonardo and Alchemy\u201d; Frosini, \u201cPittura come filosofia\u201d; Kemp, Leonardo da Vinci, 293\u2013\n329; Galluzzi, \u201cVinci\u2019s Concept of \u2018Nature\u2019,\u201d; Beretta, \u201cLeonardo and Lucretius\u201d; Bernardoni,\n\u201cElementi, sostanze naturali\u201d; and Nanni, \u201cLucrezio.\u201d For Leonardo\u2019s involvement in the chemical arts, see Schneider, Chemische Wissen Leonardo, 40\u20133, 87\u201392; Partington, History of Chemistry, vol. II, 1\u20138; Taylor, \u201cVinci et la chimie\u201d; Reti, \u201cArti chimiche di Leonardo\u201d (1952a; 1952b);\nBernardoni, \u201cLeonardo and the \u2018chemical arts\u2019,\u201d and Esplosioni, fusioni e trasmutazioni, 38\u201341.\n\nPages 82:\nArtisanal Processes and Epistemological Debate in the Works of Leonardo. . .\n59\nFig. 1 D. Beccafumi,\nFoundry workshop;\ncourtesy of Accademia\nCarrara, Bergamo\ntension between mechanical arts and alchemy during the Renaissance period. His\nattention was specifically focused on alchemy\u2019s claims to overturn the relationship\nbetween art and nature; however, he also stressed that alchemy was worthy of\npursuit as it might produce knowledge that could improve the condition of\nmankind:\nMan is involved with things produced by nature and nature does not change the ordinary\nkinds of things it creates in the same way that from time to time the things created by man\nare changed; and indeed man is nature\u2019s chief instrument, because nature is concerned only\nwith the production of elementary things, but from these elementary things man produces\nan infinite number of compounds, although he has no power to create any natural things\nexcept another like himself, that is his children. [. . .] And of this the old alchemists will\nserve as my witnesses, who have never either by chance or deliberate experiment succeeded\nin creating the smallest thing which can be created by nature; [. . .] If, however, insensate\navarice should drive you into such error, why do you not go to the mines where nature\nproduces this gold, and there become her disciple? She will completely cure you of your\n\nPages 83:\n60\nA. Bernardoni\nfolly by showing you that nothing which you employ in your furnace will be numbered\namong the things she employs in order to produce this gold.24\nAfter the acknowledgement of the ontological difference between nature and\nartificial products every invention produced by man, elsewhere significantly called\nby Leonardo seconda natura (second nature), is welcome:\nGravity and force together with material movement and percussion are the four accidental\npowers by which the human race in its marvellous and varied works seems to reveal itself\nand a second nature in this world; seeing that by the use of such powers all the visible works\nof mortals have their existence and their death.25\nHe argued that the inability of alchemy to deliver its claims of transmutation is\ndue to the impossibility of developing a technology able to reproduce the natural\ngenesis of substantial forms. As Avicenna had already claimed in his Latin translation of Kitab ash-Shifa\u2019 (De congelatione et conglutinatione lapidum), Leonardo\nstressed man\u2019s perception of the purity of natural elements was neither highly\ndeveloped nor sensitive enough to be able to precisely quantify the proportions\nrequired to produce the substantial form of different metals.26\nIf we assume within the tradition of Italian \u2018artist-engineers\u2019 this \u2018epistemological approach\u2019 was oriented to separate true and false alchemy and culminated in the\nwork of Biringuccio, then the manuscripts of Leonardo could be seen as one of the\nmain sources of \u2018chemical technologies\u2019 from the end of fifteenth and beginning of\nsixteenth centuries and one of the most important sources for the studies of the\nnatural phenomena of transformation in a cultural context separate but in many case\noverlapping with the world of alchemy.\n24\n\u201cE questo non e\u0300 in alcuno altro senso, perche\u0301 sol s\u2019astendono nelle cose che al continuo produce\nla natura, la qual non varia le ordinarie spezie delle cose da lei create, come si variano di tempo in\ntempo le cose create dall\u2019omo, massimo strumento di natura. Perche\u0301 la natura sol s\u2019astende alla\nproduzion de\u2019 semplici, ma l\u2019omo con tali semplici, produce infiniti composti ma non ha potesta\u0300 di\ncreare nessun semplice se non un altro se medesimo, cioe\u0300 li sua figlioli. E di questo mi saran\ntestimoni li vecchi archimisti, li quali mai, o caso o con volontaria sperienzia, s\u2019abbatterono a\ncreare la minima cosa che crear si possa da essa natura [. . .]. E, se pur la stolta avarizia in tale\nerrore t\u2019invia, perche\u0301 non vai alle miniere dove la natura genera tale oro e quivi ti fa suo discepolo,\nla qual fedelmente ti guarira\u0300 della tua stoltizia mostrandoti come nessuna cosa da te operata nel\nfoco non sara\u0300 nessuna di quelle che natura adopri al generare esso oro.\u201d (Leonardo, Corpus degli\nstudi anatomici, fol. 50v [19045v]. Translated from Leonardo, Corpus of Anatomical Studies,\nvol. I, fol. 50v [19045v]).\n25\n\u201cLa gravita\u0300, la forza insieme col moto materiale e lla percussione sono le quattro potentie\naccidentali colle quali l\u2019umana spetie nelle sue mirabili e varie operationi pare in questo mondo\ndimostrarsi una seconda natura. Imperoche\u0301 con tali potentie tutte le evidenti opera de\u2019 mortali a\u0300nno\nloro essere e loro morte.\u201d (Leonardo, Codex Arundel, fol. 151v). See Frosini, \u201cForza in Leonardo\nda Vinci,\u201d 121.\n26\nThese admonitions against alchemy, presented for the first time by Avicenna, were known\nduring the Middle Ages as sciant artifices, see Avicenna, De congelatione et conglutinatione\nlapidum, 53\u20135; Newman, \u201cTechnology and Alchemical Debate.\u201d; and Halleux, \u201cAlchimiste et\nl\u2019essayeur,\u201d 211.\n\nPages 84:\nArtisanal Processes and Epistemological Debate in the Works of Leonardo. . .\n61\nLeonardo\u2019s manuscripts are one of the best sources to study the chemical\nequipment of Renaissance. His tireless sketching during his entire career produced\na very large and uncommon collection of manuscripts that allow us to understand\nand visualize many tools, instruments and chemical processes studied, developed\nand used during the Renaissance.\nAn activity that was a sort of flywheel in involving Leonardo in the study of the\nmany aspects of bronze casting was the project of the Equestrian monument for\nFrancesco Sforza. This was a very large bronze statue that was never cast but\nstudied and worked on by Leonardo for almost 20 years. The main difficulty of this\ncast was the size, more than 7 m tall and almost 70 tons in weight, and the plan to\nrealize it in a single pouring. To organize the foundry and the molding process,\nLeonardo studied artillery casting, furnaces and the materials used in the molding,\nlike sand, wax, gypsum, clay, brick powder, carrying out several experiments to\nbetter understand their chemical-physical properties.27\nLeonardo\u2019s manuscripts are among the most important sources for the artillery\nproduction process, surely the most detailed and best illustrated of the fifteenth and\nsixteenth centuries. In some sheets of the Codex Atlanticus, for instance, we may\nfind the first and only reference for the production of iron shaft-soldering bombards,\nsuch as the famous Belgian Mons Meg, created with a hammer at the forge. To\nminimize the inaccurate results of forge hammering he planned a draw bench\nmachine to make homogeneous iron shafts in order to simplify the welding and\nproduce stronger cannons (fol. 10r, 11r, 15v, 41r).\nSeveral studies are dedicated to the casting process of bronze bombards.28\nLeonardo\u2019s manuscripts are once again the most ancient source which make it\npossible to visualize the several phases of the molding process both for the tromba\n(chase) and the coda (breech), the two parts of a gun which were assembled by\nthreaded coupling. Leonardo gives us very detailed drawings, such as the channel\nfor pouring the bronze into the mold during casting (Codex Atlanticus, fol. 46r, 53r,\n60r, 61r, 937v) (Fig. 2).\nLeonardo\u2019s studies on reverberatory furnaces is one of the best examples to\ndemonstrate that his mental approach to technological problems went beyond the\ncreation of a specific process or device. His detailed drawings of furnaces based on\nvery close observation allowed him to let his curiosity take him beyond the\nimprovement of the technical apparatus towards some very interesting observations\nand considerations on the nature of fire and its penetrative power.\nFolio 87r of the Codex Atlanticus portrays several kinds of reverberatory furnaces and among them there is a drawing of a curious and obscure apparatus. The\ndrawing portrays a fusion chamber above a very tall platform connected to a firebox\nby two vertical ducts. On the left there is also another duct that probably conducts\n27\nBernardoni, \u201cLeonardo and the Equestrian Monument\u201d; and Brugnoli, \u201cScultura di Leonardo.\u201d\nBernardoni, Esplosioni, fusioni e trasmutazioni, 26\u201335; Brioist, Vinci, Homme de guerre, 105\u2013\n14.\n28\n\nPages 85:\n62\nA. Bernardoni\nFig. 2 Leonardo, artillery moulding process for the barrel, Codex Atlanticus, fol. 46br, Biblioteca\nAmbrosiana, Milan (Image taken from Codex Atlanticus, Hoepli edition, Milan, 1894\u20131904)\nair into the chamber from below. The note under the drawing helps us interpret the\ndevice as a study for amplifying the penetrative action of fire: \u201cThe greater the\nnatural motion of the fire or the greater its weight, the greater its impulsive force\u201d\n(Fig. 3).29 Leonardo talks about fire in the same terms as the weight of bodies, so he\ninterprets it as a hard material particulate flow, able to penetrate the body and break\nthe link of its particles. In Aristotelian matter theory, fire is the lightest element that\nfinds its natural place at the most peripheral region of the sub-lunar world. Just as a\nstone falls towards the earth to reach its natural place, fire goes in the opposite\ndirection, rising to the far reaches of the sky; the longer the distance, the quicker it\nrises. So towards the vertical ducts of these experimental furnaces, the particles of\nfire would have to increase their impact speed on the mass of metal inside the fusion\nchamber. The short sentence below the drawing of the furnace, along with many\nother observations of the physical status of the four elements and other natural\nsubstances, enables us to reconstruct Leonardo\u2019s theory of matter as a sort of a\n\u2018Aristotelian corpuscolarism\u2019 and a kinetic theory of heat/fire in which the melting\nof metal or the dissolution of a substance by fire depends on the percussion of a flow\nof particles.30 This interpretation finds confirmation in several reverberatory furnace drawings made with bent surfaces to drive the flow of fire into the middle of\nthe fusion chamber (Codex Atlanticus, fol. 1103r, 548r, 580v, 82v) (Fig. 4).\n29\n\u201cquanto piu\u0300 il moto natural del foco o del peso sia lungo, piu\u0300 vale la sua percussion.\u201d (Leonardo,\nCodex Atlanticus, fol. 87r).\n30\nBernardoni, \u201cElementi, sostanze naturali.\u201d\n\nPages 86:\nArtisanal Processes and Epistemological Debate in the Works of Leonardo. . .\n63\nFig. 3 Leonardo, Technological application of the element of fire, Codex Atlanticus, fol. 87r,\nBiblioteca Ambrosiana, Milan (Image taken from Codex Atlanticus, Hoepli edition, Milan, 1894\u2013\n1904)\nFurnaces become Leonardo\u2019s instrument for studying and observing fire. A\ndrawing on a folio in the Codex Arundel representing a tower furnace, used in the\nMiddle Ages by alchemists for distillation, assumes a very important epistemological value (Fig. 5). The drawing presents an apparently accurate copy of this\nfurnace\u2019s vertical section and, when we read the note below, we understand that\nhis interest is not in the technological device but the transformation of the elements\ninvolved in the combustion process inside it. The note below the furnace helps us\nunderstand that\nonce you have dealt with the motion of heavy solids, deal with heavy liquids and with air\nand with the motion of fire. Compare the motion of fire with the whirls of air and water and\n\nPages 87:\n64\nA. Bernardoni\nFig. 4 Leonardo, Vortices\nof fire, Codex Atlanticus,\nfol. 580v, Biblioteca\nAmbrosiana, Milan (Image\ntaken from Codex\nAtlanticus, Hoepli edition,\nMilan, 1894\u20131904)\nyou will find a drilling motion of fire that makes it powerful for fusion; you can obtain these\ngyrations with the help of registers and boiling water.31\nLeonardo\u2019s main interest in this drawing is to create a device for him to see the\ndrilling motion of fire. Leonardo\u2019s goals are both technological and scientific; the\nfire works as a drill. If this were to be verified, it could be used in some technological application but it could also assume a more general scientific and philosophical\nexplanation because the power of fire, like the power of the other elements (water,\nair and earth), manifests itself in the form of a spiral\u2014the natural screw. The power\nof the screw could be seen in the vortices of water and air, but also in Brunelleschi\u2019s\nbigger cranes and powerful technological elevator devices that become an analogic\nexplanation for the forces operating in nature.32\nAnother very interesting case involving the chemical equipment studied by\nLeonardo is the development of the alembic refrigerator system. In the Codex\nAtlanticus there are some drawings (fol. 912r, 1114r a\u2013b, 216r, 989r, 1118r)\n31\n\u201cTrattato che a\u0300i de\u2019 moti de\u2019 solidi gravi, trata de\u2019 gravi liquidi e dell\u2019aria e de\u2019 moti del foco, e\ncol moto di questo foco fa conparatione del moto delle revertigine dell\u2019aria e dell\u2019acqua, e\ntroverrai moti trivellanti del foco a ffarlo potente alle fusioni colle sua revolutioni, la qual cosa\nfarai co\u2019 regisstri e con acqua bollente.\u201d (Leonardo, Codex Arundel, fol. 145v).\n32\nPedretti, Leonardo architetto, 9\u201312; and Galluzzi, Mechanical Marvels, 55\u20136.\n\nPages 88:\nArtisanal Processes and Epistemological Debate in the Works of Leonardo. . .\n65\nFig. 5 Leonardo, Drilling\nmotion of fire, Codex\nArundel, fol. 145v,\nCourtesy of British Library,\nLondon\nwhere we can see a very interesting attempt to develop a basin refrigerator system\nby separating the basin and the stove to prevent a thermal shock in the neck of the\ncucurbit (fol. 989r) (Fig. 6). For the refrigerator system Leonardo also developed an\nalembic lid with a chamber along its external surface where fresh water could flow\ninside (Fig. 7). Scholars had already discussed this very modern solution in order to\nunderstand its pertinence to a real alembic or to an unrealized design.33 The\nwireframe representation leads us to think that it was made of glass, but its\nmorphological complexity tends to suggest it was made by hammering soldered\ncopper.\nIn folio 216r of Codex Atlanticus we have another interesting study for casting a\ntraditional alembic (Fig. 8). This is the only source known to me with specifications\nabout creating and conserving an alembic. First of all, writes Leonardo, the model\nof the alembic in turned wood has to be built, and then it has to be refined with clay\nwool-cloth clippings. The external plaster mold has to be built on it in two valves.\n33\nReti, \u201cArti chimiche di Leonardo\u201d (1952a; 1952b).\n\nPages 89:\n66\nA. Bernardoni\nFig. 6 Leonardo, Basin\nrefrigerator alembic, Codex\nAtlanticus, fol. 989r,\nBiblioteca Ambrosiana,\nMilan (Image taken from\nCodex Atlanticus, Hoepli\nedition, Milan, 1894\u20131904)\nFig. 7 Leonardo,\nRefrigerated Alembic,\nCodex Atlanticus, fol.\n1114br, Biblioteca\nAmbrosiana, Milan (Image\ntaken from Codex\nAtlanticus, Hoepli edition,\nMilan, 1894\u20131904)\nThere is no other information and it is impossible to know the casting material\nLeonardo thought he would use. It was most likely copper or bronze, however, we\ncannot exclude the use of glass. Leonardo, in fact, preferred using glass alembics\nbecause of the possibility of observing condensation phenomena inside them. In a\nfragmentary sheet of Manuscript E he specifies:\nSuch is the nature of the condensation of the walls, constraining the space enclosed between\nthem, as is that of the enclosed [space], multiplied by the enclosing [walls]. This is proved\nwith the smoke generated in an enclosed space, as is seen in the glass vessels with which\ndistilling is done, in which it is easily recognized at what part of this transparent vase the\nsmoke condenses more or less and . . .34\n34\nLeonardo, Manuscript E, 8 [fol. 3r, I].\n\nPages 90:\nArtisanal Processes and Epistemological Debate in the Works of Leonardo. . .\n67\nFig. 8 Leonardo, Basin refrigerator alembic, Codex Atlanticus, fol. 216r, Biblioteca Ambrosiana,\nMilan (Image taken from Codex Atlanticus, Hoepli edition, Milan, 1894\u20131904)\nThe use of glass in the casting is very difficult because of its viscosity. The only\nreference to this technique in Leonardo is in relation to the casting of a glass bell jar\nin Manuscript B, in which he says he uses a metallurgical furnace to pour the glass\ninside a very hot mold: \u201cPrepare the furnace in the usual manner, that is, for\nbombards, and when the glass is melted, pour it into the red\u2013hot form.\u201d35\n35\nLeonardo, Manuscript B, 19 [fol. 10v, IV].\n\nPages 91:\n68\nA. Bernardoni\nMoreover, on the other pages of his manuscripts Leonardo confirms his propensity to use glass for various apparatuses such as the transparent box to see the\nmotion of the flowing water through a hole in the bottom (Codex Atlanticus, fol.\n219r) or motion generated in a mass of water by a surface wave (Codex Hammer,\nfol. 9r and 29v). We also find a transparent glass cylinder for studying the flame of a\ncandle (Codex Atlanticus, fol. 226r) and, most of all, the drawing of a glassdrinking horn with which Leonardo says he is able to observe free atoms moved\nby the water.36 The topic of atoms in Leonardo is a very articulated question,\ninterwoven with the theme of the essere del nulla (being of nothing), for which\nthere is a specific literature.37 Here it is enough to make a brief reference to this\ntheme, just to stress it could also be discussed in terms of the observation of\nphysical-chemical phenomena. Leonardo\u2019s atoms do not have qualitative-chemical\nspecifications but they have to be interpreted as physical primary matter particles\nexisting in nature without any chemical or physical properties. They are the result\nof substance consumption and we can see them in the form of dust, smoke, or as\ntiny, undefined pieces of matter:\nThe air that successively surrounds a moving object moving through it makes various\nmotions within itself. This can be seen in the dust particles [attimi] found in the sphere of\nthe sun, when they penetrate through some window into an obscure location, and when a\nstone is thrown into these dust particles [attimi], along the length of this solar ray, you can\nsee the dust particles [attimi] turning about at that location where the path made by the\nmoving object was filled in again by the air, as has been proved in the fifth.38\nAnd again:\nIt follows therefore, from what I say, that the atmosphere acquires its blueness from the\nparticles which catch the luminous rays of the sun. We may also observe the difference\nbetween the atoms of dust and those of smoke seen in the sun\u2019s rays as they pass through the\nchinks of the walls in dark rooms, that the one seems the color of ashes, and the other\u2014the\nthin smoke\u2014seems of a most beautiful blue.39\nEach substance could be destroyed by separation, going beyond the limits of\nminima naturalia\u2014the last specification of substantial form on matter. Significantly, even though the sentence is partially crossed out, Leonardo writes the\n\u201catoms are not a part of the substance from which they are born,\u201d as he wants to\ntake under consideration the possibility of the strangeness of the inner composition\nof substance.40 Atoms as we will also see in the case of Biringuccio are something\n36\n\u201cVetro a cio\u0300 che si vegga li attimi nell\u2019acqua che si move.\u201d (Leonardo, Codex Atlanticus,\nfol. 589v).\n37\nMarinoni, \u201cL\u2019Essere del nulla,\u201d 209\u201332; Bernardoni, \u201cElementi, sostanze naturali,\u201d 99\u2013104;\nBeretta, \u201cLeonardo and Lucretius\u201d; and Nanni, \u201cLucrezio.\u201d\n38\nLeonardo, Manuscript F, 138 [fol. 74v, IV]. The phenomenon is also noted on folio 87r, see\nLeonardo, Manuscript F, 158\u20139 [fol. 87r]; and on folio 78r, see Leonardo, Manuscript L, 89\u201390\n[fol. 78r].\n39\nLeonardo, Codex Hammer, 4A, fol. 4r.\n40\n\u201cattimo non e\u0300 parte della materia donde nascie.\u201d (Leonardo, Codex Arundel, fol. 176v).\n\nPages 92:\nArtisanal Processes and Epistemological Debate in the Works of Leonardo. . .\n69\nmaterial, which could be seen or imagined observing natural or artificial phenomena of matter transformation.\nBiringuccio\u2019s Pirotechnia and the Knowledge of Nature\nBiringuccio, like Leonardo, placed the focus of his consideration on the possibility\nof increasing knowledge and reproducing processes of nature through the technological codification emerging from alchemical tradition and from his professional\nactivity. In the Pirotechnia (Fig. 9), we again find the two traditional contradictory\nopinions on alchemy: negative towards the alchemists who hide their art behind\nesotericism, magic, alchemical authority and those who practice chemical process\nwithout ratio and empirical control, and positive in relation to the improvement of\nmankind:\nHow many alchemists have I heard lamenting, one because by some unfortunate chance he\nhad spilled his whole composition in the ashes; another because he had been deceived by\nthe excessive strength of the fire, so that the substance of his materials had been burned and\nthe spirits inadvertently allowed to escape; and yet another because he had poor and feeble\nmaterials! In a word, one for one reason, and one for another, in order to hide either their\ndeception or their ignorance, all defend themselves and make excuses for their art.41\nMoreover, after marking his distance from false and sophistic alchemy,\nBiringuccio returned to what he called \u201ctrue alchemy\u201d with very positive opinions,\ntalking about it as a philosophical and technological activity grounded on reason\nand empirical experimentation which, even when following the illusory goal of\nmetal transmutation or the perfective and healthy elixir, discovered new substances,\nmedicine and technological processes. After a rational and empirical codification of\nthe chemical process and substance discovered and prepared by it, true alchemy\nremained to Biringuccio the most important \u201cart\u201d for studying the secrets of nature:\nThus, in short, it can be said in conclusion that this art [alchemy] is the origin and\nfoundation of many other arts, wherefore it should be held in reverence and practiced.\nBut he who practices it must be ignorant neither of cause nor of natural effects, and not too\npoor to support the expense. Neither should he do it from avarice, but only in order to enjoy\nthe fine fruits of its effects and the knowledge of them, and that pleasing novelty which it\nshows to the experimenter in operation.42\nBiringuccio considered alchemy a legitimate knowledge grounded on experimental and speculative activity. This is an important epistemological step for\nartisanal processes because alchemy was no longer seen as a utilitarian art but as\na disinterested activity carried out by men to enjoy the fruits of their knowledge.\n41\nBiringuccio, Pirotechnia (1942), 41. For the Italian, see Biringuccio, De la pirotechnia (1977),\nfol. 7v.\n42\nBiringuccio, Pirotechnia (1942), 337. For the Italian, see Biringuccio, De la pirotechnia (1977),\nfol. 123v.\n\nPages 93:\n70\nA. Bernardoni\nFig. 9 V. Biringuccio, De\nla pirotechnia, Venice,\n1540, frontispiece; courtesy\nof Museo Galileo Library\n\u201cPhilosophical alchemy,\u201d as Biringuccio calls it, is for him a scientific discipline\nthat directly studies natural phenomena and could be seen as an alternative\napproach to the theoretical speculation of scholastic philosophy.43 Alchemy was\nhere presented and discussed from a technical and theoretical point of view and,\neven more importantly, it was classified as a specific art of fire placed close to, but\nseparate from, the arts of distillation. This is an important distinction from which\nBiringuccio\u2019s original approach to the arts of fire emerges and that distinguishes\nhim, for instance, from Georg Agricola who, at almost the same time, wrote his De\nre metallica in which he outlined the general arts of metals related to mining and\nmetallurgy. Biringuccio expanded his perspective to include all the arts of fire,\nincluding, artillery, making gunpowder, acids preparation, pottery, goldsmithing,\nfireworks, generic distillation arts, as well as alchemy.44 If we accept his conditions,\n43\nSee Biringuccio, De la pirotechnia (1914), 27\u201340; Perifano, \u201cAlchimie\u201d; Smith, Body of the\nArtisan, 143\u20134; and Bernardoni, La conoscenza del fare, 669.\n44\nBiringuccio, De la pirotechnia (1977), fol. 123r\u20134r.\n\nPages 94:\nArtisanal Processes and Epistemological Debate in the Works of Leonardo. . .\n71\nalchemy and pyrotechnics are not in contradiction, rather, in so far as they are used\nin the same philosophical concepts and the same operational practices, alchemy\ncould be considered a continuity of the arts of fire. Biringuccio\u2019s Pirotechnia, in\nfact, could be interpreted as a sort of normalized alchemy, that is, an \u2018engineering\ndiscipline\u2019 founded on a general theory of matter and in codified operative practices\nto control the power of fire during matter transformation processes.\nThe importance of Biringuccio\u2019s book in the history of metallurgy and chemistry\nis well known. Along with Agricola\u2019s works, it was a most important source for\nmany chemical technology devices and processes.45 Although Pirotechnia was\nessentially a practical treatise, the author\u2019s intention was to go beyond the writing\ndown of know how towards a theoretical consideration about the nature and\ntransformation of substances. As can be seen in many passages of the book,\nBiringuccio developed independent ideas on these issues, combining different\npositions on the mineral world from philosophical and alchemical traditions, in\nparticular from Albertus Magnus\u2019s (1193\u20131280) De mineralibus, and the Summa\nperfectionis of Pseudo-Geber, but he was also influenced by the new concept of\nsubstantial form introduced by Augustine Nifo (1473\u2013c.1538) in the Aristotelian\ntradition of Padua, who considered the essence of natural substances to be the order\nand internal structure of sub-particles.46\nBiringuccio classified mineral substances on the basis of their macroscopic\nproperties observable during metallurgical processes and starting from these he\ntried to give a description of metal into the frame of a general theory to explain their\nmutual physical-chemical relationship. His model of perfection was gold; its gloss,\ncompact structure, resistance to oxidation and calcination made this the mineral\nsubstance with the most balanced internal particle structure:\n[. . .] Its original and peculiar materials are none other than elemental substances, with the\nquantity and quality of each proportioned equally one to the other and very finely purified.\nFrom this union of elements which are of equal force there is born a pleasing and perfect\nelemental mixture, and then after fermentation and decoction the elements finally become\nfixed, permanent, and joined together in such a union that they are almost inseparable, so\nthat by the power of the heavens or of time or of the order of the most wise Nature, or by all\nthese together, these substances are converted into that metallic body called gold.47\nThe other metals, starting with silver, have an internal growing disequilibrium\nthat manifests itself by observing external physical-chemical properties. This classification becomes even more evident with the category of semi-minerals in which,\nfor example, Biringuccio includes substances such as mercury, marcasite, sulphur\nand antimony that seem to be progressive stages of the metal generation process\n45\nSee Biringuccio, De la pirotechnia (1914), VII\u2013XXV, and De la pirotechnia (1977), pp. I\u2013\nXXXIII; and Cipriani, \u201cAgricola e Biringuccio.\u201d\n46\nEmerton, Scientific Reinterpretation of Form, 97\u2013105; and Bernardoni, La conoscenza del fare,\n71\u2013114.\n47\nBiringuccio, Pirotechnia (1942), 26\u20137. For the Italian, see Biringuccio, De la pirotechnia\n(1977), fol. 1r.\n\nPages 95:\n72\nA. Bernardoni\ndefined on the basis of their appearance and their chemical-physical behavior\nduring empirical manipulation. The case of antimony is one of the best examples:\n[It] is a composition made by Nature to create a metallic mineral that is overflowing with an\nundue proportion of hot and dry material and with its moisture poorly mixed, with an effect\nwholly contrary to the composition of metals. Therefore, it comes to be, like quicksilver, a\nmineral deformity and monstrosity among metals. Or it might be a material that is about to\nreach metallic perfection, but is hindered from doing so by being mined too soon. I am\npersuaded to this opinion by seeing in it so many parts similar to those of metals [. . .].48\nAs we have seen in Leonardo, Biringuccio also used specifically designed tools\nand metallurgical processes to observe natural phenomena and to underline the\nimportance of empirical research.\nDescribing the several aspects of distillation technology, Biringuccio talked\nabout the possibility of going beyond the physical dimension of the four elements\nin order to reach an undetermined status of matter, identified by the alchemist as the\n\u201cquintessence\u201d:\nBy means of the art of distillation many say that you proceed from element to element,\nmaking them subtle and separating them so that at the end the materials are reduced to such\na point that they no longer have a resemblance to any of the substances of the four elements.\nAnd then they say that they have reduced them to one, which they call the Quintessence.49\nBiringuccio did not believe that this physical status of matter could be identified\nwith quintessence but it is very interesting to read the possibility of having a\nphysical dimension of matter beyond the four-elementary specifications achieved\nthrough a technological process.\nBiringuccio did not give an organic and systematic explanation of this status of\nmatter but, as in the case of Leonardo, from his book arises a corpuscular concept of\nmatter in which he spoke about atoms, giving examples of their physical dimension.\nParticularly interesting was his analogical explanation of the compactness and the\nregular size of the particle of gold as it is seen in the separating process separating\nsilver and gold: silver turns into solution with nitric acid while gold remains behind\nas a solid particle: \u201cIt [goes] here and there, wandering about in the water like\natoms. Because these are tiny and subtle things, they reduce the power of water.\u201d50\nAtoms are light, small and are driven by water in casual motion. Even though it is\nimpossible to talk about atomistic conception of nature, it is very interesting to note\nhow Biringuccio does not limit himself to technical considerations about metallurgical process but, uses his tools (cucurbit, alembic, furnaces etc.) to observe matter\ntransformation processes in order to have a deeper understanding of natural and\nartificial substances.\n48\nBiringuccio, Pirotechnia (1942), 91. For the Italian, see Biringuccio, De la pirotechnia (1977),\nfol. 27v.\n49\nBiringuccio, Pirotechnia (1942), 340\u20131. For the Italian, see Biringuccio, De la pirotechnia\n(1977), fol. 125r.\n50\nBiringuccio, Pirotechnia (1942), 200. For the Italian, see Biringuccio, De la pirotechnia (1977),\nfol. 71r.\n\nPages 96:\nArtisanal Processes and Epistemological Debate in the Works of Leonardo. . .\n73\nThe atomic dimension evoked by Biringuccio seems to involve the physical\nstatus of matter and, even though he did not have a clear position on it, his reference\nto the genesis of substances reveals to us his interest and involvement on the\nproblem of generation and diversification of natural species:\nI am sure that you understand that of all the things created by the most high God Himself or\nby Nature at His command, not one\u2014even though it be an atom or the smallest worm\u2014has\nbeen produced without some particular gift.51\nThese incursions into problematic topics of natural philosophy are clear evidence of Biringuccio\u2019s willingness to participate in the debate on natural and\ntechnological phenomena. Apart from the question of how this would fit into the\ncontext of natural philosophy and the genesis of substance, it is evident that the\nproblem of the composition of substances was a debated topic and Biringuccio is\none of the best examples of this interest in the first half of the sixteenth century.52\nThis concept of atoms\u2014as opposed to the minima naturalia developed in the\nAristotelian medieval tradition\u2014seems to be close to the Democritean concept,\neven though Biringuccio, and Leonardo, rejected the mechanical explication of\nsubstance composition by continuing to talk of Aristotelian elements as a final part\nof substance constituents. As can be seen in the cases of Leonardo and Biringuccio,\nRenaissance technicians seem to consider atoms as pieces of undetermined matter,\nas something existing beyond the limits of the physical dimension that could not be\nreached by mechanical (by cutting) or chemical (by distillation) means. A very\ninteresting partial confirmation of this comes from the curious assumption during\nthe late Middle Ages that atoms were the last division of the official weight set. We\nfind this in the writings of Antonio Averlino detto il Filarete (c.1400\u2013c.1469),\nGirolamo Cardano and Gerolamo Cattaneo and atoms were used as units of linear\nmeasurement in several North Italian towns. This remained in place until the\nintroduction of the modern metric system.53\nBiringuccio\u2019s scepticism about alchemists and the bookish tradition drove him\nto stress the importance of factual verification in the advancement of learning as the\ntrue foundation of the knowledge of nature. Biringuccio\u2019s idea of knowledge as\nbased on factual verification is to be situated in the technical culture of which he is\npart. To stress the importance of factual knowledge he underlines the importance of\n51\nBiringuccio, Pirotechnia (1942), 114. For the Italian, see Biringuccio, De la pirotechnia (1977),\nfol. 36v.\n52\nFor a more detailed analysis of Biringuccio\u2019s concept of \u2018atoms\u2019 and his theory of matter, see\nBernardoni, La conoscenza del fare, 78\u2013105. For a general analysis on the medieval and Renaissance concept of \u2018matter\u2019, see Murdoch, \u201cMinima Naturalia\u201d; and Grellard & Robert, Atomism.\n53\nFilarete, Trattato di architettura, 470; Cardano, Practica arithmetica, ch. LXIII; and Cattaneo,\nDell\u2019arte del misurare. For a detailed analysis of the units of measure use in Italy from the Middle\nAges to the modern era, see Frangioni, Metrologia lombarda.\n\nPages 97:\n74\nA. Bernardoni\nevidence from nature whatever its origin (books, nature, oral tradition) and\nconcludes:\nI have done this willingly in order that you may acquire more learning and because I am\ncertain that new information always gives birth in men\u2019s mind to new discoveries and so to\nfurther information. Indeed I am certain that it is the key that arouses intelligent men and\nmakes them, if they wish, arrive at certain conclusions that they could not have reached\nwithout such a foundation, or even nearly approached.54\nThe advancement of learning for Biringuccio depends on continual \u201cdiscoveries\u201d and \u201cnew information,\u201d that results in two processes of knowledge: the first\nleads to the creation of new artificial products and the second determines the\nincrease in and deepening of knowledge about nature. As is clear from this passage,\nhuman creativity can be awakened by practical problems. And once such \u201cnew\ninformation\u201d is integrated into the wealth of knowledge this can lead humanity to\nthe opening of new paths of research.55\nEvery discovery and invention is a step that could widen our knowledge horizons, each new observation and each new technique, even if they remain unused for\na long time, belong to the growing social legacy that Leonardo da Vinci called\n\u201csecond nature.\u201d56 The notitie nuove is the lifeblood of the process by which man\npenetrates the secrets of nature, thus creating a substrate of knowledge that stimulates minds to look for new inventions. It would certainly be excessive and\ninappropriate to evoke the positivist image of a Biringuccio paladin of the experimental method; however, the epistemological instances placed in Pirotechnia do\ngrant the Siennese engineer a place in the tradition of technical knowledge in the\nlate fifteenth and early sixteenth centuries.57\nBibliography\nAbbri, Ferdinando. 2009. Lawrence M. Principe (ed.), Chymists and Chymistry: Studies in the\nHistory of Alchemy and Early Modern Chemistry. Minerva 47: 115\u2013118.\nAgricola, Georg. 1556. De re metallica. Basel: Froben.\nAgricola, Georg. [1556] 1950. De re metallica, eds. and trans. Herbert Clark Hoover and Lou\nHenry Hoover. New York: Dover Publications Inc.\nAnonymous. [1520 (?)] 1949. Probierbu\u0308chlein. In Bergwerk- und Probierb\u20ac\nuchlein, eds. and trans.\nAnneliese Gru\u0308nhaldt Sisco and Cyril Stanley Smith. New York: The American Institute of\nMining and Metallurgical Engineers.\n54\nBiringuccio, Pirotechnia (1942), 28. For the Italian, see Biringuccio, De la pirotechnia (1977),\nfol. 1v.\n55\nSee Bernardoni, La conoscenza del fare, 55\u201363; and Rossi, I filosofi e le macchine, 49\u201352.\n56\nSee Kemp, \u201c\u2018Wrought by No Artist\u2019s Hand\u201d\u2019; Long, Objects of Art/Objects of Nature, 63\u201382;\nand Findlen, Inventing Nature, 297\u2013323.\n57\nSee, Mieli, \u201cVannoccio Biringuccio\u201d; Guareschi, \u201cVannoccio Biringuccio\u201d, 432\u20138; Galluzzi,\nMechanical Marvels, 11\u201318; and Smith, Body of the Artisan, 142\u20139.\n\nPages 98:\nArtisanal Processes and Epistemological Debate in the Works of Leonardo. . .\n75\nArnaud, E.R. 1655. Introduction a la chymie, ou a la vraye physique, ou\u0300 le lecteur treuvera la\ndefinition de toutes les operations de la chymie, etc. Lyon: Claude Post.\nAvicenna. 1927. De congelatione et conglutinatione lapidum, being sections of the Kitab al-Shifa/\nthe Latin and Arabic texts, eds. and trans. Eric John Holmyard and Desmond Christopher\nMandeville. Paris: Paul Geuthner.\nBeretta, Marco. 2010. Leonardo and Lucretius. In Rinascimento, ed. Leo S. Olschki, Series 2, Vol.\nXLIX, 341\u2013372.\nBernardoni, Andrea. 2007. La quaestio de alchimia nel De la pirotechnia di Vannoccio\nBiringuccio. In Atti del XII convegno nazionale di storia e fondamenti della chimica,\ned. Franco Calascibetta and Luigi Cerruti, 261\u2013276. Rome: Accademia dei LX.\nBernardoni, Andrea. 2009. Leonardo and the Equestrian Monument for Francesco Sforza: The\nStory of an Unrealized Monumental Sculpture. In Leonardo da Vinci and the Art of Sculpture,\ned. Gary M. Radke, 95\u2013135. Atlanta: High Museum of Art, Yale University Press.\nBernardoni, Andrea. 2011a. Elementi, sostanze naturali, atomi: osservazioni sulla struttura della\nmateria nel Codice Arundel di Leonardo. In Il Codice Arundel di Leonardo: ricerche e\nprospettive, Atti del Convegno Universita\u0300 degli Studi di Bergamo, eds. Andrea Bernardoni\nand Giuseppe Fornari, 77\u2013105. Poggio a Caiano: CB edizioni.\nBernardoni, Andrea. 2011b. La conoscenza del fare, ingegneria arte e scienza nel De la\npirotechnia di Vannoccio Biringuccio. Rome: L\u2019Erma di Bretschneider.\nBernardoni, Andrea. 2012. Leonardo and the \u2018Chemical Arts\u2019. Nuncius 27: 11\u201355.\nBernardoni, Andrea. 2013. Esplosioni, fusioni e trasmutazioni: il monumento a Francesco Sforza e\nle arti chimiche in Leonardo: disegni di Leonardo dal Codice Atlantico. Novara: De Agostini.\nBiringuccio, Vannoccio. [1540] 1914. De la pirotechnia, ed. Aldo Mieli. Bari: Societa\u0300 tipografica\neditrice Barese.\nBiringuccio, Vannoccio. [1540] 1942. The Pirotechnia of Vannoccio Biriniguccio: The Classic\nSixteenth-Century Treatise on Metals and Metallurgy, eds. and trans. Cyril Stanley Smith and\nMarta Teach Gnudi. New York: Dover Publications.\nBiringuccio, Vannoccio. [1540] 1977. De la pirotechnia, ed. Adriano Carugo. Milan: Il Polifilo.\nBoni, Bruno. 1954. Leonardo da Vinci e l\u2019alchimia. Milan: Societa Editrice la Chimica.\nBrioist, Pascal. 2013. Le\u0301onard de Vinci, homme de guerre. Paris: Alma Editeur.\nBrugnoli, Maria Vittoria. 1954. Documenti, notizie e ipotesi sulla scultura di Leonardo. In\nLeonardo, saggi e ricerche, ed. Achille Marazza, 359\u2013389. Rome: Istituto poligrafico dello\nStato.\nCalvesi, Maurizio. 1986. Arte e alchimia. Florence: Giunti.\nCardano, Girolamo. 1539. Practica arithmetica et misurandi singularis. Milan: Bernardini\nCalusci.\nCardano, Girolamo. 1558. De rerum varietate. Avignon: M. Vicentinum.\nCattaneo, Girolamo. 1572. Dell\u2019arte del misurare. Brescia: Marchetti.\nCipriani, Curzio. 1995. De re metallica e De la pirotechnia: Agricola e Biringuccio. In Atti e\nmemorie dell\u2019Accademia Toscana di Scienze e Lettere \u201cLa Colombaria\u201d 46: 9\u201330.\nConticelli, Valentina. 2012. L\u2019alchimia e le arti: la Fonderia degli Uffizi, da laboratorio a stanza\ndelle meraviglie. Livorno: Sillabe.\nDi Pasquale Salvatore. 1987. Leonardo, Brunelleschi and the Machinery of the Construction Site.\nIn Leonardo da Vinci Engineer and Architect, ed. Paolo Galluzzi, 163\u2013181. Montreal: Montreal Museum of Fine Arts.\nEmerton, Norma E. 1984. The Scientific Reinterpretation of Form. Ithaca/London: Cornell University Press.\nFerino-Pagden, Sylvia, Francesca del Torre Scheuch, Elisabetta Fedda, and Mino Gabriele. 2003.\nParmigianino e la pratica dell\u2019alchemica. Milan: Silvana editoriale.\nFilarete, Antonio Averlino detto il. 1972. Trattato di architettura, eds. A.M. Finoli and L. Grassi.\nMilan: Il Polifilo.\n\nPages 99:\n76\nA. Bernardoni\nFindlen, Paula. 2002. Inventing Nature: Commerce, Art and Science in the Early Modern Cabinet\nof Curiosities. In Merchants and Marvels: Commerce, Science and Art in Early Modern\nEurope, eds. Pamela H. Smith and Paula Findlen, 297\u2013323. New York: Routledge.\nFrangioni, L. 1992. Milano e le sue misure, appunti di metrologia lombarda fra Tre e Quattrocento. Napoli: Edizioni Scientifiche Italiane.\nFrosini, Fabio. 1997. Pittura come filosofia: note su \u2018spirito\u2019 e \u2018spirituale\u2019. Achademia Leonardi\nVinci. Journal of Leonardo Studies & Bibliography of Vinciana 10: 35\u201359.\nFrosini, Fabio. 2011. Il concetto di forza in Leonardo da Vinci. In Il Codex Arundel di Leonardo:\nricerche e prospettive, eds. Andrea Bernardoni and Giuseppe Fornari, 115\u2013128. CB Edizioni:\nPoggio a Caiano.\nGabriele, Mino. 1988. Le incisioni alchemico-metallurgiche di Domenico Beccafumi. Florence:\nGiulio Giannini and Figlio.\nGalison, Peter. 1999. Trading Zone: Coordinating Action and Belief. In The Science Studies\nReader, ed. Mario Biagioli, 137\u2013160. New York: Routledge.\nGalluzzi, Paolo. 1993. Portraits of Machines in Fifteenth-Century Siena. In Non-Verbal Communication in Science Prior to 1900, ed. Renato Mazzolini, 53\u201390. Florence: Olschki.\nGalluzzi, Paolo. 1997. Mechanical Marvels: Invention in the Age of Leonardo. Florence: Giunti.\nGalluzzi, Paolo. 2008. Leonardo da Vinci\u2019s Concept of \u201cNature\u201d: \u201cMore Cruel Stepmother than\nMother\u201d. In Aurora Torealis, eds. M. Beretta, K. Grandin, and S. Lindqvist, 13\u201329. Sagamore\nBeach: Science History Publications.\nGarzoni, Tommaso. 1996. La piazza universale di tutte le professioni del mondo, eds. Paolo\nCherchi and Beatrice Collina. Turin: Einaudi.\nGaurico, Pomponio. [1504] 1999. De sculptura, ed. Paolo Cutolo. Naples: Edizioni Scientifiche\nItaliane.\nGombrich, Ernst H. 1986. Leonardo and the Magicians: Polemics and Rivalry. In New Light on\nOld Masters. Studies in the Art of the Renaissance IV, ed. Ernst H. Gombrich, 61\u201388. Oxford:\nPhaidon.\nGrellard, C., and A. Robert. 2009. Atomism in Late Medieval Philosophy and Theology. Leiden/\nBoston: Brill.\nGuareschi, Icilio. 1904. Vannoccio Biringuccio e la chimica tecnica. In Supplemento annuale alla\nenciclopedia di chimica scientifica e industriale colle applicazioni all\u2019agricoltura ed industrie\nagronomiche, ed. Icilio Guareschi, 419\u2013448. Turin: UTET.\nHalleux, Robert. 1986. L\u2019Alchimiste et l\u2019essayeur. In Die Alchemie in der europ\u20ac\naischen Kulturund Wissenschaftsgeschichte, ed. Christoph Meinel, 187\u2013211. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.\nHalleux, Robert. 2009. Le savoir de la main: savants et artisans dans l\u2019Europe pre\u0301-industrielle.\nParis: Armand Colin.\nHannaway, Owen. 1986. Laboratory Design and the Aim of Science: Andreas Libavius versus\nTycho Brahe. Isis 77: 585\u2013610.\nHooykaas, R. 1953. La the\u0301orie corpusculaire de Le\u0301onard de Vinci. In Le\u0301onard de Vinci et l\u2019expe\u0301\nrience scientifique au XVIe sie\u0300cle. Colloques internationaux du Centre National de la\nRecherche Scientifique, 163\u2013170. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.\nKemp, Martin. 1995. \u2018Wrought by No Artist\u2019s Hand\u2019: The Natural, the Artificial, the Exotic, and\nthe Scientific in Some Artifacts from the Renaissance. In Reframing the Renaissance: Visual\nCulture in Europe and Latin America, 1450\u20131650, ed. Claire Farago, 177\u2013196. New Haven:\nYale University Press.\nKemp, Martin. 2006. Leonardo da Vinci: The Marvellous Works of Nature and Man. Oxford:\nOxford University Press.\nKiang, Dawson. 1997. Leonardo and Alchemy: A Bibliographical Note. Achademia Leonardi\nVinci. Journal of Leonardo Studies & Bibliography of Vinciana 10: 199\u2013201.\nLennep, Jacques van. 1985. Alchimie: contribution a\u0300 l\u2019histoire de l\u2019art alchimique. Brussels:\nCre\u0301dit Communal de Belgique.\nLeonardo da Vinci. 1973\u20131980. Codice Atlantico, ed. Augusto Marinoni, 24 vols. Florence:\nGiunti.\n\nPages 100:\nArtisanal Processes and Epistemological Debate in the Works of Leonardo. . .\n77\nLeonardo da Vinci. 1978\u20131980. Corpus of the Anatomical Studies in the Collection of Her Majesty\nthe Queen at Windsor Castle, eds. Kenneth D. Keele and Carlo Pedretti, 3 vols. London:\nJohnson Reprint Company.\nLeonardo da Vinci. 1980\u20131985. Corpus degli studi anatomici nella collezione di Sua Maesta\u0300 la\nRegina Elisabetta II nel Castello di Windsor, eds. Kenneth D. Keele and Carlo Pedretti, 3 vols.\nFlorence: Giunti Barbera.\nLeonardo da Vinci. 1998. Il codice Arundel 263 nella British Library, ed. Carlo Pedretti, trans.\nCarlo Vecce. Florence: Giunti.\nLeonardo da Vinci. 2001. The Manuscripts of Leonardo da Vinci in the Institut de France:\nManuscript L, ed. and trans. John Venerella. Milan: Castello sforzesco.\nLeonardo da Vinci. 2002a. The Manuscripts of Leonardo da Vinci in the Institut de France:\nManuscript E, ed. and trans. John Venerella. Milan: Castello sforzesco.\nLeonardo da Vinci. 2002b. The Manuscripts of Leonardo da Vinci in the Institut de France:\nManuscript F, ed. and trans. John Venerella. Milan: Castello sforzesco.\nLeonardo da Vinci. 2003. The Manuscripts of Leonardo da Vinci in the Institut de France:\nManuscript B, ed. and trans. John Venerella. Milan: Ente raccolta vinciana.\nLong, Pamela O. 2001. Openness, Secrecy, Authorship: Technical Arts and the Culture of\nKnowledge from Antiquity to the Renaissance. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.\nLong, Pamela O. 2002. Objects of Art/Objects of Nature: Visual Representation and the Investigation of Nature. In Merchants and Marvels: Commerce, Science and Art in Early Modern\nEurope, eds. Pamela H. Smith and Paula Findlen, 63\u201382. New York: Routledge.\nLong, Pamela O. 2011. Artisan/Practitioners and the Rise of the New Sciences, 1400\u20131600.\nCorvallis: Oregon State University Press.\nMaccagni, Carlo. 1993. Leggere, scrivere e disegnare la \u201cscienza volgare\u201d nel Rinascimento.\nAnnali della Scuola Normale Superiore di Pisa, serie III 23(2): 631\u2013676.\nMarinoni, Augusto. 1960. \u201cL\u2019Essere del nulla.\u201d I Lettura Vinciana. Vinci, Bibliotheco\nLeonardiana, 26 April 1960. Florence: Barbe\u0300ra.\nMartino\u0301n-Torres, Marcos. 2007. The Tools of the Chymist. Archeological and Scientific Analyses\nof Early Modern Laboratories. In Chymists and Chymistry: Studies in the History of Alchemy\nand Early Modern Chemistry, ed. Lawrence M. Principe, 149\u2013163. Sagamore Beach: Science\nHistory Publications.\nMichelangelo Buonarroti. 1965. Il carteggio di Michelangelo, eds. Giovanni Poggi, Paola\nBarocchi, and Renzo Ristori. Florence: Sansoni.\nMieli, Aldo. 1914. Vannoccio Biringuccio ed il metodo sperimentale. Isis 2: 91\u201399.\nMurdoch, J.E. 2001. The Medieval and Renaissance Tradition of Minima Naturalia. In Late\nMedieval and Early Modern Corpuscular Matter Theories, eds. C. Lu\u0308thy, J.E. Murdoch, and\nW.R. Newman, 91\u2013131. Leiden: Brill.\nNanni, Romano. 2011. Lucrezio: \u201cun ennesimo candidato per la \u2018filosofia\u2019 di Leonardo\u201d. Giornale\ncritico della filosofia italiana 3: 463\u2013491.\nNewman, William R. 1989. Technology and Alchemical Debate in the Late Middle Ages. Isis 80:\n423\u2013445.\nNewman, William R. 2004. Promethean Ambitions: Alchemy and the Quest to Perfect Nature.\nChicago: University of Chicago Press.\nNewman, William R., and Lawrence M. Principe. 1998. Alchemy vs. Chemistry: The Etymological Origins of a Historiographic Mistake. Early Science and Medicine 3: 32\u201365.\nNummedal, Tara E. 2007. Alchemy and Authority in the Holy Roman Empire. Chicago: University\nof Chicago Press.\nPartington, James Riddick. 1961. A History of Chemistry, vol. 2. London: Macmillan.\nPedretti, Carlo. 1978. Leonardo architetto. Milan: Electa.\nPerifano, Alfredo. 1996. L\u2019Alchimie dans de la pirotechnia de Vannoccio Biringuccio. Revue des e\u0301\ntudes italiennes 42: 189\u2013202.\nPerifano, Alfredo. 1997. L\u2019Alchimie a\u0300 la Cour de Come Ier de Me\u0301dicis: savoirs, culture et\npolitique. Paris: Honore\u0301 Champion.\n\nPages 101:\n78\nA. Bernardoni\nPrincipe, Lawrence M., and Lloyd DeWitt. 2002. Transmutations: Alchemy in Art. Philadelphia:\nChemical Heritage Foundation.\nReti, Ladislao. 1952a. Le arti chimiche di Leonardo da Vinci. La chimica e l\u2019industria 34(7): 721\u2013\n743.\nReti, Ladislao. 1952b. Le arti chimiche di Leonardo da Vinci. La chimica e l\u2019industria 34(11):\n655\u2013667.\nRossi, Paolo. 1971. I filosofi e le machine 1400\u20131700. Milan: Feltrinelli.\nScaglia, Giustina. 1981. Alle origini degli studi tecnologici di Leonardo. XX Lettura Vinciana.\nFlorence: Barbera Editore.\nSchneider, Wolfgang. 1949. Das chemische Wissen Leonardo da Vincis und seine Bedeutung f\u20ac\nur\ndie\nEND OF PARTIAL SUMMARY: EXPLAIN TO THE USER that this document is too long and we only summarized from page 80 to page 101 out of a total of 220. Ask if they want to continue the summary or search the document.\n]"]}

{"result":["[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=83\nPages: 83\nof mortals have their existence and their death.25\nHe argued that the inability of alchemy to deliver its claims of transmutation is\ndue to the impossibility of developing a technology able to reproduce the natural\ngenesis of substantial forms. As Avicenna had already claimed in his Latin translation of Kitab ash-Shifa\u2019 (De congelatione et conglutinatione lapidum), Leonardo\nstressed man\u2019s perception of the purity of natural elements was neither highly\ndeveloped nor sensitive enough to be able to precisely quantify the proportions\nrequired to produce the substantial form of different metals.26\nIf we assume within the tradition of Italian \u2018artist-engineers\u2019 this \u2018epistemological approach\u2019 was oriented to separate true and false alchemy and culminated in the\nwork of Biringuccio, then the manuscripts of Leonardo could be seen as one of the\nmain sources of \u2018chemical technologies\u2019 from the end of fifteenth and beginning of]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=81\nPages: 81\nactivity: heating systems, smelting furnaces, cucurbits, alembics and balanced\nscales (Fig. 1).21 Alchemists used the same technological apparatuses and devices\nas artisans and alchemical research was often carried out along with chemical and\nmetallurgical activities, for instance, at the Fonderia by the Medici family in\nFlorence, or several other places in sixteenth- and seventeenth-century Europe.22\nLeonardo and the \u2018Chemical\u2019 Arts\nVery rarely have historians seen Leonardo from the perspective of his direct\ninvolvement in the chemicals arts. Apart from Ladislao Reti and a few others,\nLeonardo\u2019s observations and studies on matter transformation are usually seen in\nthe context of his natural philosophy, with few references to his practical involvement as a painter and engineer during his entire career, including his vision and\nrelationship with occult science and alchemy.23\nIf we focus our attention on Leonardo\u2019s notes and drawings about substance]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=81\nPages: 81\nIf we focus our attention on Leonardo\u2019s notes and drawings about substance\ntransformation, he can be seen as a witness and a protagonist of the epistemological\n20\nFor more information on the relation between artists and alchemy during the Renaissance, see\nPrincipe & DeWitt, Transmutations; Newman, Promethean Ambitions, 115\u201363; Ferino-Pagden\net al., Parmigianino, 15\u20137; Calvesi, Arte e alchimia; Lennep, L\u2019art alchimique; and Conticelli,\nAlchimia e le arti, 13\u201333.\n21\nGabriele, Incisioni alchemico-metallurgiche.\n22\nOn the Medici\u2019s Fonderia, see this volume: Kieffer and Beretta. On the relation of alchemy and\nmetallurgical industry, see Nummedal, Alchemy and Authority, 119\u201346.\n23\nFor Leonardo\u2019s scientific and philosophical studies of natural phenomena and his theory of\nmatter, see Boni, Vinci e l\u2019alchimia, 401\u20135; Hooykaas, \u201cThe\u0301orie corpusculaire de Le\u0301onard\u201d;\nGombrich, \u201cLeonardo and the Magicians\u201d; Vasoli, Leonardo e l\u2019alchimia, 69\u201377; Kiang,]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=81\nPages: 81,82\nGombrich, \u201cLeonardo and the Magicians\u201d; Vasoli, Leonardo e l\u2019alchimia, 69\u201377; Kiang,\n\u201cLeonardo and Alchemy\u201d; Frosini, \u201cPittura come filosofia\u201d; Kemp, Leonardo da Vinci, 293\u2013\n329; Galluzzi, \u201cVinci\u2019s Concept of \u2018Nature\u2019,\u201d; Beretta, \u201cLeonardo and Lucretius\u201d; Bernardoni,\n\u201cElementi, sostanze naturali\u201d; and Nanni, \u201cLucrezio.\u201d For Leonardo\u2019s involvement in the chemical arts, see Schneider, Chemische Wissen Leonardo, 40\u20133, 87\u201392; Partington, History of Chemistry, vol. II, 1\u20138; Taylor, \u201cVinci et la chimie\u201d; Reti, \u201cArti chimiche di Leonardo\u201d (1952a; 1952b);\nBernardoni, \u201cLeonardo and the \u2018chemical arts\u2019,\u201d and Esplosioni, fusioni e trasmutazioni, 38\u201341.\nArtisanal Processes and Epistemological Debate in the Works of Leonardo. . .\n59\nFig. 1 D. Beccafumi,\nFoundry workshop;\ncourtesy of Accademia\nCarrara, Bergamo\ntension between mechanical arts and alchemy during the Renaissance period. His\nattention was specifically focused on alchemy\u2019s claims to overturn the relationship]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=83\nPages: 83,84\n26\nThese admonitions against alchemy, presented for the first time by Avicenna, were known\nduring the Middle Ages as sciant artifices, see Avicenna, De congelatione et conglutinatione\nlapidum, 53\u20135; Newman, \u201cTechnology and Alchemical Debate.\u201d; and Halleux, \u201cAlchimiste et\nl\u2019essayeur,\u201d 211.\nArtisanal Processes and Epistemological Debate in the Works of Leonardo. . .\n61\nLeonardo\u2019s manuscripts are one of the best sources to study the chemical\nequipment of Renaissance. His tireless sketching during his entire career produced\na very large and uncommon collection of manuscripts that allow us to understand\nand visualize many tools, instruments and chemical processes studied, developed\nand used during the Renaissance.\nAn activity that was a sort of flywheel in involving Leonardo in the study of the\nmany aspects of bronze casting was the project of the Equestrian monument for\nFrancesco Sforza. This was a very large bronze statue that was never cast but]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=16\nPages: 16,15\ncarved out space for true alchemy as one of the arts of fire. Artisanal workshops,\nsuch as Andrea Verrocchio\u2019s (c.1435\u20131488) in which Leonardo da Vinci (1452\u2013\n1519) apprenticed or Leonardo\u2019s own workplace, shared a material culture with\nalchemical laboratories. As we have already pointed out, artisans used similar\nequipment and performed \u201cchemical\u201d operations. However, Bernardoni argues,\nBiringuccio made the claim that these artisans were the true experts on matter,\nmaterials and material transformation and that artisanal \u201cchemical\u201d operations were\nthe key to natural knowledge.\nOne of the readers of Biringuccio\u2019s Pirotechnia was Johannes Mathesius (1504\u2013\n1565), a Lutheran preacher in St. Joachimsthal, the center of an important mining\ndistrict. In her contribution to this volume, Henrike Haug analyzes Mathesius\u2019s\n19\nHassenstein, Das Feuerwerckbuch, 45\u20136. For translation and discussion, see Werrett,\nFireworks, 28.\n20\nSmith, Body of the Artisan. esp. 95\u2013127.\nIntroduction\nxv]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=78\nPages: 78\nthe transformation of substances.10 Leonardo da Vinci (1452\u20131519) and\nBiringuccio, the key figures in this article, were both involved in this debate and\nmaturely and responsibly distanced themselves from the theoretical speculation of\n8\nFor Biringuccio and alchemy see, Perifano, \u201cAlchimie,\u201d 189\u2013202, Alchimie a\u0300 la Cour; and\nBernardoni, \u201cQuaestio de alchimia.\u201d On the medieval alchemical debate, see Newman, \u201cTechnology and Alchemical Debate.\u201d On artisanal and vernacular epistemology, especially for the German\narea, see Smith, Body of the Artisan, 59\u201393, 142\u201351.\n9\n\u201cet in somma egli parlava dell\u2019archimia molto confuso, et inresolutissimo come si vede ancora\nche egli fa ne\u2019 suoi scritti, dove molte volte la loda, e molte la biasima, ma finalmente nel principio\ndel nono libro anch\u2019egli, come tutti gli altri, per non essere forse ne\u0301 piu\u0300 di loro, ne\u0301 da meno, non\nche gli confessi in verita\u0300, che la sia possibile del tutto, ma conforta gli uomini ad esercitarla in]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=160\nPages: 160\njewelry were the arts most closely connected with alchemy. Their connections\ninspired Francesco to create a new decorative scenario, dominated by alchemy,\nby which illustrate the relation between arts and nature.\nFrancesco was extremely keen, even more than his father, to promote the study\nof the natural sciences and the arts related to them. His passion for the chemical arts\nwas so strong that in 1560, when he was only 19, he was told off by his brother\nGiovanni for attending the works of the fonderia all day long.33 It was Francesco\nwho, in September 1569, charged the architect, engineer and inventor Bernardo\nBuontalenti (1531\u20131608), who had been one of his teachers since 1550, to oversee\nthe construction of Bortolo\u2019s new glass furnace and a new fonderia.34 Francesco I\nalso exploited Buontalenti\u2019s versatile skills in the works of the fusion of precious]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=100\nPages: 100,101\nPedretti, Carlo. 1978. Leonardo architetto. Milan: Electa.\nPerifano, Alfredo. 1996. L\u2019Alchimie dans de la pirotechnia de Vannoccio Biringuccio. Revue des e\u0301\ntudes italiennes 42: 189\u2013202.\nPerifano, Alfredo. 1997. L\u2019Alchimie a\u0300 la Cour de Come Ier de Me\u0301dicis: savoirs, culture et\npolitique. Paris: Honore\u0301 Champion.\n78\nA. Bernardoni\nPrincipe, Lawrence M., and Lloyd DeWitt. 2002. Transmutations: Alchemy in Art. Philadelphia:\nChemical Heritage Foundation.\nReti, Ladislao. 1952a. Le arti chimiche di Leonardo da Vinci. La chimica e l\u2019industria 34(7): 721\u2013\n743.\nReti, Ladislao. 1952b. Le arti chimiche di Leonardo da Vinci. La chimica e l\u2019industria 34(11):\n655\u2013667.\nRossi, Paolo. 1971. I filosofi e le machine 1400\u20131700. Milan: Feltrinelli.\nScaglia, Giustina. 1981. Alle origini degli studi tecnologici di Leonardo. XX Lettura Vinciana.\nFlorence: Barbera Editore.\nSchneider, Wolfgang. 1949. Das chemische Wissen Leonardo da Vincis und seine Bedeutung f\u20ac\nur\ndie Geschichte der Chemie, Die Pharmazie 4.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=78\nPages: 78\nninth book He, no better and no worse than anyone else, confesses his hopes it could\nactually be possible after all, and cautions the men to exercise patience and have reverence\nfor the magnificent goals, and miraculous works of nature. Although in the Chapter of Gold\nhe so degraded Alchemy with very weak reasons, as one who had had a great deal of\nexperience, and not a lot of science, since he did not even know that Alberto and many\nothers had written of it. But still, we are obliged him for having been, beyond his great\npractical experience, a very loyal and truthful man, and most liberal of his treasures.9\nThe most important consequence of this inclusion of Biringuccio as a protagonist in the alchemical debate happens in the mid-sixteenth century; the Quaestio de\nalchimia can no longer exclude the position of the technician directly involved in\nthe transformation of substances.10 Leonardo da Vinci (1452\u20131519) and]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=157\nPages: 157\npatron a keen interest in alchemy, was meant to have taken part\u2014but his premature\ndeath prevented his involvement. In the Studiolo the connection between alchemy\nand the chemical arts was exalted. The iconographic itinerary conceived by\nBorghini was situated in a sequence on the upper part of the wall where paintings\ndevoted to thermal baths, the discovery of gun powder, a glass works, a goldsmith\u2019s\nworkshop, alchemists and a bronze foundry were located; at the room\u2019s two ends\nwere two statues, portraying Vulcan and Apollo. On the lower part of the wall a\nmythological scene recalled Francesco I\u2019s alchemical and artistic interests.27 I\nwould like to stress the importance of a few elements directly or indirectly related\nto the chemical arts. What first strikes you in this particular arrangement is the\nproximity of Stradano\u2019s famous painting of Francesco I\u2019s alchemical laboratory and\nGiovanni Maria Butteri\u2019s (1540\u20131606) painting illustrating the glass works (Figs. 3\nand 4).]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=100\nPages: 100\nMedieval and Early Modern Corpuscular Matter Theories, eds. C. Lu\u0308thy, J.E. Murdoch, and\nW.R. Newman, 91\u2013131. Leiden: Brill.\nNanni, Romano. 2011. Lucrezio: \u201cun ennesimo candidato per la \u2018filosofia\u2019 di Leonardo\u201d. Giornale\ncritico della filosofia italiana 3: 463\u2013491.\nNewman, William R. 1989. Technology and Alchemical Debate in the Late Middle Ages. Isis 80:\n423\u2013445.\nNewman, William R. 2004. Promethean Ambitions: Alchemy and the Quest to Perfect Nature.\nChicago: University of Chicago Press.\nNewman, William R., and Lawrence M. Principe. 1998. Alchemy vs. Chemistry: The Etymological Origins of a Historiographic Mistake. Early Science and Medicine 3: 32\u201365.\nNummedal, Tara E. 2007. Alchemy and Authority in the Holy Roman Empire. Chicago: University\nof Chicago Press.\nPartington, James Riddick. 1961. A History of Chemistry, vol. 2. London: Macmillan.\nPedretti, Carlo. 1978. Leonardo architetto. Milan: Electa.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=92\nPages: 92\nremained to Biringuccio the most important \u201cart\u201d for studying the secrets of nature:\nThus, in short, it can be said in conclusion that this art [alchemy] is the origin and\nfoundation of many other arts, wherefore it should be held in reverence and practiced.\nBut he who practices it must be ignorant neither of cause nor of natural effects, and not too\npoor to support the expense. Neither should he do it from avarice, but only in order to enjoy\nthe fine fruits of its effects and the knowledge of them, and that pleasing novelty which it\nshows to the experimenter in operation.42\nBiringuccio considered alchemy a legitimate knowledge grounded on experimental and speculative activity. This is an important epistemological step for\nartisanal processes because alchemy was no longer seen as a utilitarian art but as\na disinterested activity carried out by men to enjoy the fruits of their knowledge.\n41\nBiringuccio, Pirotechnia (1942), 41. For the Italian, see Biringuccio, De la pirotechnia (1977),]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=92\nPages: 92\nBiringuccio\u2019s Pirotechnia and the Knowledge of Nature\nBiringuccio, like Leonardo, placed the focus of his consideration on the possibility\nof increasing knowledge and reproducing processes of nature through the technological codification emerging from alchemical tradition and from his professional\nactivity. In the Pirotechnia (Fig. 9), we again find the two traditional contradictory\nopinions on alchemy: negative towards the alchemists who hide their art behind\nesotericism, magic, alchemical authority and those who practice chemical process\nwithout ratio and empirical control, and positive in relation to the improvement of\nmankind:\nHow many alchemists have I heard lamenting, one because by some unfortunate chance he\nhad spilled his whole composition in the ashes; another because he had been deceived by\nthe excessive strength of the fire, so that the substance of his materials had been burned and\nthe spirits inadvertently allowed to escape; and yet another because he had poor and feeble]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=156\nPages: 156\nIn this process of reconfiguring Florentine arts and crafts, alchemy played an\nexceedingly important role, both as a fashionable scientific discipline with not\nparticularly strong academic ties and as a useful set of experimental practices in\nwhich several crafts helped artisans quench their thirst for innovation and realize\ntheir socio-cultural ambitions. I shall not explore here the spread of interest in\nalchemy in Florence at beginning of the sixteenth century, a theme already effectively surveyed in Alfredo Perifano\u2019s book on Cosimo I\u2019s alchemical passion.24\nI shall instead take into consideration the development of alchemy in the Palazzo\nVecchio\u2019s fonderia and the Casino, sites where its relation with the chemical arts\nand technological innovations became apparent. Indeed, it is my impression that if\nwe want to understand the metamorphosis of the sciences in Florence during this\ncrucial period we should look at disciplines, such as alchemy, which had few]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=92\nPages: 92,93\n41\nBiringuccio, Pirotechnia (1942), 41. For the Italian, see Biringuccio, De la pirotechnia (1977),\nfol. 7v.\n42\nBiringuccio, Pirotechnia (1942), 337. For the Italian, see Biringuccio, De la pirotechnia (1977),\nfol. 123v.\n70\nA. Bernardoni\nFig. 9 V. Biringuccio, De\nla pirotechnia, Venice,\n1540, frontispiece; courtesy\nof Museo Galileo Library\n\u201cPhilosophical alchemy,\u201d as Biringuccio calls it, is for him a scientific discipline\nthat directly studies natural phenomena and could be seen as an alternative\napproach to the theoretical speculation of scholastic philosophy.43 Alchemy was\nhere presented and discussed from a technical and theoretical point of view and,\neven more importantly, it was classified as a specific art of fire placed close to, but\nseparate from, the arts of distillation. This is an important distinction from which\nBiringuccio\u2019s original approach to the arts of fire emerges and that distinguishes]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=175\nPages: 175\nI use the term arts and artists in association with Florentine guilds. Although in Renaissance\nFlorence there is no normative definition for alchimia most writers use the term to refer to an art by\nwhich it is possible to transmute metals, counterfeit gems and prolong life. Accordingly I apply the\nsame definition to alchemy. It should also be noted that people engaged at the Medici court in\nalchemical pursuits were called stillatori.\nBibliography\n1604. Apparato della Fonderia dell\u2019Illustrissimo et Eccellentissimo Signor Don Antonio. Nel\nquale si contiene tutta l\u2019Arte spagirica di Teofrasto Paracelso, & sue medicine. E altri segreti\nbellissimi. Florence: Biblioteca Nazionale Centrale di Firenze, Magliabecchiana XVI, 63, vols.\nI\u2013IV.\n1980. La corte il mare i mercati. La rinascita della Scienza. Editoria e Societa\u0300. Astrologia, magia e\nalchimia, ed. Firenze e la Toscana dei Medici nell\u2019Europa del Cinquecento. Florence: Electa.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=89\nPages: 89\nBiblioteca Ambrosiana,\nMilan (Image taken from\nCodex Atlanticus, Hoepli\nedition, Milan, 1894\u20131904)\nFig. 7 Leonardo,\nRefrigerated Alembic,\nCodex Atlanticus, fol.\n1114br, Biblioteca\nAmbrosiana, Milan (Image\ntaken from Codex\nAtlanticus, Hoepli edition,\nMilan, 1894\u20131904)\nThere is no other information and it is impossible to know the casting material\nLeonardo thought he would use. It was most likely copper or bronze, however, we\ncannot exclude the use of glass. Leonardo, in fact, preferred using glass alembics\nbecause of the possibility of observing condensation phenomena inside them. In a\nfragmentary sheet of Manuscript E he specifies:\nSuch is the nature of the condensation of the walls, constraining the space enclosed between\nthem, as is that of the enclosed [space], multiplied by the enclosing [walls]. This is proved\nwith the smoke generated in an enclosed space, as is seen in the glass vessels with which]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=92\nPages: 92\nthe spirits inadvertently allowed to escape; and yet another because he had poor and feeble\nmaterials! In a word, one for one reason, and one for another, in order to hide either their\ndeception or their ignorance, all defend themselves and make excuses for their art.41\nMoreover, after marking his distance from false and sophistic alchemy,\nBiringuccio returned to what he called \u201ctrue alchemy\u201d with very positive opinions,\ntalking about it as a philosophical and technological activity grounded on reason\nand empirical experimentation which, even when following the illusory goal of\nmetal transmutation or the perfective and healthy elixir, discovered new substances,\nmedicine and technological processes. After a rational and empirical codification of\nthe chemical process and substance discovered and prepared by it, true alchemy\nremained to Biringuccio the most important \u201cart\u201d for studying the secrets of nature:]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=76\nPages: 76\nDebate in the Works of Leonardo Da Vinci\nand Vannoccio Biringuccio\nAndrea Bernardoni\nAbstract During the Renaissance the field of the chemical arts was characterised\nby the complex identity of its protagonists, who would hardly recognize themselves\nin traditional socio-cultural and professional definitions. Although it is anachronistic to speak of chemistry as a discipline, during the late fifteenth and early sixteenth\ncenturies it is possible to outline an area of interest around the transformation\nprocesses of substances in which various fields of theoretical and practical knowledge intersect. In this cultural context the figures of Leonardo da Vinci and\nVannoccio Biringuccio stand out as, in addition to their experimental activity,\nthey became the promoters of a general reform of chemical arts and natural\nphilosophy.\n\u2018Chemical\u2019 Arts During the Renaissance\nTalking about chemistry in relation to the Renaissance calls for historiographical]"]}

{"result":["[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=16\nPages: 16\nof scholarly culture, played an increasingly important role in laboratories and\nworkshops. In these workplaces, a sort of hybrid figure was at work, with one\nfoot in artisanal culture and another in scholarly culture and impossible to categorize in mutually exclusive categories of the scholar and the craftsman.23 Certain\ntypes of crafts\u2014glassmaking, gold- and silversmithing, and porcelain production\u2014\nseem to have been particularly prone to exchanges between artisanal and scholarly\nalchemical cultures. By the seventeenth century, the expertise of some glassmakers,\nsilver- and goldsmiths and producers of porcelain was just as based in the worlds of\nalchemical and bookish learning as it was grounded in hands-on work in the\nlaboratory.24 Lawrence Principe and Morgan Wesley discuss two examples of\nsuch arts: silversmithing and porcelain production, respectively.\n21\nFor \u2018trading zones\u2019 between artisanal and scholarly cultures, see Long, Artisan/Practitioners.\nKlein, \u201cChemical Experts.\u201d\n23]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=121\nPages: 121\ncraftsmen\u2019, introduced by Edgar Zilsel in 1942, who started to interact with\nacademics and humanists, is just one of the many important texts dealing with the\nexchange between the artes mechanicae and the artes liberales from the fifteenth\ncentury onwards, a theory which was recently elaborated and confirmed by Pamela\nH. Smith in The Body of the Artisan in 2004 and by Pamela O. Long in Artisan/\nPractitioners in 2011.45 Again in 2004, Davis Baird\u2019s contribution on \u2018thing\nknowledge\u2019 focussed on a \u2018philosophy of scientific instruments\u2019 and distinguishes\nwithin this epistemology of the artificial object three forms in which an instrument\ncan represent knowledge: firstly as model, secondly as product and medium of\nworking knowledge and thirdly as embodiment of \u2018encapsulated knowledge\u2019. His\ntheoretical system not only applied to scientific instruments, but can also be adapted\nto other artificially created objects, for instance to the Handsteine. In this field, it]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=17\nPages: 17,18\nat Renaissance courts. Laboratories and artisanal workshops shared a material\n25\nSee also Pietsch, \u201cTschirnhaus,\u201d and Klein, \u201cChemical Experts.\u201d\nIntroduction\nxvii\nculture. In fact, in the early modern period, they were often so similar in terms of the\ninstruments they contained that they carried the same name. This material culture\nremained largely the same. A change took place at another level: the increasing\npresence of books and texts in laboratories and workshops populated by figures who\nmerged artisanal and scholarly cultures. This book suggests that this shift in\nworkshop culture facilitated the epistemic exchanges between alchemists and producers of the decorative arts.\nAcknowledgements\nThis book was conceived and written in dialogue with an exhibition project \u201cArt\nand Alchemy. The Mystery of Transformation.\u201d The exhibition is on view at the\nMuseum Kunstpalast in Du\u0308sseldorf from April to August 2014. I would like to]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=16\nPages: 16,15\nFireworks, 28.\n20\nSmith, Body of the Artisan. esp. 95\u2013127.\nIntroduction\nxv\nsermons to reveal conceptions of the origin and formation of ores for which\nMathesius drew equally on natural philosophy and alchemy and on the artisanal\nknowledge of the local miners and goldsmiths. Following one of the goldsmiths\u2019\nmost prized objects, a so-called Handstein, into the Kunstkammer, Haug shows that\nthis knowledge also reached elite collectors. They valued Handsteine for the\nmetallogenetic knowledge they embodied, thereby endorsing the shifting epistemic\nstatus of the arts.\nEpistemic Changes Between Artisans and Alchemists\nBiringuccio and Mathesius\u2019s St. Joachimsthal are examples of persons and places\nof exchange between scholarly cultures (in which learning is based on reading and\nwriting) and artisanal cultures (in which learning is based on doing).21 The laboratories created in Medici Florence, discussed in the chapters by Kieffer and]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=80\nPages: 80\nvisited in Milan that discusses the organization of the workshop and the artisans\u2019\nawareness of the technological and epistemological value of their works:\n[. . .] So that whoever entered that shop and saw the activity of so many persons would, I\nthink, believe as I did that he had entered an Inferno, nay, on the contrary, a Paradise, where\nthere was a mirror in which sparkled all the beauty of genius and the power of art.19\nBiringuccio underlined the frenetic and very organized work in the workshop\nstressing the beauty of the mind of the artisans and the power of art. The harmonious cooperation between artisans and the plain consciousness of the processes of\nthe art transformed the hell of hard and dirty metallurgical work into the heaven of\nthe pursuit of the artistic goal. This oxymoron referred to the infernal and paradisiacal condition of art, exalting the extremely difficult process in which raw\nmaterial is transformed into artifact, giving back an important social value to]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=59\nPages: 59,60\ncontemporary workshop or laboratory practices.48\nFirst of all, the textual environment and the diversity of the subjects bound\ntogether with the artistic and alchemical recipes in a same book, lead to the\nconclusion that these compilations were mainly read by scholars primarily interested in natural philosophy and were not intended for contemporary practical use.\nMoreover, it has been frequently stated that craft practices were transmitted orally,\n48\nClarke, \u201cCodicological Indicators\u201d; and Neven, Recettes artistiques, 16\u201323.\n36\nS. Neven\nfrom the master to the apprentice.49 A large number of the manuscripts of this study\nresult from copying and compilation processes undertaken by scribes. As they were\ncopied in a context outside the workshop or the laboratory, these recipes were not\nrevised and, consequently, conveyed an anachronistic technical tradition that\nbecame more and more outdated.\nSuch observations seem to argue against the view that sees these books as]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=80\nPages: 80,79\n14\nLong, Artisan/Practitioners, 94\u20136. See also, Galison, \u201cTrading Zone.\u201d\n15\nHannaway, \u201cLaboratory Design.\u201d\n12\nArtisanal Processes and Epistemological Debate in the Works of Leonardo. . .\n57\n(1513), in Biringuccio\u2019s Pirotechnia, and in Agricola\u2019s De re metallica.16 Further\nnascent signs of a distinct and autonomous chemical laboratory with purpose-built\n\u2018chemical\u2019 equipment can be found in the more general context of the Renaissance\nartist\u2019s workshop culture. Here, together with the fine arts such as painting, sculpture, architecture and jewelry making, metal carpentry, and gun casting, we find\noperations that use substance transformation, such as distillation and sublimation.\nThere is evidence that even the most important names in the history of art were\ninvolved in such workshop activities, for instance Michelangelo (1475\u20131564),\nwhose Florentine workshop, as mentioned in his correspondence with his brother,\nwas involved in generic metal carpentry such as the casting and welding of]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=81\nPages: 81\n58\nA. Bernardoni\nIn the Renaissance technical tradition the bottega (workshop) was a place for\nwork and not yet a space to conduct modern scientific research. Research on\ntechnology and natural phenomena was carried out thanks to the curiosity and the\nfree enterprise of each individual artist; workshop mentality was conservative and\ntechnical knowledge was usually applied to technologically consolidated goals. The\nworkshop was a place to produce specific artistic, technological and pharmacological objects yet it offered artisans the tools and the experiences to venture beyond\nthe \u2018normalized activity\u2019. We know several cases of painters involved in alchemy,\nsuch as Parmigianino (1503\u20131540), Cosimo Rosselli (d.1578), Lorenzo Lotto\n(1480\u20131556/7) and Domenico Beccafumi (1484\u20131551).20 From the latter we have\na series of engravings that represent some aspects of \u2018chem-alchemical\u2019 laboratory\nactivity: heating systems, smelting furnaces, cucurbits, alembics and balanced]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=180\nPages: 180\nepistemic exchanges or collaborations on the level of practical or theoretical\nknowledge.\nDocumented examples of extended collaborations or exchanges between artisans and natural philosophers would be both more interesting and more informative\nfor mapping out the domains and dynamics of early modern alchemical practice. A\npromising locus for such study is to be found particularly among gold- and\nsilversmiths. On the one hand, their trade regularly involved chymical processes\nsuch as assaying, refining, and so forth, and they were thus more or less conversant\nwith chymical substances (acids, salts, metals, amalgams, etc.) and chymical\noperations (fusion, quartation, distillation, etc.) and would frequently have\nmaintained workshops equipped with the necessary equipment (furnaces, flues,\nfuel, retorts, crucibles, etc.) needed for chymical work generally. On the other\nhand, the basic materials of their artisanal labors\u2014gold and silver\u2014held a central\n5\nSee Smith, Body of the Artisan.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=154\nPages: 154\na city \u201cfounded upon the guilds and trade.\u201d17\nThis new configuration of professional relations led to a thorough reassessment\nof the locations where cultural and economic activities were conducted, articulating\nin an experimental key the arts, which previously had been regarded as the fruit of\nindividual dexterity rather than the outcome of a deliberate cultural program. In\nmany cases the architectural changes were not apparent, since many kinds of\nartisans (e.g., the goldsmiths) kept on using the same premises they had occupied\nfor generations. However, even in such examples of apparent continuity the arts\nwere seen as vectors for change. This perception found visual expression in a\nvolume of engravings, based on drawings by Jan van der Straet (1523\u20131605)\n(or Giovanni Stradano), that bore the significant title Nova Reperta, commissioned\nby the Florentine academician Luigi Alamanni (1558\u20131603) around the end of the]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=122\nPages: 122\ncreative processes. But it is hard to prove that the goldsmith followed the same\nideas as the alchemist, because hardly any artisans recorded their approach in\nwritten form: the goldsmith\u2019s knowledge is working, not (alchemical) codified\nknowledge; an object, such as the Handstein might count as product, evidence\nand proof, but will always remain speechless and therefore will never entirely serve\n(in our modern understanding) as an eloquent advocate to support this assumption.\nThird, encapsulated knowledge: A work of art such as the Handstein is not\n\u2018narrative\u2019 in the sense that it develops one argument and discusses it in paratactical\nform. Such an artwork visualizes the variety of knowledge\u2014the theological, the\nmontanistic, the alchemical\u2014in a synoptical way. Rather than developing an\nargument in a logical manner, it emphasizes the interdependencies of different\nareas. But this corresponds with the interconnected nature of these fields, as]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=122\nPages: 122\nareas. But this corresponds with the interconnected nature of these fields, as\npreviously outlined: early modern concepts of metallogenesis must be understood\nas a mixture of religious connotations, their dependency on antique montanistic\ntheories as well as on alchemical lore adopted through medieval Islamic mediation.\nBeyond that, a work of art communicates in different ways than a text. The object\ntransforms the know how of the artisan as it is performed in the working process and\nblends it with the lore of the scholar into embodied, visual knowledge. This\nknowledge, encapsulated in the work of art can then be exhibited in the surroundings of the ruler, in his Kunstkammer collection as well as in processions and\ncourtly festivities.47 It is\u2014apart from instruments to measure natural phenomena,\nwhich Baird puts in the focus of his analysis \u2014not \u2018useful\u2019 in the sense that it\nembodied knowledge which can be used to gain and widen existent knowledge. But]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=17\nPages: 17\nchemistry and skilled in porcelain production. Remarkably, the success of porcelain\nproduction was due to the introduction of techniques of investigation, which did not\nbelong to the traditional potter\u2019s skills, but to chymistry, which had overlapped with\nthe worlds of metallurgy and assaying for centuries.\nGrill, Dwight, and Tschirnhaus are only a few of the numerous examples of\nglassmakers, silver- and goldsmiths and producers of porcelain whose expertise\nwas both based in the worlds of bookish learning and grounded in hands-on work.\nDifficult to categorize as either craftsman or scholar, they are responsible for\nepistemic exchanges between the artisanal and the scholarly worlds. The rise of\nthese hybrid artisan-scholars was connected to the establishment of laboratories in\nwhich art technologies and alchemy were brought together, the first of these being\nat Renaissance courts. Laboratories and artisanal workshops shared a material\n25]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=129\nPages: 129\n107\nFig. 2 Armoury\nworkshops, fresco,\nLudovico Buti. 1588\n(Courtesy of the Uffizi,\nFlorence)\ndisplayed under the Giovian series of portraits. In parallel, a restoration workshop\nfor sculptures and a painters\u2019 workshop completed the series of know how. Finally,\na garden planted with botanic samples on the roof of the Loggia dei Lanzi echoed\nback to the fonderia, situated on the same floor.1\nAccording to the archival sources, Francesco I had the original idea of putting\ntogether collections and workshops (Ferdinando I\u2019s brother and predecessor). He\nhad the necessary philosophical education and cultural knowledge to imagine and\nexecute this complex yet coherent project.2 From the beginning it was the prince\nalchemist\u2019s brainchild to establish a program gathering naturalia, artificialia and\nknow how of all kinds under one roof, that would work together like an \u2018encyclopaedic machine\u2019, a kind of monumental clock. The analogy between mechanics and]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=145\nPages: 145\nthey represent a concentration of the know how of the court workshops and their\ndistribution was a good way to promote Tuscan art. Finally, because their efficacy\nwas widely accepted and praised, they were an excellent means for Ferdinando I to\ncreate a regular, dependant and indebted clientele.\nAs a result, the fonderia played a double role: it manufactured finished products\n(the remedies) to be distributed and it produced raw materials for the other\nworkshops of the Uffizi. This second part was very important for Ferdinando I\u2019s\nproject, because the workshops were arranged so that they could collaborate, one\nwith the other, avoiding the need to bring expensive and indubitably less well\nadapted materials from outside.\n\u201cFor knowledge itself was a power whereby he knoweth.\u201d51 The Medici always\nconsidered knowledge the key to power in politics. The Grand Duke Cosimo I had]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=12\nPages: 12,13\nwas exclusively produced in the workshops of the Casino.\nIn sum, Renaissance courts established spaces where artisanal workshops and\nlaboratories were brought together facilitating the circulation of materials, people\nand knowledge between the worlds of craft (today\u2019s decorative arts) and alchemy.\nArt Technologies and Knowledge of Material Transformation\nLaboratories were not only the workplaces of transmutational alchemists. The Uffizi\nand the Casino had little in common with the workplaces of alleged goldmakers\ndestined to fail and bring their families to financial ruin, as famously depicted by\nPieter Brueghel the Elder (c.1525\u20131569) (Fig. 2). Just as the spaces known as\nlaboratories encompassed the workplaces of artisans laboring at furnaces and\nxii\nIntroduction\nFig. 2 Pieter Brueghel the Elder, The Alchemist\u2019s Family: Al-gemist, 1558 (Courtesy of the\nKupferstichkabinett, Staatliche Museen zu Berlin)\nusing materials and chemical procedures to make both everyday items and objects]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=125\nPages: 125,126\nBetween Maker and Nature. Configurations 12: 1\u201340.\nSmith, Pamela H. 2004. The Body of the Artisan. Art and Experience in the Scientific Revolution.\nChicago: University of Chicago Press.\nStorczer, Stephan G. 1992. Die Handsteinsammlung des Kunsthistorischen Museums in Wien.\nVienna: Diplomarbeit Universita\u0308t Wien.\nArtificial Interventions in the Natural Form of Things: Shared. . .\n103\nStrieder, Peter. 1967. Erzstufe. In Reallexikon zur deutschen Kunstgeschichte 5: 408\u2013418. Stuttgart: Metzler.\nSuhing, Lothar. 1986. \u2018Philosophisches\u2019 in der fru\u0308hneuzeitlichen Berg- und Hu\u0308ttenkunde.\nMetallogenese und Transmutation aus der Sicht montanistischen Erfahrungswissens. In Die\nAlchemie in der europ\u20ac\naischen Kultur- und Wissenschaftsgeschichte, ed. Christoph Meinel,\n293\u2013314. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.\nTheophilus Presbyter. 1847. An Essay Upon Various Arts in Three Books, by Theophilus, Called\nalso Rugerus, Priest and Monk, Forming an Encyclopedia of Christian Art of the Eleventh]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=16\nPages: 16,15\ncarved out space for true alchemy as one of the arts of fire. Artisanal workshops,\nsuch as Andrea Verrocchio\u2019s (c.1435\u20131488) in which Leonardo da Vinci (1452\u2013\n1519) apprenticed or Leonardo\u2019s own workplace, shared a material culture with\nalchemical laboratories. As we have already pointed out, artisans used similar\nequipment and performed \u201cchemical\u201d operations. However, Bernardoni argues,\nBiringuccio made the claim that these artisans were the true experts on matter,\nmaterials and material transformation and that artisanal \u201cchemical\u201d operations were\nthe key to natural knowledge.\nOne of the readers of Biringuccio\u2019s Pirotechnia was Johannes Mathesius (1504\u2013\n1565), a Lutheran preacher in St. Joachimsthal, the center of an important mining\ndistrict. In her contribution to this volume, Henrike Haug analyzes Mathesius\u2019s\n19\nHassenstein, Das Feuerwerckbuch, 45\u20136. For translation and discussion, see Werrett,\nFireworks, 28.\n20\nSmith, Body of the Artisan. esp. 95\u2013127.\nIntroduction\nxv]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=198\nPages: 198\nsource of random observations made casually in the course of exercising their\ncraft, they initiated projects, conducted experiments, made innovations, read\nlearned treatises, and communicated or collaborated with more traditionallyeducated or more natural philosophically inclined members. While someone like\nAnthoni Grill was undoubtedly an exceptional figure, he nevertheless serves to\nillustrate one end of the spectrum of possible social and intellectual positions\noccupied by early modern gold- and silversmiths. His active participation and\neventual notoriety and success indicate the social boundaries that were crossed\nwithin the network, a situation that also existed with Caillart and Roussel and others\nin the French context as well. These examples thus begin to resituate the role of\nsuch artisan-chymists within the larger ambit of chymistry. While not erased, the\nneat division of artisan and natural philosopher emerges considerably blurred.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=9\nPages: 9,10\n\u201cmade by alchemy\u201d according to Cennino Cennini (c.1370\u2013c.1440). However, this\n3\n4\nDavis, \u201cRenaissance Inventions.\u201d\nMander, Het schilder-boeck, 199v. Translation in Melion, Shaping the Netherlandish Canon, 79.\nIntroduction\nix\nbook is not concerned with travelling materials and shared material culture.\nShifting the focus from painting to the decorative arts, this book scrutinizes\nepistemic exchanges between producers of the arts of fire and alchemists.\nLaboratories and Workshops\nWhat can the evolution of the laboratory, and its shifting relation to the artisanal\nworkshop, tell us about epistemic exchanges between the arts and alchemy? In the\nfifteenth and sixteenth centuries, the term laboratorium uniquely referred to workplaces in which \u201cchemical\u201d operations were performed: smelting, combustion,\ndistillation, dissolution, and precipitation. Matteo Martelli has convincingly\nshown that no such term was available in Antiquity.5 The Papyri, containing recipes]"]}

{"result":["[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=83\nPages: 83\nof mortals have their existence and their death.25\nHe argued that the inability of alchemy to deliver its claims of transmutation is\ndue to the impossibility of developing a technology able to reproduce the natural\ngenesis of substantial forms. As Avicenna had already claimed in his Latin translation of Kitab ash-Shifa\u2019 (De congelatione et conglutinatione lapidum), Leonardo\nstressed man\u2019s perception of the purity of natural elements was neither highly\ndeveloped nor sensitive enough to be able to precisely quantify the proportions\nrequired to produce the substantial form of different metals.26\nIf we assume within the tradition of Italian \u2018artist-engineers\u2019 this \u2018epistemological approach\u2019 was oriented to separate true and false alchemy and culminated in the\nwork of Biringuccio, then the manuscripts of Leonardo could be seen as one of the\nmain sources of \u2018chemical technologies\u2019 from the end of fifteenth and beginning of]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=81\nPages: 81,82\nGombrich, \u201cLeonardo and the Magicians\u201d; Vasoli, Leonardo e l\u2019alchimia, 69\u201377; Kiang,\n\u201cLeonardo and Alchemy\u201d; Frosini, \u201cPittura come filosofia\u201d; Kemp, Leonardo da Vinci, 293\u2013\n329; Galluzzi, \u201cVinci\u2019s Concept of \u2018Nature\u2019,\u201d; Beretta, \u201cLeonardo and Lucretius\u201d; Bernardoni,\n\u201cElementi, sostanze naturali\u201d; and Nanni, \u201cLucrezio.\u201d For Leonardo\u2019s involvement in the chemical arts, see Schneider, Chemische Wissen Leonardo, 40\u20133, 87\u201392; Partington, History of Chemistry, vol. II, 1\u20138; Taylor, \u201cVinci et la chimie\u201d; Reti, \u201cArti chimiche di Leonardo\u201d (1952a; 1952b);\nBernardoni, \u201cLeonardo and the \u2018chemical arts\u2019,\u201d and Esplosioni, fusioni e trasmutazioni, 38\u201341.\nArtisanal Processes and Epistemological Debate in the Works of Leonardo. . .\n59\nFig. 1 D. Beccafumi,\nFoundry workshop;\ncourtesy of Accademia\nCarrara, Bergamo\ntension between mechanical arts and alchemy during the Renaissance period. His\nattention was specifically focused on alchemy\u2019s claims to overturn the relationship]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=83\nPages: 83,84\n26\nThese admonitions against alchemy, presented for the first time by Avicenna, were known\nduring the Middle Ages as sciant artifices, see Avicenna, De congelatione et conglutinatione\nlapidum, 53\u20135; Newman, \u201cTechnology and Alchemical Debate.\u201d; and Halleux, \u201cAlchimiste et\nl\u2019essayeur,\u201d 211.\nArtisanal Processes and Epistemological Debate in the Works of Leonardo. . .\n61\nLeonardo\u2019s manuscripts are one of the best sources to study the chemical\nequipment of Renaissance. His tireless sketching during his entire career produced\na very large and uncommon collection of manuscripts that allow us to understand\nand visualize many tools, instruments and chemical processes studied, developed\nand used during the Renaissance.\nAn activity that was a sort of flywheel in involving Leonardo in the study of the\nmany aspects of bronze casting was the project of the Equestrian monument for\nFrancesco Sforza. This was a very large bronze statue that was never cast but]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=81\nPages: 81\nactivity: heating systems, smelting furnaces, cucurbits, alembics and balanced\nscales (Fig. 1).21 Alchemists used the same technological apparatuses and devices\nas artisans and alchemical research was often carried out along with chemical and\nmetallurgical activities, for instance, at the Fonderia by the Medici family in\nFlorence, or several other places in sixteenth- and seventeenth-century Europe.22\nLeonardo and the \u2018Chemical\u2019 Arts\nVery rarely have historians seen Leonardo from the perspective of his direct\ninvolvement in the chemicals arts. Apart from Ladislao Reti and a few others,\nLeonardo\u2019s observations and studies on matter transformation are usually seen in\nthe context of his natural philosophy, with few references to his practical involvement as a painter and engineer during his entire career, including his vision and\nrelationship with occult science and alchemy.23\nIf we focus our attention on Leonardo\u2019s notes and drawings about substance]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=81\nPages: 81\nIf we focus our attention on Leonardo\u2019s notes and drawings about substance\ntransformation, he can be seen as a witness and a protagonist of the epistemological\n20\nFor more information on the relation between artists and alchemy during the Renaissance, see\nPrincipe & DeWitt, Transmutations; Newman, Promethean Ambitions, 115\u201363; Ferino-Pagden\net al., Parmigianino, 15\u20137; Calvesi, Arte e alchimia; Lennep, L\u2019art alchimique; and Conticelli,\nAlchimia e le arti, 13\u201333.\n21\nGabriele, Incisioni alchemico-metallurgiche.\n22\nOn the Medici\u2019s Fonderia, see this volume: Kieffer and Beretta. On the relation of alchemy and\nmetallurgical industry, see Nummedal, Alchemy and Authority, 119\u201346.\n23\nFor Leonardo\u2019s scientific and philosophical studies of natural phenomena and his theory of\nmatter, see Boni, Vinci e l\u2019alchimia, 401\u20135; Hooykaas, \u201cThe\u0301orie corpusculaire de Le\u0301onard\u201d;\nGombrich, \u201cLeonardo and the Magicians\u201d; Vasoli, Leonardo e l\u2019alchimia, 69\u201377; Kiang,]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=16\nPages: 16,15\ncarved out space for true alchemy as one of the arts of fire. Artisanal workshops,\nsuch as Andrea Verrocchio\u2019s (c.1435\u20131488) in which Leonardo da Vinci (1452\u2013\n1519) apprenticed or Leonardo\u2019s own workplace, shared a material culture with\nalchemical laboratories. As we have already pointed out, artisans used similar\nequipment and performed \u201cchemical\u201d operations. However, Bernardoni argues,\nBiringuccio made the claim that these artisans were the true experts on matter,\nmaterials and material transformation and that artisanal \u201cchemical\u201d operations were\nthe key to natural knowledge.\nOne of the readers of Biringuccio\u2019s Pirotechnia was Johannes Mathesius (1504\u2013\n1565), a Lutheran preacher in St. Joachimsthal, the center of an important mining\ndistrict. In her contribution to this volume, Henrike Haug analyzes Mathesius\u2019s\n19\nHassenstein, Das Feuerwerckbuch, 45\u20136. For translation and discussion, see Werrett,\nFireworks, 28.\n20\nSmith, Body of the Artisan. esp. 95\u2013127.\nIntroduction\nxv]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=78\nPages: 78\nthe transformation of substances.10 Leonardo da Vinci (1452\u20131519) and\nBiringuccio, the key figures in this article, were both involved in this debate and\nmaturely and responsibly distanced themselves from the theoretical speculation of\n8\nFor Biringuccio and alchemy see, Perifano, \u201cAlchimie,\u201d 189\u2013202, Alchimie a\u0300 la Cour; and\nBernardoni, \u201cQuaestio de alchimia.\u201d On the medieval alchemical debate, see Newman, \u201cTechnology and Alchemical Debate.\u201d On artisanal and vernacular epistemology, especially for the German\narea, see Smith, Body of the Artisan, 59\u201393, 142\u201351.\n9\n\u201cet in somma egli parlava dell\u2019archimia molto confuso, et inresolutissimo come si vede ancora\nche egli fa ne\u2019 suoi scritti, dove molte volte la loda, e molte la biasima, ma finalmente nel principio\ndel nono libro anch\u2019egli, come tutti gli altri, per non essere forse ne\u0301 piu\u0300 di loro, ne\u0301 da meno, non\nche gli confessi in verita\u0300, che la sia possibile del tutto, ma conforta gli uomini ad esercitarla in]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=92\nPages: 92\nremained to Biringuccio the most important \u201cart\u201d for studying the secrets of nature:\nThus, in short, it can be said in conclusion that this art [alchemy] is the origin and\nfoundation of many other arts, wherefore it should be held in reverence and practiced.\nBut he who practices it must be ignorant neither of cause nor of natural effects, and not too\npoor to support the expense. Neither should he do it from avarice, but only in order to enjoy\nthe fine fruits of its effects and the knowledge of them, and that pleasing novelty which it\nshows to the experimenter in operation.42\nBiringuccio considered alchemy a legitimate knowledge grounded on experimental and speculative activity. This is an important epistemological step for\nartisanal processes because alchemy was no longer seen as a utilitarian art but as\na disinterested activity carried out by men to enjoy the fruits of their knowledge.\n41\nBiringuccio, Pirotechnia (1942), 41. For the Italian, see Biringuccio, De la pirotechnia (1977),]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=99\nPages: 99,100\nKemp, Martin. 1995. \u2018Wrought by No Artist\u2019s Hand\u2019: The Natural, the Artificial, the Exotic, and\nthe Scientific in Some Artifacts from the Renaissance. In Reframing the Renaissance: Visual\nCulture in Europe and Latin America, 1450\u20131650, ed. Claire Farago, 177\u2013196. New Haven:\nYale University Press.\nKemp, Martin. 2006. Leonardo da Vinci: The Marvellous Works of Nature and Man. Oxford:\nOxford University Press.\nKiang, Dawson. 1997. Leonardo and Alchemy: A Bibliographical Note. Achademia Leonardi\nVinci. Journal of Leonardo Studies & Bibliography of Vinciana 10: 199\u2013201.\nLennep, Jacques van. 1985. Alchimie: contribution a\u0300 l\u2019histoire de l\u2019art alchimique. Brussels:\nCre\u0301dit Communal de Belgique.\nLeonardo da Vinci. 1973\u20131980. Codice Atlantico, ed. Augusto Marinoni, 24 vols. Florence:\nGiunti.\nArtisanal Processes and Epistemological Debate in the Works of Leonardo. . .\n77\nLeonardo da Vinci. 1978\u20131980. Corpus of the Anatomical Studies in the Collection of Her Majesty]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=97\nPages: 97,98\nMechanical Marvels, 11\u201318; and Smith, Body of the Artisan, 142\u20139.\nArtisanal Processes and Epistemological Debate in the Works of Leonardo. . .\n75\nArnaud, E.R. 1655. Introduction a la chymie, ou a la vraye physique, ou\u0300 le lecteur treuvera la\ndefinition de toutes les operations de la chymie, etc. Lyon: Claude Post.\nAvicenna. 1927. De congelatione et conglutinatione lapidum, being sections of the Kitab al-Shifa/\nthe Latin and Arabic texts, eds. and trans. Eric John Holmyard and Desmond Christopher\nMandeville. Paris: Paul Geuthner.\nBeretta, Marco. 2010. Leonardo and Lucretius. In Rinascimento, ed. Leo S. Olschki, Series 2, Vol.\nXLIX, 341\u2013372.\nBernardoni, Andrea. 2007. La quaestio de alchimia nel De la pirotechnia di Vannoccio\nBiringuccio. In Atti del XII convegno nazionale di storia e fondamenti della chimica,\ned. Franco Calascibetta and Luigi Cerruti, 261\u2013276. Rome: Accademia dei LX.\nBernardoni, Andrea. 2009. Leonardo and the Equestrian Monument for Francesco Sforza: The]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=157\nPages: 157\npatron a keen interest in alchemy, was meant to have taken part\u2014but his premature\ndeath prevented his involvement. In the Studiolo the connection between alchemy\nand the chemical arts was exalted. The iconographic itinerary conceived by\nBorghini was situated in a sequence on the upper part of the wall where paintings\ndevoted to thermal baths, the discovery of gun powder, a glass works, a goldsmith\u2019s\nworkshop, alchemists and a bronze foundry were located; at the room\u2019s two ends\nwere two statues, portraying Vulcan and Apollo. On the lower part of the wall a\nmythological scene recalled Francesco I\u2019s alchemical and artistic interests.27 I\nwould like to stress the importance of a few elements directly or indirectly related\nto the chemical arts. What first strikes you in this particular arrangement is the\nproximity of Stradano\u2019s famous painting of Francesco I\u2019s alchemical laboratory and\nGiovanni Maria Butteri\u2019s (1540\u20131606) painting illustrating the glass works (Figs. 3\nand 4).]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=93\nPages: 93,94\nBiringuccio\u2019s original approach to the arts of fire emerges and that distinguishes\nhim, for instance, from Georg Agricola who, at almost the same time, wrote his De\nre metallica in which he outlined the general arts of metals related to mining and\nmetallurgy. Biringuccio expanded his perspective to include all the arts of fire,\nincluding, artillery, making gunpowder, acids preparation, pottery, goldsmithing,\nfireworks, generic distillation arts, as well as alchemy.44 If we accept his conditions,\n43\nSee Biringuccio, De la pirotechnia (1914), 27\u201340; Perifano, \u201cAlchimie\u201d; Smith, Body of the\nArtisan, 143\u20134; and Bernardoni, La conoscenza del fare, 669.\n44\nBiringuccio, De la pirotechnia (1977), fol. 123r\u20134r.\nArtisanal Processes and Epistemological Debate in the Works of Leonardo. . .\n71\nalchemy and pyrotechnics are not in contradiction, rather, in so far as they are used\nin the same philosophical concepts and the same operational practices, alchemy]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=156\nPages: 156\nIn this process of reconfiguring Florentine arts and crafts, alchemy played an\nexceedingly important role, both as a fashionable scientific discipline with not\nparticularly strong academic ties and as a useful set of experimental practices in\nwhich several crafts helped artisans quench their thirst for innovation and realize\ntheir socio-cultural ambitions. I shall not explore here the spread of interest in\nalchemy in Florence at beginning of the sixteenth century, a theme already effectively surveyed in Alfredo Perifano\u2019s book on Cosimo I\u2019s alchemical passion.24\nI shall instead take into consideration the development of alchemy in the Palazzo\nVecchio\u2019s fonderia and the Casino, sites where its relation with the chemical arts\nand technological innovations became apparent. Indeed, it is my impression that if\nwe want to understand the metamorphosis of the sciences in Florence during this\ncrucial period we should look at disciplines, such as alchemy, which had few]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=76\nPages: 76\nDebate in the Works of Leonardo Da Vinci\nand Vannoccio Biringuccio\nAndrea Bernardoni\nAbstract During the Renaissance the field of the chemical arts was characterised\nby the complex identity of its protagonists, who would hardly recognize themselves\nin traditional socio-cultural and professional definitions. Although it is anachronistic to speak of chemistry as a discipline, during the late fifteenth and early sixteenth\ncenturies it is possible to outline an area of interest around the transformation\nprocesses of substances in which various fields of theoretical and practical knowledge intersect. In this cultural context the figures of Leonardo da Vinci and\nVannoccio Biringuccio stand out as, in addition to their experimental activity,\nthey became the promoters of a general reform of chemical arts and natural\nphilosophy.\n\u2018Chemical\u2019 Arts During the Renaissance\nTalking about chemistry in relation to the Renaissance calls for historiographical]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=146\nPages: 146\nadministration of artistic and scientific activities in order to produce characteristic\nobjects he used as tributes to consolidate his politic alliances.\nThe cohabitation between arts and sciences still corresponded to the ancient\nway: in the Renaissance, according to the philosophers and the theologians, arts and\nsciences both belonged to natural philosophy. Besides, botany and medicine\nbecame part of the symbolic network formed around the ideal prince\u2019s image: the\ndoctor and philosopher prince acting for his people\u2019s health and salvation. This\nimage took on a special aura under Ferdinando I, who dealt in large-scale sacred\nimages with curing powers, like the Miraculous Virgin of Santissima Annunziata or\nthe Madonna of Loreto, and medicine.\nDestined to further dynastic and political propaganda, arts and sciences had to\nreflect grand-ducal power. Therefore, the Galleria dei lavori preserved through\nsecrecy the most progressive techniques, developed a widely recognizable style for\n55]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=92\nPages: 92\nBiringuccio\u2019s Pirotechnia and the Knowledge of Nature\nBiringuccio, like Leonardo, placed the focus of his consideration on the possibility\nof increasing knowledge and reproducing processes of nature through the technological codification emerging from alchemical tradition and from his professional\nactivity. In the Pirotechnia (Fig. 9), we again find the two traditional contradictory\nopinions on alchemy: negative towards the alchemists who hide their art behind\nesotericism, magic, alchemical authority and those who practice chemical process\nwithout ratio and empirical control, and positive in relation to the improvement of\nmankind:\nHow many alchemists have I heard lamenting, one because by some unfortunate chance he\nhad spilled his whole composition in the ashes; another because he had been deceived by\nthe excessive strength of the fire, so that the substance of his materials had been burned and\nthe spirits inadvertently allowed to escape; and yet another because he had poor and feeble]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=80\nPages: 80\nwas involved in generic metal carpentry such as the casting and welding of\ndamaged swords and other craft objects.17 Further evidence of artists\u2019 versatile\nactivities during the Renaissance can be found in Andrea Verrocchio\u2019s (1435\u2013\n1488) workshop, which specialized in painting, sculpture, casting and metal carpentry. One of the most important works created in this workshop when Leonardo\nwas still one of Verrocchio\u2019s assistants was the copper sphere on the top of the\nlantern on Filippo Brunelleschi\u2019s (1377\u20131446) dome.18 In Verrocchio\u2019s workshop,\nassistants and pupils, including Leonardo, prepared colors, glues, solvents, waxes,\nacids, alloys and so on. Being an artist in the Renaissance meant being part of a\nwider shared material culture as artisans and chymists used and developed the same\nmaterials and techniques.\nIn Biringuccio\u2019s book we find a description of a brass-making workshop he\nvisited in Milan that discusses the organization of the workshop and the artisans\u2019]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=173\nPages: 173,174\npowerful aura and the original strong connections between alchemy, the arts and\npolitics that had been established in the Casino. As strongly as Don Antonio\nbelieved in the cultural and social importance of alchemy, he was in no position\nto pursue his father\u2019s aim to incorporate these interests into the government of\nTuscany. Chemistry, alchemy, pharmacy and medicine remained at the center of\nMedici patronage, but the new Grand Dukes, by inviting Galileo to court as their\nphilosopher and mathematician, privileged a more pragmatic patronage which\nMaterial and Temporal Powers at the Casino di San Marco (1574\u20131621)\n153\nFig. 14 The Tribuna di Galileo. Photo second half of the nineteenth century (Courtesy of Museo\nGalileo. Florence)\ncombined a more encyclopedic view of the ways nature could be investigated.\nIronically, however, this new development in Medici scientific-patronage did not\nhave any significant effects on the Tuscan scientific tradition. Although Galileo]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=92\nPages: 92,93\n41\nBiringuccio, Pirotechnia (1942), 41. For the Italian, see Biringuccio, De la pirotechnia (1977),\nfol. 7v.\n42\nBiringuccio, Pirotechnia (1942), 337. For the Italian, see Biringuccio, De la pirotechnia (1977),\nfol. 123v.\n70\nA. Bernardoni\nFig. 9 V. Biringuccio, De\nla pirotechnia, Venice,\n1540, frontispiece; courtesy\nof Museo Galileo Library\n\u201cPhilosophical alchemy,\u201d as Biringuccio calls it, is for him a scientific discipline\nthat directly studies natural phenomena and could be seen as an alternative\napproach to the theoretical speculation of scholastic philosophy.43 Alchemy was\nhere presented and discussed from a technical and theoretical point of view and,\neven more importantly, it was classified as a specific art of fire placed close to, but\nseparate from, the arts of distillation. This is an important distinction from which\nBiringuccio\u2019s original approach to the arts of fire emerges and that distinguishes]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=92\nPages: 92\nthe spirits inadvertently allowed to escape; and yet another because he had poor and feeble\nmaterials! In a word, one for one reason, and one for another, in order to hide either their\ndeception or their ignorance, all defend themselves and make excuses for their art.41\nMoreover, after marking his distance from false and sophistic alchemy,\nBiringuccio returned to what he called \u201ctrue alchemy\u201d with very positive opinions,\ntalking about it as a philosophical and technological activity grounded on reason\nand empirical experimentation which, even when following the illusory goal of\nmetal transmutation or the perfective and healthy elixir, discovered new substances,\nmedicine and technological processes. After a rational and empirical codification of\nthe chemical process and substance discovered and prepared by it, true alchemy\nremained to Biringuccio the most important \u201cart\u201d for studying the secrets of nature:]"]}

{"result":["[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=83\nPages: 83\nof mortals have their existence and their death.25\nHe argued that the inability of alchemy to deliver its claims of transmutation is\ndue to the impossibility of developing a technology able to reproduce the natural\ngenesis of substantial forms. As Avicenna had already claimed in his Latin translation of Kitab ash-Shifa\u2019 (De congelatione et conglutinatione lapidum), Leonardo\nstressed man\u2019s perception of the purity of natural elements was neither highly\ndeveloped nor sensitive enough to be able to precisely quantify the proportions\nrequired to produce the substantial form of different metals.26\nIf we assume within the tradition of Italian \u2018artist-engineers\u2019 this \u2018epistemological approach\u2019 was oriented to separate true and false alchemy and culminated in the\nwork of Biringuccio, then the manuscripts of Leonardo could be seen as one of the\nmain sources of \u2018chemical technologies\u2019 from the end of fifteenth and beginning of]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=81\nPages: 81,82\nGombrich, \u201cLeonardo and the Magicians\u201d; Vasoli, Leonardo e l\u2019alchimia, 69\u201377; Kiang,\n\u201cLeonardo and Alchemy\u201d; Frosini, \u201cPittura come filosofia\u201d; Kemp, Leonardo da Vinci, 293\u2013\n329; Galluzzi, \u201cVinci\u2019s Concept of \u2018Nature\u2019,\u201d; Beretta, \u201cLeonardo and Lucretius\u201d; Bernardoni,\n\u201cElementi, sostanze naturali\u201d; and Nanni, \u201cLucrezio.\u201d For Leonardo\u2019s involvement in the chemical arts, see Schneider, Chemische Wissen Leonardo, 40\u20133, 87\u201392; Partington, History of Chemistry, vol. II, 1\u20138; Taylor, \u201cVinci et la chimie\u201d; Reti, \u201cArti chimiche di Leonardo\u201d (1952a; 1952b);\nBernardoni, \u201cLeonardo and the \u2018chemical arts\u2019,\u201d and Esplosioni, fusioni e trasmutazioni, 38\u201341.\nArtisanal Processes and Epistemological Debate in the Works of Leonardo. . .\n59\nFig. 1 D. Beccafumi,\nFoundry workshop;\ncourtesy of Accademia\nCarrara, Bergamo\ntension between mechanical arts and alchemy during the Renaissance period. His\nattention was specifically focused on alchemy\u2019s claims to overturn the relationship]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=81\nPages: 81\nactivity: heating systems, smelting furnaces, cucurbits, alembics and balanced\nscales (Fig. 1).21 Alchemists used the same technological apparatuses and devices\nas artisans and alchemical research was often carried out along with chemical and\nmetallurgical activities, for instance, at the Fonderia by the Medici family in\nFlorence, or several other places in sixteenth- and seventeenth-century Europe.22\nLeonardo and the \u2018Chemical\u2019 Arts\nVery rarely have historians seen Leonardo from the perspective of his direct\ninvolvement in the chemicals arts. Apart from Ladislao Reti and a few others,\nLeonardo\u2019s observations and studies on matter transformation are usually seen in\nthe context of his natural philosophy, with few references to his practical involvement as a painter and engineer during his entire career, including his vision and\nrelationship with occult science and alchemy.23\nIf we focus our attention on Leonardo\u2019s notes and drawings about substance]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=81\nPages: 81\nIf we focus our attention on Leonardo\u2019s notes and drawings about substance\ntransformation, he can be seen as a witness and a protagonist of the epistemological\n20\nFor more information on the relation between artists and alchemy during the Renaissance, see\nPrincipe & DeWitt, Transmutations; Newman, Promethean Ambitions, 115\u201363; Ferino-Pagden\net al., Parmigianino, 15\u20137; Calvesi, Arte e alchimia; Lennep, L\u2019art alchimique; and Conticelli,\nAlchimia e le arti, 13\u201333.\n21\nGabriele, Incisioni alchemico-metallurgiche.\n22\nOn the Medici\u2019s Fonderia, see this volume: Kieffer and Beretta. On the relation of alchemy and\nmetallurgical industry, see Nummedal, Alchemy and Authority, 119\u201346.\n23\nFor Leonardo\u2019s scientific and philosophical studies of natural phenomena and his theory of\nmatter, see Boni, Vinci e l\u2019alchimia, 401\u20135; Hooykaas, \u201cThe\u0301orie corpusculaire de Le\u0301onard\u201d;\nGombrich, \u201cLeonardo and the Magicians\u201d; Vasoli, Leonardo e l\u2019alchimia, 69\u201377; Kiang,]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=83\nPages: 83,84\n26\nThese admonitions against alchemy, presented for the first time by Avicenna, were known\nduring the Middle Ages as sciant artifices, see Avicenna, De congelatione et conglutinatione\nlapidum, 53\u20135; Newman, \u201cTechnology and Alchemical Debate.\u201d; and Halleux, \u201cAlchimiste et\nl\u2019essayeur,\u201d 211.\nArtisanal Processes and Epistemological Debate in the Works of Leonardo. . .\n61\nLeonardo\u2019s manuscripts are one of the best sources to study the chemical\nequipment of Renaissance. His tireless sketching during his entire career produced\na very large and uncommon collection of manuscripts that allow us to understand\nand visualize many tools, instruments and chemical processes studied, developed\nand used during the Renaissance.\nAn activity that was a sort of flywheel in involving Leonardo in the study of the\nmany aspects of bronze casting was the project of the Equestrian monument for\nFrancesco Sforza. This was a very large bronze statue that was never cast but]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=78\nPages: 78\nthe transformation of substances.10 Leonardo da Vinci (1452\u20131519) and\nBiringuccio, the key figures in this article, were both involved in this debate and\nmaturely and responsibly distanced themselves from the theoretical speculation of\n8\nFor Biringuccio and alchemy see, Perifano, \u201cAlchimie,\u201d 189\u2013202, Alchimie a\u0300 la Cour; and\nBernardoni, \u201cQuaestio de alchimia.\u201d On the medieval alchemical debate, see Newman, \u201cTechnology and Alchemical Debate.\u201d On artisanal and vernacular epistemology, especially for the German\narea, see Smith, Body of the Artisan, 59\u201393, 142\u201351.\n9\n\u201cet in somma egli parlava dell\u2019archimia molto confuso, et inresolutissimo come si vede ancora\nche egli fa ne\u2019 suoi scritti, dove molte volte la loda, e molte la biasima, ma finalmente nel principio\ndel nono libro anch\u2019egli, come tutti gli altri, per non essere forse ne\u0301 piu\u0300 di loro, ne\u0301 da meno, non\nche gli confessi in verita\u0300, che la sia possibile del tutto, ma conforta gli uomini ad esercitarla in]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=16\nPages: 16,15\ncarved out space for true alchemy as one of the arts of fire. Artisanal workshops,\nsuch as Andrea Verrocchio\u2019s (c.1435\u20131488) in which Leonardo da Vinci (1452\u2013\n1519) apprenticed or Leonardo\u2019s own workplace, shared a material culture with\nalchemical laboratories. As we have already pointed out, artisans used similar\nequipment and performed \u201cchemical\u201d operations. However, Bernardoni argues,\nBiringuccio made the claim that these artisans were the true experts on matter,\nmaterials and material transformation and that artisanal \u201cchemical\u201d operations were\nthe key to natural knowledge.\nOne of the readers of Biringuccio\u2019s Pirotechnia was Johannes Mathesius (1504\u2013\n1565), a Lutheran preacher in St. Joachimsthal, the center of an important mining\ndistrict. In her contribution to this volume, Henrike Haug analyzes Mathesius\u2019s\n19\nHassenstein, Das Feuerwerckbuch, 45\u20136. For translation and discussion, see Werrett,\nFireworks, 28.\n20\nSmith, Body of the Artisan. esp. 95\u2013127.\nIntroduction\nxv]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=97\nPages: 97\nthe opening of new paths of research.55\nEvery discovery and invention is a step that could widen our knowledge horizons, each new observation and each new technique, even if they remain unused for\na long time, belong to the growing social legacy that Leonardo da Vinci called\n\u201csecond nature.\u201d56 The notitie nuove is the lifeblood of the process by which man\npenetrates the secrets of nature, thus creating a substrate of knowledge that stimulates minds to look for new inventions. It would certainly be excessive and\ninappropriate to evoke the positivist image of a Biringuccio paladin of the experimental method; however, the epistemological instances placed in Pirotechnia do\ngrant the Siennese engineer a place in the tradition of technical knowledge in the\nlate fifteenth and early sixteenth centuries.57\nBibliography\nAbbri, Ferdinando. 2009. Lawrence M. Principe (ed.), Chymists and Chymistry: Studies in the\nHistory of Alchemy and Early Modern Chemistry. Minerva 47: 115\u2013118.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=100\nPages: 100\nMedieval and Early Modern Corpuscular Matter Theories, eds. C. Lu\u0308thy, J.E. Murdoch, and\nW.R. Newman, 91\u2013131. Leiden: Brill.\nNanni, Romano. 2011. Lucrezio: \u201cun ennesimo candidato per la \u2018filosofia\u2019 di Leonardo\u201d. Giornale\ncritico della filosofia italiana 3: 463\u2013491.\nNewman, William R. 1989. Technology and Alchemical Debate in the Late Middle Ages. Isis 80:\n423\u2013445.\nNewman, William R. 2004. Promethean Ambitions: Alchemy and the Quest to Perfect Nature.\nChicago: University of Chicago Press.\nNewman, William R., and Lawrence M. Principe. 1998. Alchemy vs. Chemistry: The Etymological Origins of a Historiographic Mistake. Early Science and Medicine 3: 32\u201365.\nNummedal, Tara E. 2007. Alchemy and Authority in the Holy Roman Empire. Chicago: University\nof Chicago Press.\nPartington, James Riddick. 1961. A History of Chemistry, vol. 2. London: Macmillan.\nPedretti, Carlo. 1978. Leonardo architetto. Milan: Electa.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=92\nPages: 92\nBiringuccio\u2019s Pirotechnia and the Knowledge of Nature\nBiringuccio, like Leonardo, placed the focus of his consideration on the possibility\nof increasing knowledge and reproducing processes of nature through the technological codification emerging from alchemical tradition and from his professional\nactivity. In the Pirotechnia (Fig. 9), we again find the two traditional contradictory\nopinions on alchemy: negative towards the alchemists who hide their art behind\nesotericism, magic, alchemical authority and those who practice chemical process\nwithout ratio and empirical control, and positive in relation to the improvement of\nmankind:\nHow many alchemists have I heard lamenting, one because by some unfortunate chance he\nhad spilled his whole composition in the ashes; another because he had been deceived by\nthe excessive strength of the fire, so that the substance of his materials had been burned and\nthe spirits inadvertently allowed to escape; and yet another because he had poor and feeble]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=160\nPages: 160\njewelry were the arts most closely connected with alchemy. Their connections\ninspired Francesco to create a new decorative scenario, dominated by alchemy,\nby which illustrate the relation between arts and nature.\nFrancesco was extremely keen, even more than his father, to promote the study\nof the natural sciences and the arts related to them. His passion for the chemical arts\nwas so strong that in 1560, when he was only 19, he was told off by his brother\nGiovanni for attending the works of the fonderia all day long.33 It was Francesco\nwho, in September 1569, charged the architect, engineer and inventor Bernardo\nBuontalenti (1531\u20131608), who had been one of his teachers since 1550, to oversee\nthe construction of Bortolo\u2019s new glass furnace and a new fonderia.34 Francesco I\nalso exploited Buontalenti\u2019s versatile skills in the works of the fusion of precious]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=100\nPages: 100,101\nPedretti, Carlo. 1978. Leonardo architetto. Milan: Electa.\nPerifano, Alfredo. 1996. L\u2019Alchimie dans de la pirotechnia de Vannoccio Biringuccio. Revue des e\u0301\ntudes italiennes 42: 189\u2013202.\nPerifano, Alfredo. 1997. L\u2019Alchimie a\u0300 la Cour de Come Ier de Me\u0301dicis: savoirs, culture et\npolitique. Paris: Honore\u0301 Champion.\n78\nA. Bernardoni\nPrincipe, Lawrence M., and Lloyd DeWitt. 2002. Transmutations: Alchemy in Art. Philadelphia:\nChemical Heritage Foundation.\nReti, Ladislao. 1952a. Le arti chimiche di Leonardo da Vinci. La chimica e l\u2019industria 34(7): 721\u2013\n743.\nReti, Ladislao. 1952b. Le arti chimiche di Leonardo da Vinci. La chimica e l\u2019industria 34(11):\n655\u2013667.\nRossi, Paolo. 1971. I filosofi e le machine 1400\u20131700. Milan: Feltrinelli.\nScaglia, Giustina. 1981. Alle origini degli studi tecnologici di Leonardo. XX Lettura Vinciana.\nFlorence: Barbera Editore.\nSchneider, Wolfgang. 1949. Das chemische Wissen Leonardo da Vincis und seine Bedeutung f\u20ac\nur\ndie Geschichte der Chemie, Die Pharmazie 4.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=92\nPages: 92,93\n41\nBiringuccio, Pirotechnia (1942), 41. For the Italian, see Biringuccio, De la pirotechnia (1977),\nfol. 7v.\n42\nBiringuccio, Pirotechnia (1942), 337. For the Italian, see Biringuccio, De la pirotechnia (1977),\nfol. 123v.\n70\nA. Bernardoni\nFig. 9 V. Biringuccio, De\nla pirotechnia, Venice,\n1540, frontispiece; courtesy\nof Museo Galileo Library\n\u201cPhilosophical alchemy,\u201d as Biringuccio calls it, is for him a scientific discipline\nthat directly studies natural phenomena and could be seen as an alternative\napproach to the theoretical speculation of scholastic philosophy.43 Alchemy was\nhere presented and discussed from a technical and theoretical point of view and,\neven more importantly, it was classified as a specific art of fire placed close to, but\nseparate from, the arts of distillation. This is an important distinction from which\nBiringuccio\u2019s original approach to the arts of fire emerges and that distinguishes]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=78\nPages: 78\nninth book He, no better and no worse than anyone else, confesses his hopes it could\nactually be possible after all, and cautions the men to exercise patience and have reverence\nfor the magnificent goals, and miraculous works of nature. Although in the Chapter of Gold\nhe so degraded Alchemy with very weak reasons, as one who had had a great deal of\nexperience, and not a lot of science, since he did not even know that Alberto and many\nothers had written of it. But still, we are obliged him for having been, beyond his great\npractical experience, a very loyal and truthful man, and most liberal of his treasures.9\nThe most important consequence of this inclusion of Biringuccio as a protagonist in the alchemical debate happens in the mid-sixteenth century; the Quaestio de\nalchimia can no longer exclude the position of the technician directly involved in\nthe transformation of substances.10 Leonardo da Vinci (1452\u20131519) and]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=99\nPages: 99,100\nKemp, Martin. 1995. \u2018Wrought by No Artist\u2019s Hand\u2019: The Natural, the Artificial, the Exotic, and\nthe Scientific in Some Artifacts from the Renaissance. In Reframing the Renaissance: Visual\nCulture in Europe and Latin America, 1450\u20131650, ed. Claire Farago, 177\u2013196. New Haven:\nYale University Press.\nKemp, Martin. 2006. Leonardo da Vinci: The Marvellous Works of Nature and Man. Oxford:\nOxford University Press.\nKiang, Dawson. 1997. Leonardo and Alchemy: A Bibliographical Note. Achademia Leonardi\nVinci. Journal of Leonardo Studies & Bibliography of Vinciana 10: 199\u2013201.\nLennep, Jacques van. 1985. Alchimie: contribution a\u0300 l\u2019histoire de l\u2019art alchimique. Brussels:\nCre\u0301dit Communal de Belgique.\nLeonardo da Vinci. 1973\u20131980. Codice Atlantico, ed. Augusto Marinoni, 24 vols. Florence:\nGiunti.\nArtisanal Processes and Epistemological Debate in the Works of Leonardo. . .\n77\nLeonardo da Vinci. 1978\u20131980. Corpus of the Anatomical Studies in the Collection of Her Majesty]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=92\nPages: 92\nremained to Biringuccio the most important \u201cart\u201d for studying the secrets of nature:\nThus, in short, it can be said in conclusion that this art [alchemy] is the origin and\nfoundation of many other arts, wherefore it should be held in reverence and practiced.\nBut he who practices it must be ignorant neither of cause nor of natural effects, and not too\npoor to support the expense. Neither should he do it from avarice, but only in order to enjoy\nthe fine fruits of its effects and the knowledge of them, and that pleasing novelty which it\nshows to the experimenter in operation.42\nBiringuccio considered alchemy a legitimate knowledge grounded on experimental and speculative activity. This is an important epistemological step for\nartisanal processes because alchemy was no longer seen as a utilitarian art but as\na disinterested activity carried out by men to enjoy the fruits of their knowledge.\n41\nBiringuccio, Pirotechnia (1942), 41. For the Italian, see Biringuccio, De la pirotechnia (1977),]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=87\nPages: 87\ndrilling motion of fire. Leonardo\u2019s goals are both technological and scientific; the\nfire works as a drill. If this were to be verified, it could be used in some technological application but it could also assume a more general scientific and philosophical\nexplanation because the power of fire, like the power of the other elements (water,\nair and earth), manifests itself in the form of a spiral\u2014the natural screw. The power\nof the screw could be seen in the vortices of water and air, but also in Brunelleschi\u2019s\nbigger cranes and powerful technological elevator devices that become an analogic\nexplanation for the forces operating in nature.32\nAnother very interesting case involving the chemical equipment studied by\nLeonardo is the development of the alembic refrigerator system. In the Codex\nAtlanticus there are some drawings (fol. 912r, 1114r a\u2013b, 216r, 989r, 1118r)\n31\n\u201cTrattato che a\u0300i de\u2019 moti de\u2019 solidi gravi, trata de\u2019 gravi liquidi e dell\u2019aria e de\u2019 moti del foco, e]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=83\nPages: 83\nerrore t\u2019invia, perche\u0301 non vai alle miniere dove la natura genera tale oro e quivi ti fa suo discepolo,\nla qual fedelmente ti guarira\u0300 della tua stoltizia mostrandoti come nessuna cosa da te operata nel\nfoco non sara\u0300 nessuna di quelle che natura adopri al generare esso oro.\u201d (Leonardo, Corpus degli\nstudi anatomici, fol. 50v [19045v]. Translated from Leonardo, Corpus of Anatomical Studies,\nvol. I, fol. 50v [19045v]).\n25\n\u201cLa gravita\u0300, la forza insieme col moto materiale e lla percussione sono le quattro potentie\naccidentali colle quali l\u2019umana spetie nelle sue mirabili e varie operationi pare in questo mondo\ndimostrarsi una seconda natura. Imperoche\u0301 con tali potentie tutte le evidenti opera de\u2019 mortali a\u0300nno\nloro essere e loro morte.\u201d (Leonardo, Codex Arundel, fol. 151v). See Frosini, \u201cForza in Leonardo\nda Vinci,\u201d 121.\n26\nThese admonitions against alchemy, presented for the first time by Avicenna, were known]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=76\nPages: 76\nDebate in the Works of Leonardo Da Vinci\nand Vannoccio Biringuccio\nAndrea Bernardoni\nAbstract During the Renaissance the field of the chemical arts was characterised\nby the complex identity of its protagonists, who would hardly recognize themselves\nin traditional socio-cultural and professional definitions. Although it is anachronistic to speak of chemistry as a discipline, during the late fifteenth and early sixteenth\ncenturies it is possible to outline an area of interest around the transformation\nprocesses of substances in which various fields of theoretical and practical knowledge intersect. In this cultural context the figures of Leonardo da Vinci and\nVannoccio Biringuccio stand out as, in addition to their experimental activity,\nthey became the promoters of a general reform of chemical arts and natural\nphilosophy.\n\u2018Chemical\u2019 Arts During the Renaissance\nTalking about chemistry in relation to the Renaissance calls for historiographical]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=97\nPages: 97,98\nMechanical Marvels, 11\u201318; and Smith, Body of the Artisan, 142\u20139.\nArtisanal Processes and Epistemological Debate in the Works of Leonardo. . .\n75\nArnaud, E.R. 1655. Introduction a la chymie, ou a la vraye physique, ou\u0300 le lecteur treuvera la\ndefinition de toutes les operations de la chymie, etc. Lyon: Claude Post.\nAvicenna. 1927. De congelatione et conglutinatione lapidum, being sections of the Kitab al-Shifa/\nthe Latin and Arabic texts, eds. and trans. Eric John Holmyard and Desmond Christopher\nMandeville. Paris: Paul Geuthner.\nBeretta, Marco. 2010. Leonardo and Lucretius. In Rinascimento, ed. Leo S. Olschki, Series 2, Vol.\nXLIX, 341\u2013372.\nBernardoni, Andrea. 2007. La quaestio de alchimia nel De la pirotechnia di Vannoccio\nBiringuccio. In Atti del XII convegno nazionale di storia e fondamenti della chimica,\ned. Franco Calascibetta and Luigi Cerruti, 261\u2013276. Rome: Accademia dei LX.\nBernardoni, Andrea. 2009. Leonardo and the Equestrian Monument for Francesco Sforza: The]"]}

{"result":["[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=81\nPages: 81\nIf we focus our attention on Leonardo\u2019s notes and drawings about substance\ntransformation, he can be seen as a witness and a protagonist of the epistemological\n20\nFor more information on the relation between artists and alchemy during the Renaissance, see\nPrincipe & DeWitt, Transmutations; Newman, Promethean Ambitions, 115\u201363; Ferino-Pagden\net al., Parmigianino, 15\u20137; Calvesi, Arte e alchimia; Lennep, L\u2019art alchimique; and Conticelli,\nAlchimia e le arti, 13\u201333.\n21\nGabriele, Incisioni alchemico-metallurgiche.\n22\nOn the Medici\u2019s Fonderia, see this volume: Kieffer and Beretta. On the relation of alchemy and\nmetallurgical industry, see Nummedal, Alchemy and Authority, 119\u201346.\n23\nFor Leonardo\u2019s scientific and philosophical studies of natural phenomena and his theory of\nmatter, see Boni, Vinci e l\u2019alchimia, 401\u20135; Hooykaas, \u201cThe\u0301orie corpusculaire de Le\u0301onard\u201d;\nGombrich, \u201cLeonardo and the Magicians\u201d; Vasoli, Leonardo e l\u2019alchimia, 69\u201377; Kiang,]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=81\nPages: 81\nactivity: heating systems, smelting furnaces, cucurbits, alembics and balanced\nscales (Fig. 1).21 Alchemists used the same technological apparatuses and devices\nas artisans and alchemical research was often carried out along with chemical and\nmetallurgical activities, for instance, at the Fonderia by the Medici family in\nFlorence, or several other places in sixteenth- and seventeenth-century Europe.22\nLeonardo and the \u2018Chemical\u2019 Arts\nVery rarely have historians seen Leonardo from the perspective of his direct\ninvolvement in the chemicals arts. Apart from Ladislao Reti and a few others,\nLeonardo\u2019s observations and studies on matter transformation are usually seen in\nthe context of his natural philosophy, with few references to his practical involvement as a painter and engineer during his entire career, including his vision and\nrelationship with occult science and alchemy.23\nIf we focus our attention on Leonardo\u2019s notes and drawings about substance]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=83\nPages: 83\nof mortals have their existence and their death.25\nHe argued that the inability of alchemy to deliver its claims of transmutation is\ndue to the impossibility of developing a technology able to reproduce the natural\ngenesis of substantial forms. As Avicenna had already claimed in his Latin translation of Kitab ash-Shifa\u2019 (De congelatione et conglutinatione lapidum), Leonardo\nstressed man\u2019s perception of the purity of natural elements was neither highly\ndeveloped nor sensitive enough to be able to precisely quantify the proportions\nrequired to produce the substantial form of different metals.26\nIf we assume within the tradition of Italian \u2018artist-engineers\u2019 this \u2018epistemological approach\u2019 was oriented to separate true and false alchemy and culminated in the\nwork of Biringuccio, then the manuscripts of Leonardo could be seen as one of the\nmain sources of \u2018chemical technologies\u2019 from the end of fifteenth and beginning of]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=81\nPages: 81,82\nGombrich, \u201cLeonardo and the Magicians\u201d; Vasoli, Leonardo e l\u2019alchimia, 69\u201377; Kiang,\n\u201cLeonardo and Alchemy\u201d; Frosini, \u201cPittura come filosofia\u201d; Kemp, Leonardo da Vinci, 293\u2013\n329; Galluzzi, \u201cVinci\u2019s Concept of \u2018Nature\u2019,\u201d; Beretta, \u201cLeonardo and Lucretius\u201d; Bernardoni,\n\u201cElementi, sostanze naturali\u201d; and Nanni, \u201cLucrezio.\u201d For Leonardo\u2019s involvement in the chemical arts, see Schneider, Chemische Wissen Leonardo, 40\u20133, 87\u201392; Partington, History of Chemistry, vol. II, 1\u20138; Taylor, \u201cVinci et la chimie\u201d; Reti, \u201cArti chimiche di Leonardo\u201d (1952a; 1952b);\nBernardoni, \u201cLeonardo and the \u2018chemical arts\u2019,\u201d and Esplosioni, fusioni e trasmutazioni, 38\u201341.\nArtisanal Processes and Epistemological Debate in the Works of Leonardo. . .\n59\nFig. 1 D. Beccafumi,\nFoundry workshop;\ncourtesy of Accademia\nCarrara, Bergamo\ntension between mechanical arts and alchemy during the Renaissance period. His\nattention was specifically focused on alchemy\u2019s claims to overturn the relationship]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=78\nPages: 78\nthe transformation of substances.10 Leonardo da Vinci (1452\u20131519) and\nBiringuccio, the key figures in this article, were both involved in this debate and\nmaturely and responsibly distanced themselves from the theoretical speculation of\n8\nFor Biringuccio and alchemy see, Perifano, \u201cAlchimie,\u201d 189\u2013202, Alchimie a\u0300 la Cour; and\nBernardoni, \u201cQuaestio de alchimia.\u201d On the medieval alchemical debate, see Newman, \u201cTechnology and Alchemical Debate.\u201d On artisanal and vernacular epistemology, especially for the German\narea, see Smith, Body of the Artisan, 59\u201393, 142\u201351.\n9\n\u201cet in somma egli parlava dell\u2019archimia molto confuso, et inresolutissimo come si vede ancora\nche egli fa ne\u2019 suoi scritti, dove molte volte la loda, e molte la biasima, ma finalmente nel principio\ndel nono libro anch\u2019egli, come tutti gli altri, per non essere forse ne\u0301 piu\u0300 di loro, ne\u0301 da meno, non\nche gli confessi in verita\u0300, che la sia possibile del tutto, ma conforta gli uomini ad esercitarla in]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=16\nPages: 16,15\ncarved out space for true alchemy as one of the arts of fire. Artisanal workshops,\nsuch as Andrea Verrocchio\u2019s (c.1435\u20131488) in which Leonardo da Vinci (1452\u2013\n1519) apprenticed or Leonardo\u2019s own workplace, shared a material culture with\nalchemical laboratories. As we have already pointed out, artisans used similar\nequipment and performed \u201cchemical\u201d operations. However, Bernardoni argues,\nBiringuccio made the claim that these artisans were the true experts on matter,\nmaterials and material transformation and that artisanal \u201cchemical\u201d operations were\nthe key to natural knowledge.\nOne of the readers of Biringuccio\u2019s Pirotechnia was Johannes Mathesius (1504\u2013\n1565), a Lutheran preacher in St. Joachimsthal, the center of an important mining\ndistrict. In her contribution to this volume, Henrike Haug analyzes Mathesius\u2019s\n19\nHassenstein, Das Feuerwerckbuch, 45\u20136. For translation and discussion, see Werrett,\nFireworks, 28.\n20\nSmith, Body of the Artisan. esp. 95\u2013127.\nIntroduction\nxv]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=91\nPages: 91,92\nof substance.40 Atoms as we will also see in the case of Biringuccio are something\n36\n\u201cVetro a cio\u0300 che si vegga li attimi nell\u2019acqua che si move.\u201d (Leonardo, Codex Atlanticus,\nfol. 589v).\n37\nMarinoni, \u201cL\u2019Essere del nulla,\u201d 209\u201332; Bernardoni, \u201cElementi, sostanze naturali,\u201d 99\u2013104;\nBeretta, \u201cLeonardo and Lucretius\u201d; and Nanni, \u201cLucrezio.\u201d\n38\nLeonardo, Manuscript F, 138 [fol. 74v, IV]. The phenomenon is also noted on folio 87r, see\nLeonardo, Manuscript F, 158\u20139 [fol. 87r]; and on folio 78r, see Leonardo, Manuscript L, 89\u201390\n[fol. 78r].\n39\nLeonardo, Codex Hammer, 4A, fol. 4r.\n40\n\u201cattimo non e\u0300 parte della materia donde nascie.\u201d (Leonardo, Codex Arundel, fol. 176v).\nArtisanal Processes and Epistemological Debate in the Works of Leonardo. . .\n69\nmaterial, which could be seen or imagined observing natural or artificial phenomena of matter transformation.\nBiringuccio\u2019s Pirotechnia and the Knowledge of Nature]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=83\nPages: 83,84\n26\nThese admonitions against alchemy, presented for the first time by Avicenna, were known\nduring the Middle Ages as sciant artifices, see Avicenna, De congelatione et conglutinatione\nlapidum, 53\u20135; Newman, \u201cTechnology and Alchemical Debate.\u201d; and Halleux, \u201cAlchimiste et\nl\u2019essayeur,\u201d 211.\nArtisanal Processes and Epistemological Debate in the Works of Leonardo. . .\n61\nLeonardo\u2019s manuscripts are one of the best sources to study the chemical\nequipment of Renaissance. His tireless sketching during his entire career produced\na very large and uncommon collection of manuscripts that allow us to understand\nand visualize many tools, instruments and chemical processes studied, developed\nand used during the Renaissance.\nAn activity that was a sort of flywheel in involving Leonardo in the study of the\nmany aspects of bronze casting was the project of the Equestrian monument for\nFrancesco Sforza. This was a very large bronze statue that was never cast but]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=76\nPages: 76\nDebate in the Works of Leonardo Da Vinci\nand Vannoccio Biringuccio\nAndrea Bernardoni\nAbstract During the Renaissance the field of the chemical arts was characterised\nby the complex identity of its protagonists, who would hardly recognize themselves\nin traditional socio-cultural and professional definitions. Although it is anachronistic to speak of chemistry as a discipline, during the late fifteenth and early sixteenth\ncenturies it is possible to outline an area of interest around the transformation\nprocesses of substances in which various fields of theoretical and practical knowledge intersect. In this cultural context the figures of Leonardo da Vinci and\nVannoccio Biringuccio stand out as, in addition to their experimental activity,\nthey became the promoters of a general reform of chemical arts and natural\nphilosophy.\n\u2018Chemical\u2019 Arts During the Renaissance\nTalking about chemistry in relation to the Renaissance calls for historiographical]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=90\nPages: 90,91\n35\nLeonardo, Manuscript B, 19 [fol. 10v, IV].\n68\nA. Bernardoni\nMoreover, on the other pages of his manuscripts Leonardo confirms his propensity to use glass for various apparatuses such as the transparent box to see the\nmotion of the flowing water through a hole in the bottom (Codex Atlanticus, fol.\n219r) or motion generated in a mass of water by a surface wave (Codex Hammer,\nfol. 9r and 29v). We also find a transparent glass cylinder for studying the flame of a\ncandle (Codex Atlanticus, fol. 226r) and, most of all, the drawing of a glassdrinking horn with which Leonardo says he is able to observe free atoms moved\nby the water.36 The topic of atoms in Leonardo is a very articulated question,\ninterwoven with the theme of the essere del nulla (being of nothing), for which\nthere is a specific literature.37 Here it is enough to make a brief reference to this\ntheme, just to stress it could also be discussed in terms of the observation of]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=99\nPages: 99,100\nKemp, Martin. 1995. \u2018Wrought by No Artist\u2019s Hand\u2019: The Natural, the Artificial, the Exotic, and\nthe Scientific in Some Artifacts from the Renaissance. In Reframing the Renaissance: Visual\nCulture in Europe and Latin America, 1450\u20131650, ed. Claire Farago, 177\u2013196. New Haven:\nYale University Press.\nKemp, Martin. 2006. Leonardo da Vinci: The Marvellous Works of Nature and Man. Oxford:\nOxford University Press.\nKiang, Dawson. 1997. Leonardo and Alchemy: A Bibliographical Note. Achademia Leonardi\nVinci. Journal of Leonardo Studies & Bibliography of Vinciana 10: 199\u2013201.\nLennep, Jacques van. 1985. Alchimie: contribution a\u0300 l\u2019histoire de l\u2019art alchimique. Brussels:\nCre\u0301dit Communal de Belgique.\nLeonardo da Vinci. 1973\u20131980. Codice Atlantico, ed. Augusto Marinoni, 24 vols. Florence:\nGiunti.\nArtisanal Processes and Epistemological Debate in the Works of Leonardo. . .\n77\nLeonardo da Vinci. 1978\u20131980. Corpus of the Anatomical Studies in the Collection of Her Majesty]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=80\nPages: 80\nwas involved in generic metal carpentry such as the casting and welding of\ndamaged swords and other craft objects.17 Further evidence of artists\u2019 versatile\nactivities during the Renaissance can be found in Andrea Verrocchio\u2019s (1435\u2013\n1488) workshop, which specialized in painting, sculpture, casting and metal carpentry. One of the most important works created in this workshop when Leonardo\nwas still one of Verrocchio\u2019s assistants was the copper sphere on the top of the\nlantern on Filippo Brunelleschi\u2019s (1377\u20131446) dome.18 In Verrocchio\u2019s workshop,\nassistants and pupils, including Leonardo, prepared colors, glues, solvents, waxes,\nacids, alloys and so on. Being an artist in the Renaissance meant being part of a\nwider shared material culture as artisans and chymists used and developed the same\nmaterials and techniques.\nIn Biringuccio\u2019s book we find a description of a brass-making workshop he\nvisited in Milan that discusses the organization of the workshop and the artisans\u2019]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=87\nPages: 87\ndrilling motion of fire. Leonardo\u2019s goals are both technological and scientific; the\nfire works as a drill. If this were to be verified, it could be used in some technological application but it could also assume a more general scientific and philosophical\nexplanation because the power of fire, like the power of the other elements (water,\nair and earth), manifests itself in the form of a spiral\u2014the natural screw. The power\nof the screw could be seen in the vortices of water and air, but also in Brunelleschi\u2019s\nbigger cranes and powerful technological elevator devices that become an analogic\nexplanation for the forces operating in nature.32\nAnother very interesting case involving the chemical equipment studied by\nLeonardo is the development of the alembic refrigerator system. In the Codex\nAtlanticus there are some drawings (fol. 912r, 1114r a\u2013b, 216r, 989r, 1118r)\n31\n\u201cTrattato che a\u0300i de\u2019 moti de\u2019 solidi gravi, trata de\u2019 gravi liquidi e dell\u2019aria e de\u2019 moti del foco, e]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=91\nPages: 91\ntheme, just to stress it could also be discussed in terms of the observation of\nphysical-chemical phenomena. Leonardo\u2019s atoms do not have qualitative-chemical\nspecifications but they have to be interpreted as physical primary matter particles\nexisting in nature without any chemical or physical properties. They are the result\nof substance consumption and we can see them in the form of dust, smoke, or as\ntiny, undefined pieces of matter:\nThe air that successively surrounds a moving object moving through it makes various\nmotions within itself. This can be seen in the dust particles [attimi] found in the sphere of\nthe sun, when they penetrate through some window into an obscure location, and when a\nstone is thrown into these dust particles [attimi], along the length of this solar ray, you can\nsee the dust particles [attimi] turning about at that location where the path made by the\nmoving object was filled in again by the air, as has been proved in the fifth.38\nAnd again:]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=84\nPages: 84\nFrancesco Sforza. This was a very large bronze statue that was never cast but\nstudied and worked on by Leonardo for almost 20 years. The main difficulty of this\ncast was the size, more than 7 m tall and almost 70 tons in weight, and the plan to\nrealize it in a single pouring. To organize the foundry and the molding process,\nLeonardo studied artillery casting, furnaces and the materials used in the molding,\nlike sand, wax, gypsum, clay, brick powder, carrying out several experiments to\nbetter understand their chemical-physical properties.27\nLeonardo\u2019s manuscripts are among the most important sources for the artillery\nproduction process, surely the most detailed and best illustrated of the fifteenth and\nsixteenth centuries. In some sheets of the Codex Atlanticus, for instance, we may\nfind the first and only reference for the production of iron shaft-soldering bombards,\nsuch as the famous Belgian Mons Meg, created with a hammer at the forge. To]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=97\nPages: 97,98\nMechanical Marvels, 11\u201318; and Smith, Body of the Artisan, 142\u20139.\nArtisanal Processes and Epistemological Debate in the Works of Leonardo. . .\n75\nArnaud, E.R. 1655. Introduction a la chymie, ou a la vraye physique, ou\u0300 le lecteur treuvera la\ndefinition de toutes les operations de la chymie, etc. Lyon: Claude Post.\nAvicenna. 1927. De congelatione et conglutinatione lapidum, being sections of the Kitab al-Shifa/\nthe Latin and Arabic texts, eds. and trans. Eric John Holmyard and Desmond Christopher\nMandeville. Paris: Paul Geuthner.\nBeretta, Marco. 2010. Leonardo and Lucretius. In Rinascimento, ed. Leo S. Olschki, Series 2, Vol.\nXLIX, 341\u2013372.\nBernardoni, Andrea. 2007. La quaestio de alchimia nel De la pirotechnia di Vannoccio\nBiringuccio. In Atti del XII convegno nazionale di storia e fondamenti della chimica,\ned. Franco Calascibetta and Luigi Cerruti, 261\u2013276. Rome: Accademia dei LX.\nBernardoni, Andrea. 2009. Leonardo and the Equestrian Monument for Francesco Sforza: The]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=88\nPages: 88,87\ncol moto di questo foco fa conparatione del moto delle revertigine dell\u2019aria e dell\u2019acqua, e\ntroverrai moti trivellanti del foco a ffarlo potente alle fusioni colle sua revolutioni, la qual cosa\nfarai co\u2019 regisstri e con acqua bollente.\u201d (Leonardo, Codex Arundel, fol. 145v).\n32\nPedretti, Leonardo architetto, 9\u201312; and Galluzzi, Mechanical Marvels, 55\u20136.\nArtisanal Processes and Epistemological Debate in the Works of Leonardo. . .\n65\nFig. 5 Leonardo, Drilling\nmotion of fire, Codex\nArundel, fol. 145v,\nCourtesy of British Library,\nLondon\nwhere we can see a very interesting attempt to develop a basin refrigerator system\nby separating the basin and the stove to prevent a thermal shock in the neck of the\ncucurbit (fol. 989r) (Fig. 6). For the refrigerator system Leonardo also developed an\nalembic lid with a chamber along its external surface where fresh water could flow\ninside (Fig. 7). Scholars had already discussed this very modern solution in order to]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=99\nPages: 99\nGalluzzi, Paolo. 2008. Leonardo da Vinci\u2019s Concept of \u201cNature\u201d: \u201cMore Cruel Stepmother than\nMother\u201d. In Aurora Torealis, eds. M. Beretta, K. Grandin, and S. Lindqvist, 13\u201329. Sagamore\nBeach: Science History Publications.\nGarzoni, Tommaso. 1996. La piazza universale di tutte le professioni del mondo, eds. Paolo\nCherchi and Beatrice Collina. Turin: Einaudi.\nGaurico, Pomponio. [1504] 1999. De sculptura, ed. Paolo Cutolo. Naples: Edizioni Scientifiche\nItaliane.\nGombrich, Ernst H. 1986. Leonardo and the Magicians: Polemics and Rivalry. In New Light on\nOld Masters. Studies in the Art of the Renaissance IV, ed. Ernst H. Gombrich, 61\u201388. Oxford:\nPhaidon.\nGrellard, C., and A. Robert. 2009. Atomism in Late Medieval Philosophy and Theology. Leiden/\nBoston: Brill.\nGuareschi, Icilio. 1904. Vannoccio Biringuccio e la chimica tecnica. In Supplemento annuale alla\nenciclopedia di chimica scientifica e industriale colle applicazioni all\u2019agricoltura ed industrie]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=100\nPages: 100,101\nPedretti, Carlo. 1978. Leonardo architetto. Milan: Electa.\nPerifano, Alfredo. 1996. L\u2019Alchimie dans de la pirotechnia de Vannoccio Biringuccio. Revue des e\u0301\ntudes italiennes 42: 189\u2013202.\nPerifano, Alfredo. 1997. L\u2019Alchimie a\u0300 la Cour de Come Ier de Me\u0301dicis: savoirs, culture et\npolitique. Paris: Honore\u0301 Champion.\n78\nA. Bernardoni\nPrincipe, Lawrence M., and Lloyd DeWitt. 2002. Transmutations: Alchemy in Art. Philadelphia:\nChemical Heritage Foundation.\nReti, Ladislao. 1952a. Le arti chimiche di Leonardo da Vinci. La chimica e l\u2019industria 34(7): 721\u2013\n743.\nReti, Ladislao. 1952b. Le arti chimiche di Leonardo da Vinci. La chimica e l\u2019industria 34(11):\n655\u2013667.\nRossi, Paolo. 1971. I filosofi e le machine 1400\u20131700. Milan: Feltrinelli.\nScaglia, Giustina. 1981. Alle origini degli studi tecnologici di Leonardo. XX Lettura Vinciana.\nFlorence: Barbera Editore.\nSchneider, Wolfgang. 1949. Das chemische Wissen Leonardo da Vincis und seine Bedeutung f\u20ac\nur\ndie Geschichte der Chemie, Die Pharmazie 4.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=15\nPages: 15\nas a field of expert inquiry on materials and material transformation was considered\nsufficiently positive to identify with. However, we should not forget that Vasari\u2019s\nidentification of Van Eyck as an alchemist served the purpose of downplaying\nNetherlandish art as techne, only a first step in a narrative of art historical progress\nculminating in Vasari\u2019s beloved Florentine art.\nThe epistemic value of techne was shifting at the time of Vasari. Artisans came\nto be considered experts of nature likening the artisanal processes of material\ntransformation undertaken in their workshops to those of nature.20 As Andrea\nBernardoni shows in this volume, Biringuccio\u2019s Pirotechnia is part of this larger\nprocess of shifting epistemic value of artisanal processes. Rejecting transmutational\nalchemy as \u201cfalse\u201d and the alchemists who practiced it as fraudulent, Biringuccio\ncarved out space for true alchemy as one of the arts of fire. Artisanal workshops,]"]}

{"result":["[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=92\nPages: 92\nremained to Biringuccio the most important \u201cart\u201d for studying the secrets of nature:\nThus, in short, it can be said in conclusion that this art [alchemy] is the origin and\nfoundation of many other arts, wherefore it should be held in reverence and practiced.\nBut he who practices it must be ignorant neither of cause nor of natural effects, and not too\npoor to support the expense. Neither should he do it from avarice, but only in order to enjoy\nthe fine fruits of its effects and the knowledge of them, and that pleasing novelty which it\nshows to the experimenter in operation.42\nBiringuccio considered alchemy a legitimate knowledge grounded on experimental and speculative activity. This is an important epistemological step for\nartisanal processes because alchemy was no longer seen as a utilitarian art but as\na disinterested activity carried out by men to enjoy the fruits of their knowledge.\n41\nBiringuccio, Pirotechnia (1942), 41. For the Italian, see Biringuccio, De la pirotechnia (1977),]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=156\nPages: 156\nIn this process of reconfiguring Florentine arts and crafts, alchemy played an\nexceedingly important role, both as a fashionable scientific discipline with not\nparticularly strong academic ties and as a useful set of experimental practices in\nwhich several crafts helped artisans quench their thirst for innovation and realize\ntheir socio-cultural ambitions. I shall not explore here the spread of interest in\nalchemy in Florence at beginning of the sixteenth century, a theme already effectively surveyed in Alfredo Perifano\u2019s book on Cosimo I\u2019s alchemical passion.24\nI shall instead take into consideration the development of alchemy in the Palazzo\nVecchio\u2019s fonderia and the Casino, sites where its relation with the chemical arts\nand technological innovations became apparent. Indeed, it is my impression that if\nwe want to understand the metamorphosis of the sciences in Florence during this\ncrucial period we should look at disciplines, such as alchemy, which had few]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=156\nPages: 156\narts.22 Important as their work has been in documenting the historic relevance of the\nnew architectural settings, a global picture is still lacking of the nexus between\nthese sites dedicated to the production of scientific and technical knowledge and the\neconomic forces that propelled their realization. A recent book on the history of the\nSpezieria al Giglio illustrates the profound economic and cultural changes introduced by apothecaries who were only apparently immobile.23 Cosimo I\u2019s policy of\nsponsoring the arts and technology as part of his program of economic expansion\nforced intellectual elites to take account of a body of knowledge that had been\nconfined to the margin of the Court, and to re-evaluate their room for manoeuver,\nnot only conceptually but also architectonically, in terms of their work spaces.\nThe Casino di San Marco\nIn this process of reconfiguring Florentine arts and crafts, alchemy played an]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=160\nPages: 160\njewelry were the arts most closely connected with alchemy. Their connections\ninspired Francesco to create a new decorative scenario, dominated by alchemy,\nby which illustrate the relation between arts and nature.\nFrancesco was extremely keen, even more than his father, to promote the study\nof the natural sciences and the arts related to them. His passion for the chemical arts\nwas so strong that in 1560, when he was only 19, he was told off by his brother\nGiovanni for attending the works of the fonderia all day long.33 It was Francesco\nwho, in September 1569, charged the architect, engineer and inventor Bernardo\nBuontalenti (1531\u20131608), who had been one of his teachers since 1550, to oversee\nthe construction of Bortolo\u2019s new glass furnace and a new fonderia.34 Francesco I\nalso exploited Buontalenti\u2019s versatile skills in the works of the fusion of precious]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=122\nPages: 122\nareas. But this corresponds with the interconnected nature of these fields, as\npreviously outlined: early modern concepts of metallogenesis must be understood\nas a mixture of religious connotations, their dependency on antique montanistic\ntheories as well as on alchemical lore adopted through medieval Islamic mediation.\nBeyond that, a work of art communicates in different ways than a text. The object\ntransforms the know how of the artisan as it is performed in the working process and\nblends it with the lore of the scholar into embodied, visual knowledge. This\nknowledge, encapsulated in the work of art can then be exhibited in the surroundings of the ruler, in his Kunstkammer collection as well as in processions and\ncourtly festivities.47 It is\u2014apart from instruments to measure natural phenomena,\nwhich Baird puts in the focus of his analysis \u2014not \u2018useful\u2019 in the sense that it\nembodied knowledge which can be used to gain and widen existent knowledge. But]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=204\nPages: 204\nhands. At the time of Biringuccio\u2019s writing, the potter\u2019s art was on the threshold of a\nparadigm shift that would create a marked division between craft knowledge and\ntheory based practice, setting two separate courses for ceramic innovation in the\nlater sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. His citation of alchemy as one of \u201ctwo\nsources as [pottery\u2019s] principal basis,\u201d is referential to the provision of purified\nminerals and \u201celemental mixtures.\u201d5 However, it also foreshadowed the intellectual\nengagement of chymists in the quest for the production of European porcelain,\nbringing the weight of the older alchemical tradition to bear.\nPrior to the fourteenth century, European pottery was external to the hierarchy of\nthe esteemed arts, such as metallurgy, glassmaking, painting, and dyeing. The\nextensively copied treatise De diversis artibus, composed in the thirteenth century\nby the Benedictine monk Theophilus, thoroughly introduces the full range of]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=77\nPages: 77\nAgricola talked about a generic art of metal as a separate activity from alchemy:\n\u201cBut concerning the art of alchemy, if it be an art, I will speak further elsewhere. I\nwill now return to the art of mining.\u201d7\nWhen talking about chemistry in the Renaissance we have to consider a variegated tradition of non-mechanical arts where chemical processes developed: pharmacy, metallurgy, glass making, dyeing, spirits distillation, agriculture cultivations\nand the preparation of colours for painting and drawing; each of these professional\nactivities involve chemical processes that are not necessarily involved in alchemical transmutation. The difference between the purpose of chemical arts and\nalchemy was also the cause of cultural and epistemological tension during the\nMiddle Ages and Renaissance. The medieval technological debate during the\nfifteenth and sixteenth centuries went beyond the traditional Quaestio de alchimia]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=13\nPages: 13\nusing materials and chemical procedures to make both everyday items and objects\nof the visual and decorative arts, the activity known as alchemy encompassed more\nthan attempts to make gold.14 Transmutational alchemy was about the transmutation of all base metals into more noble ones, but chrysopoeia was only one\naspect of alchemy. Alchemy also touched on medicine and chemical manufacture.\nIt was about the chemical production of things\u2014medicines, porcelain, dyes, and\nother products as well as the precious metals\u2014and about the knowledge of how to\nproduce them. In this sense, \u201cart technologies\u201d\u2014materials and techniques to make\nart and knowledge of these materials and techniques\u2014overlapped with alchemy.\nAlchemy has deep roots in writings on material transformation from Antiquity.\nThe productive knowledge associated with material transformation was written\ndown in recipe books. The Leiden and Stockholm Papyri date to the third century]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=157\nPages: 157\npatron a keen interest in alchemy, was meant to have taken part\u2014but his premature\ndeath prevented his involvement. In the Studiolo the connection between alchemy\nand the chemical arts was exalted. The iconographic itinerary conceived by\nBorghini was situated in a sequence on the upper part of the wall where paintings\ndevoted to thermal baths, the discovery of gun powder, a glass works, a goldsmith\u2019s\nworkshop, alchemists and a bronze foundry were located; at the room\u2019s two ends\nwere two statues, portraying Vulcan and Apollo. On the lower part of the wall a\nmythological scene recalled Francesco I\u2019s alchemical and artistic interests.27 I\nwould like to stress the importance of a few elements directly or indirectly related\nto the chemical arts. What first strikes you in this particular arrangement is the\nproximity of Stradano\u2019s famous painting of Francesco I\u2019s alchemical laboratory and\nGiovanni Maria Butteri\u2019s (1540\u20131606) painting illustrating the glass works (Figs. 3\nand 4).]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=154\nPages: 154\na city \u201cfounded upon the guilds and trade.\u201d17\nThis new configuration of professional relations led to a thorough reassessment\nof the locations where cultural and economic activities were conducted, articulating\nin an experimental key the arts, which previously had been regarded as the fruit of\nindividual dexterity rather than the outcome of a deliberate cultural program. In\nmany cases the architectural changes were not apparent, since many kinds of\nartisans (e.g., the goldsmiths) kept on using the same premises they had occupied\nfor generations. However, even in such examples of apparent continuity the arts\nwere seen as vectors for change. This perception found visual expression in a\nvolume of engravings, based on drawings by Jan van der Straet (1523\u20131605)\n(or Giovanni Stradano), that bore the significant title Nova Reperta, commissioned\nby the Florentine academician Luigi Alamanni (1558\u20131603) around the end of the]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=146\nPages: 146\nadministration of artistic and scientific activities in order to produce characteristic\nobjects he used as tributes to consolidate his politic alliances.\nThe cohabitation between arts and sciences still corresponded to the ancient\nway: in the Renaissance, according to the philosophers and the theologians, arts and\nsciences both belonged to natural philosophy. Besides, botany and medicine\nbecame part of the symbolic network formed around the ideal prince\u2019s image: the\ndoctor and philosopher prince acting for his people\u2019s health and salvation. This\nimage took on a special aura under Ferdinando I, who dealt in large-scale sacred\nimages with curing powers, like the Miraculous Virgin of Santissima Annunziata or\nthe Madonna of Loreto, and medicine.\nDestined to further dynastic and political propaganda, arts and sciences had to\nreflect grand-ducal power. Therefore, the Galleria dei lavori preserved through\nsecrecy the most progressive techniques, developed a widely recognizable style for\n55]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=47\nPages: 47\nfraught with difficulty. Alchemy can be defined as the \u2018art of transmutation\u2019,\nreferring to the perfection of base or impure matter (often metal or stone) into\nperfect substances. Alchemical procedures thus rely on artisanal/craft practices.\nAny overlap between alchemy and art-technological procedures can be explained\nby the use of identical materials and substances. Both are concerned with the\ndescription of colours\u2014especially in processes of change, the making of pigments,\nthe production of artificial gemstones, the imitation of gold and silver and the\ntransmutation of materials. Both require procedures involving precise and specifically defined actions, prescriptions and ingredients. So both ultimately use identical\nrhetorical formulations that reflect a \u2018step by step\u2019 procedure. Assuming that\nalchemical and artistic texts have the same textual format, raises the question: did\nthey also have the same types of production and dissemination? Using a corpus of]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=157\nPages: 157\nthe chemical arts was visually displayed in the series of paintings hanging in the\nStudiolo of Palazzo Vecchio, a small dark room decorated with a complex iconographic narrative. Designed for the then Prince Francesco by Vincenzo Borghini\n(1515\u20131580) and Giorgio Vasari (1511\u20131574), its cabinets seem to have included\nsome of the most valuable treasures produced in the fonderia. In addition to all sorts\nof precious stones, glass and porcelain, they carefully stored the rarest natural\nspecimens and the products of alchemical experiments.26 The meaning of this\nroom and its intimate connection with Francesco I\u2019s interest in alchemy, has been\ndiscussed by many, and most recently reconstructed in the comprehensive work by\nValentina Conticelli. Thirty-two artists were employed and coordinated by Vasari\nto accomplish the work. Benvenuto Cellini (1500\u20131571), who shared with his\npatron a keen interest in alchemy, was meant to have taken part\u2014but his premature]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=82\nPages: 82\nattention was specifically focused on alchemy\u2019s claims to overturn the relationship\nbetween art and nature; however, he also stressed that alchemy was worthy of\npursuit as it might produce knowledge that could improve the condition of\nmankind:\nMan is involved with things produced by nature and nature does not change the ordinary\nkinds of things it creates in the same way that from time to time the things created by man\nare changed; and indeed man is nature\u2019s chief instrument, because nature is concerned only\nwith the production of elementary things, but from these elementary things man produces\nan infinite number of compounds, although he has no power to create any natural things\nexcept another like himself, that is his children. [. . .] And of this the old alchemists will\nserve as my witnesses, who have never either by chance or deliberate experiment succeeded\nin creating the smallest thing which can be created by nature; [. . .] If, however, insensate]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=40\nPages: 40,41\ncolour without focusing only on gold. Nevertheless, the Egyptian alchemist, though\nvery familiar with ps.-Democritus\u2019s books, never mentions stones working and\npurple dyeing in the passage. These kinds of crafts seem to have been somehow left\napart within the debate on the contents of the original books of alchemy. Although\nZosimus stresses the central role played by dyeing techniques, the polarity between\nThe Alchemical Art of Dyeing: The Fourfold Division of Alchemy. . .\n17\na wider idea of alchemy and the bare making of precious metals seems to have been\nreduced to a simpler discussion on metalworking: Zosimus underscores all the\npossible chromatic transformations of metals, which seem to become the most\nrelevant topic of any alchemical inquiry.\nSuch a variety of positions already detectable during the earliest phases of the\nwestern alchemical tradition makes clear how fluid were the boundaries of an art]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=26\nPages: 26,27\n2\nThe Alchemical Art of Dyeing: The Fourfold Division of Alchemy. . .\n3\nThe passage comes after a long introduction (\u00a7\u00a7 1\u20134) in which Psellos rhetorically\ndiscusses the philosophical framework within which chrysopoeia is to be understood and assessed. At the very beginning (\u00a7 1, ll. 5f.) the scholar identifies the main\ntopic of his letter with \u1f21 \u1f10\u03bc\u03c0\u03cd\u03c1\u03b9\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b5\u0002\u03c7\u03bd\u03b7 (the art of fire), whose first aim is said to be\nthe transformation of lead, tin, and any other metal into gold (\u00a7 1, ll. 12\u201315). The\nkey concept of transformation is framed and expanded in the following paragraphs\n(\u00a7\u00a7 2\u20134), where Psellos tries to set the basic principles guiding his \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u2019\u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03ae\u03bc\u03b7\u03c2\n(scientific) explanation of this art. He insists on the four elements that compose the\nphysical world, on their reciprocal changes, and on the alterations of the four\nqualities (namely wet, dry, hot, and cold). These changes are explained through]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=8\nPages: 8\npainting celebrates Antwerp\u2019s economic power and the productive ingenuity of its\ncraftsmen and artists as much as it praises the transformative force of fire turning\nrelatively cheap and humble materials into highly valued objects of art. These\nobjects were all products of the arts of fire, which according to Vannoccio\nBiringuccio (1480\u2013c.1539) included alchemy, and excluded \u201cfalse alchemy\u201d\nconcerned with pretentious transmutation.2\nIn the background of Van Utrecht\u2019s painting, a window opens on to a space in\nwhich a man stands working at a stove with an open fire. Stirring a cauldron, the\nman is shown in the material company of bellows, an anvil, a melting and a\ndistilling furnace, and other equipment related to the worlds of assaying and\nmetallurgy. Van Utrecht\u2019s background refers to the spaces in which the objects in\nthe foreground were produced. Were these spaces laboratories or artisanal workshops? Were they home to gold- and silversmiths, glassmakers or producers of]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=12\nPages: 12\nfunction as a deposit of recipes and descriptions of techniques. Trained artisans\nwould then be sent out to distribute new processes, new manufactures and inventions. Becher used alchemy to intrigue his patron, who was always interested in the\nwealth promised by metallic transmutation, and to link the worlds of the court and\ncommerce.\nSuch court projects often took inspiration from the two earliest examples of\nspaces bringing together alchemy and the decorative arts at the Medici court in\nFlorence. Two essays in this volume deal with these Florentine workplaces: Fanny\nKieffer discusses the Uffizi, and Marco Beretta the Casino di San Marco. Founded\nin 1586 by Francesco I de\u2019 Medici (1541\u20131587), and developed by his successor,\nFerdinando I (1549\u20131609), the Uffizi housed the fonderia, a workspace for the arts\nof fire. Here medicines were prepared and metals fused. The fonderia was simultaneously a pharmacy, an alchemical laboratory, a smithy, a goldsmith\u2019s workshop,]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=16\nPages: 16\nBeretta, were also early examples of such places of exchange, followed by many\nother European courts. These workplaces facilitated the exchange of materials\nbetween alchemy and the arts, and the attraction of the courts also made artisans\nadopt alchemical language to elevate the status of their craft. However, above all,\nthese court laboratories made possible, well beyond a shared material culture, the\nexchange of people and knowledge between the arts and alchemy. Although there is\na long tradition of experimentation in alchemy and the boundaries between alchemy\nand art technologies were fluid from the very beginnings of alchemy in Antiquity, in\nthe sixteenth and seventeenth centuries artisans became more deeply involved in\nalchemical pursuits, and some crafts relied on chemical expertise offered by\nscholars trained as alchemists.22 Above all, texts and books, products and symbols\nof scholarly culture, played an increasingly important role in laboratories and]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=48\nPages: 48\nYet, alchemy could be described as the practical, philosophical and medical search\nfor the perfecting of base material substances and also for the extending of life.3\nThe theoretical and practical aspects of alchemy involve both the study of all\ninanimate or animate things made from the elements and the observation and\nimitation of natural processes within the laboratory.4 In this context, alchemy\ncould be seen as a mechanical art, in the sense that it works on matter but is also\na liberal art, as it attempts to explain matter in its composition and its transformation.5 In the practical sense, one of the main goals of alchemy is the transmutation\n1\nThe main data and characteristics of these manuscripts are given in Appendix.\nBrewer, Fr. Rogeri Bacon, 39\u201340.\n3\nPerception and definition of alchemy is not chronologically constant and has been the subject of\nseveral (re)interpretations since the eighteenth century, see Principe & Newman, \u201cHistoriography\nof Alchemy.\u201d\n4]"]}

{"result":["[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=89\nPages: 89\nBiblioteca Ambrosiana,\nMilan (Image taken from\nCodex Atlanticus, Hoepli\nedition, Milan, 1894\u20131904)\nFig. 7 Leonardo,\nRefrigerated Alembic,\nCodex Atlanticus, fol.\n1114br, Biblioteca\nAmbrosiana, Milan (Image\ntaken from Codex\nAtlanticus, Hoepli edition,\nMilan, 1894\u20131904)\nThere is no other information and it is impossible to know the casting material\nLeonardo thought he would use. It was most likely copper or bronze, however, we\ncannot exclude the use of glass. Leonardo, in fact, preferred using glass alembics\nbecause of the possibility of observing condensation phenomena inside them. In a\nfragmentary sheet of Manuscript E he specifies:\nSuch is the nature of the condensation of the walls, constraining the space enclosed between\nthem, as is that of the enclosed [space], multiplied by the enclosing [walls]. This is proved\nwith the smoke generated in an enclosed space, as is seen in the glass vessels with which]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=88\nPages: 88,89\ninside (Fig. 7). Scholars had already discussed this very modern solution in order to\nunderstand its pertinence to a real alembic or to an unrealized design.33 The\nwireframe representation leads us to think that it was made of glass, but its\nmorphological complexity tends to suggest it was made by hammering soldered\ncopper.\nIn folio 216r of Codex Atlanticus we have another interesting study for casting a\ntraditional alembic (Fig. 8). This is the only source known to me with specifications\nabout creating and conserving an alembic. First of all, writes Leonardo, the model\nof the alembic in turned wood has to be built, and then it has to be refined with clay\nwool-cloth clippings. The external plaster mold has to be built on it in two valves.\n33\nReti, \u201cArti chimiche di Leonardo\u201d (1952a; 1952b).\n66\nA. Bernardoni\nFig. 6 Leonardo, Basin\nrefrigerator alembic, Codex\nAtlanticus, fol. 989r,\nBiblioteca Ambrosiana,\nMilan (Image taken from\nCodex Atlanticus, Hoepli\nedition, Milan, 1894\u20131904)]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=83\nPages: 83,84\n26\nThese admonitions against alchemy, presented for the first time by Avicenna, were known\nduring the Middle Ages as sciant artifices, see Avicenna, De congelatione et conglutinatione\nlapidum, 53\u20135; Newman, \u201cTechnology and Alchemical Debate.\u201d; and Halleux, \u201cAlchimiste et\nl\u2019essayeur,\u201d 211.\nArtisanal Processes and Epistemological Debate in the Works of Leonardo. . .\n61\nLeonardo\u2019s manuscripts are one of the best sources to study the chemical\nequipment of Renaissance. His tireless sketching during his entire career produced\na very large and uncommon collection of manuscripts that allow us to understand\nand visualize many tools, instruments and chemical processes studied, developed\nand used during the Renaissance.\nAn activity that was a sort of flywheel in involving Leonardo in the study of the\nmany aspects of bronze casting was the project of the Equestrian monument for\nFrancesco Sforza. This was a very large bronze statue that was never cast but]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=81\nPages: 81\nactivity: heating systems, smelting furnaces, cucurbits, alembics and balanced\nscales (Fig. 1).21 Alchemists used the same technological apparatuses and devices\nas artisans and alchemical research was often carried out along with chemical and\nmetallurgical activities, for instance, at the Fonderia by the Medici family in\nFlorence, or several other places in sixteenth- and seventeenth-century Europe.22\nLeonardo and the \u2018Chemical\u2019 Arts\nVery rarely have historians seen Leonardo from the perspective of his direct\ninvolvement in the chemicals arts. Apart from Ladislao Reti and a few others,\nLeonardo\u2019s observations and studies on matter transformation are usually seen in\nthe context of his natural philosophy, with few references to his practical involvement as a painter and engineer during his entire career, including his vision and\nrelationship with occult science and alchemy.23\nIf we focus our attention on Leonardo\u2019s notes and drawings about substance]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=89\nPages: 89,91\nwith the smoke generated in an enclosed space, as is seen in the glass vessels with which\ndistilling is done, in which it is easily recognized at what part of this transparent vase the\nsmoke condenses more or less and . . .34\n34\nLeonardo, Manuscript E, 8 [fol. 3r, I].\nArtisanal Processes and Epistemological Debate in the Works of Leonardo. . .\n67\nFig. 8 Leonardo, Basin refrigerator alembic, Codex Atlanticus, fol. 216r, Biblioteca Ambrosiana,\nMilan (Image taken from Codex Atlanticus, Hoepli edition, Milan, 1894\u20131904)\nThe use of glass in the casting is very difficult because of its viscosity. The only\nreference to this technique in Leonardo is in relation to the casting of a glass bell jar\nin Manuscript B, in which he says he uses a metallurgical furnace to pour the glass\ninside a very hot mold: \u201cPrepare the furnace in the usual manner, that is, for\nbombards, and when the glass is melted, pour it into the red\u2013hot form.\u201d35\n35\nLeonardo, Manuscript B, 19 [fol. 10v, IV].\n68\nA. Bernardoni]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=87\nPages: 87\ndrilling motion of fire. Leonardo\u2019s goals are both technological and scientific; the\nfire works as a drill. If this were to be verified, it could be used in some technological application but it could also assume a more general scientific and philosophical\nexplanation because the power of fire, like the power of the other elements (water,\nair and earth), manifests itself in the form of a spiral\u2014the natural screw. The power\nof the screw could be seen in the vortices of water and air, but also in Brunelleschi\u2019s\nbigger cranes and powerful technological elevator devices that become an analogic\nexplanation for the forces operating in nature.32\nAnother very interesting case involving the chemical equipment studied by\nLeonardo is the development of the alembic refrigerator system. In the Codex\nAtlanticus there are some drawings (fol. 912r, 1114r a\u2013b, 216r, 989r, 1118r)\n31\n\u201cTrattato che a\u0300i de\u2019 moti de\u2019 solidi gravi, trata de\u2019 gravi liquidi e dell\u2019aria e de\u2019 moti del foco, e]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=83\nPages: 83\nof mortals have their existence and their death.25\nHe argued that the inability of alchemy to deliver its claims of transmutation is\ndue to the impossibility of developing a technology able to reproduce the natural\ngenesis of substantial forms. As Avicenna had already claimed in his Latin translation of Kitab ash-Shifa\u2019 (De congelatione et conglutinatione lapidum), Leonardo\nstressed man\u2019s perception of the purity of natural elements was neither highly\ndeveloped nor sensitive enough to be able to precisely quantify the proportions\nrequired to produce the substantial form of different metals.26\nIf we assume within the tradition of Italian \u2018artist-engineers\u2019 this \u2018epistemological approach\u2019 was oriented to separate true and false alchemy and culminated in the\nwork of Biringuccio, then the manuscripts of Leonardo could be seen as one of the\nmain sources of \u2018chemical technologies\u2019 from the end of fifteenth and beginning of]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=88\nPages: 88,87\ncol moto di questo foco fa conparatione del moto delle revertigine dell\u2019aria e dell\u2019acqua, e\ntroverrai moti trivellanti del foco a ffarlo potente alle fusioni colle sua revolutioni, la qual cosa\nfarai co\u2019 regisstri e con acqua bollente.\u201d (Leonardo, Codex Arundel, fol. 145v).\n32\nPedretti, Leonardo architetto, 9\u201312; and Galluzzi, Mechanical Marvels, 55\u20136.\nArtisanal Processes and Epistemological Debate in the Works of Leonardo. . .\n65\nFig. 5 Leonardo, Drilling\nmotion of fire, Codex\nArundel, fol. 145v,\nCourtesy of British Library,\nLondon\nwhere we can see a very interesting attempt to develop a basin refrigerator system\nby separating the basin and the stove to prevent a thermal shock in the neck of the\ncucurbit (fol. 989r) (Fig. 6). For the refrigerator system Leonardo also developed an\nalembic lid with a chamber along its external surface where fresh water could flow\ninside (Fig. 7). Scholars had already discussed this very modern solution in order to]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=16\nPages: 16,15\ncarved out space for true alchemy as one of the arts of fire. Artisanal workshops,\nsuch as Andrea Verrocchio\u2019s (c.1435\u20131488) in which Leonardo da Vinci (1452\u2013\n1519) apprenticed or Leonardo\u2019s own workplace, shared a material culture with\nalchemical laboratories. As we have already pointed out, artisans used similar\nequipment and performed \u201cchemical\u201d operations. However, Bernardoni argues,\nBiringuccio made the claim that these artisans were the true experts on matter,\nmaterials and material transformation and that artisanal \u201cchemical\u201d operations were\nthe key to natural knowledge.\nOne of the readers of Biringuccio\u2019s Pirotechnia was Johannes Mathesius (1504\u2013\n1565), a Lutheran preacher in St. Joachimsthal, the center of an important mining\ndistrict. In her contribution to this volume, Henrike Haug analyzes Mathesius\u2019s\n19\nHassenstein, Das Feuerwerckbuch, 45\u20136. For translation and discussion, see Werrett,\nFireworks, 28.\n20\nSmith, Body of the Artisan. esp. 95\u2013127.\nIntroduction\nxv]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=84\nPages: 84,85\n14.\n28\n62\nA. Bernardoni\nFig. 2 Leonardo, artillery moulding process for the barrel, Codex Atlanticus, fol. 46br, Biblioteca\nAmbrosiana, Milan (Image taken from Codex Atlanticus, Hoepli edition, Milan, 1894\u20131904)\nair into the chamber from below. The note under the drawing helps us interpret the\ndevice as a study for amplifying the penetrative action of fire: \u201cThe greater the\nnatural motion of the fire or the greater its weight, the greater its impulsive force\u201d\n(Fig. 3).29 Leonardo talks about fire in the same terms as the weight of bodies, so he\ninterprets it as a hard material particulate flow, able to penetrate the body and break\nthe link of its particles. In Aristotelian matter theory, fire is the lightest element that\nfinds its natural place at the most peripheral region of the sub-lunar world. Just as a\nstone falls towards the earth to reach its natural place, fire goes in the opposite\ndirection, rising to the far reaches of the sky; the longer the distance, the quicker it]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=81\nPages: 81,82\nGombrich, \u201cLeonardo and the Magicians\u201d; Vasoli, Leonardo e l\u2019alchimia, 69\u201377; Kiang,\n\u201cLeonardo and Alchemy\u201d; Frosini, \u201cPittura come filosofia\u201d; Kemp, Leonardo da Vinci, 293\u2013\n329; Galluzzi, \u201cVinci\u2019s Concept of \u2018Nature\u2019,\u201d; Beretta, \u201cLeonardo and Lucretius\u201d; Bernardoni,\n\u201cElementi, sostanze naturali\u201d; and Nanni, \u201cLucrezio.\u201d For Leonardo\u2019s involvement in the chemical arts, see Schneider, Chemische Wissen Leonardo, 40\u20133, 87\u201392; Partington, History of Chemistry, vol. II, 1\u20138; Taylor, \u201cVinci et la chimie\u201d; Reti, \u201cArti chimiche di Leonardo\u201d (1952a; 1952b);\nBernardoni, \u201cLeonardo and the \u2018chemical arts\u2019,\u201d and Esplosioni, fusioni e trasmutazioni, 38\u201341.\nArtisanal Processes and Epistemological Debate in the Works of Leonardo. . .\n59\nFig. 1 D. Beccafumi,\nFoundry workshop;\ncourtesy of Accademia\nCarrara, Bergamo\ntension between mechanical arts and alchemy during the Renaissance period. His\nattention was specifically focused on alchemy\u2019s claims to overturn the relationship]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=90\nPages: 90,91\n35\nLeonardo, Manuscript B, 19 [fol. 10v, IV].\n68\nA. Bernardoni\nMoreover, on the other pages of his manuscripts Leonardo confirms his propensity to use glass for various apparatuses such as the transparent box to see the\nmotion of the flowing water through a hole in the bottom (Codex Atlanticus, fol.\n219r) or motion generated in a mass of water by a surface wave (Codex Hammer,\nfol. 9r and 29v). We also find a transparent glass cylinder for studying the flame of a\ncandle (Codex Atlanticus, fol. 226r) and, most of all, the drawing of a glassdrinking horn with which Leonardo says he is able to observe free atoms moved\nby the water.36 The topic of atoms in Leonardo is a very articulated question,\ninterwoven with the theme of the essere del nulla (being of nothing), for which\nthere is a specific literature.37 Here it is enough to make a brief reference to this\ntheme, just to stress it could also be discussed in terms of the observation of]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=84\nPages: 84\nFrancesco Sforza. This was a very large bronze statue that was never cast but\nstudied and worked on by Leonardo for almost 20 years. The main difficulty of this\ncast was the size, more than 7 m tall and almost 70 tons in weight, and the plan to\nrealize it in a single pouring. To organize the foundry and the molding process,\nLeonardo studied artillery casting, furnaces and the materials used in the molding,\nlike sand, wax, gypsum, clay, brick powder, carrying out several experiments to\nbetter understand their chemical-physical properties.27\nLeonardo\u2019s manuscripts are among the most important sources for the artillery\nproduction process, surely the most detailed and best illustrated of the fifteenth and\nsixteenth centuries. In some sheets of the Codex Atlanticus, for instance, we may\nfind the first and only reference for the production of iron shaft-soldering bombards,\nsuch as the famous Belgian Mons Meg, created with a hammer at the forge. To]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=81\nPages: 81\nIf we focus our attention on Leonardo\u2019s notes and drawings about substance\ntransformation, he can be seen as a witness and a protagonist of the epistemological\n20\nFor more information on the relation between artists and alchemy during the Renaissance, see\nPrincipe & DeWitt, Transmutations; Newman, Promethean Ambitions, 115\u201363; Ferino-Pagden\net al., Parmigianino, 15\u20137; Calvesi, Arte e alchimia; Lennep, L\u2019art alchimique; and Conticelli,\nAlchimia e le arti, 13\u201333.\n21\nGabriele, Incisioni alchemico-metallurgiche.\n22\nOn the Medici\u2019s Fonderia, see this volume: Kieffer and Beretta. On the relation of alchemy and\nmetallurgical industry, see Nummedal, Alchemy and Authority, 119\u201346.\n23\nFor Leonardo\u2019s scientific and philosophical studies of natural phenomena and his theory of\nmatter, see Boni, Vinci e l\u2019alchimia, 401\u20135; Hooykaas, \u201cThe\u0301orie corpusculaire de Le\u0301onard\u201d;\nGombrich, \u201cLeonardo and the Magicians\u201d; Vasoli, Leonardo e l\u2019alchimia, 69\u201377; Kiang,]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=85\nPages: 85,86\nthe fusion chamber (Codex Atlanticus, fol. 1103r, 548r, 580v, 82v) (Fig. 4).\n29\n\u201cquanto piu\u0300 il moto natural del foco o del peso sia lungo, piu\u0300 vale la sua percussion.\u201d (Leonardo,\nCodex Atlanticus, fol. 87r).\n30\nBernardoni, \u201cElementi, sostanze naturali.\u201d\nArtisanal Processes and Epistemological Debate in the Works of Leonardo. . .\n63\nFig. 3 Leonardo, Technological application of the element of fire, Codex Atlanticus, fol. 87r,\nBiblioteca Ambrosiana, Milan (Image taken from Codex Atlanticus, Hoepli edition, Milan, 1894\u2013\n1904)\nFurnaces become Leonardo\u2019s instrument for studying and observing fire. A\ndrawing on a folio in the Codex Arundel representing a tower furnace, used in the\nMiddle Ages by alchemists for distillation, assumes a very important epistemological value (Fig. 5). The drawing presents an apparently accurate copy of this\nfurnace\u2019s vertical section and, when we read the note below, we understand that]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=93\nPages: 93,94\nBiringuccio\u2019s original approach to the arts of fire emerges and that distinguishes\nhim, for instance, from Georg Agricola who, at almost the same time, wrote his De\nre metallica in which he outlined the general arts of metals related to mining and\nmetallurgy. Biringuccio expanded his perspective to include all the arts of fire,\nincluding, artillery, making gunpowder, acids preparation, pottery, goldsmithing,\nfireworks, generic distillation arts, as well as alchemy.44 If we accept his conditions,\n43\nSee Biringuccio, De la pirotechnia (1914), 27\u201340; Perifano, \u201cAlchimie\u201d; Smith, Body of the\nArtisan, 143\u20134; and Bernardoni, La conoscenza del fare, 669.\n44\nBiringuccio, De la pirotechnia (1977), fol. 123r\u20134r.\nArtisanal Processes and Epistemological Debate in the Works of Leonardo. . .\n71\nalchemy and pyrotechnics are not in contradiction, rather, in so far as they are used\nin the same philosophical concepts and the same operational practices, alchemy]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=84\nPages: 84\nsuch as the famous Belgian Mons Meg, created with a hammer at the forge. To\nminimize the inaccurate results of forge hammering he planned a draw bench\nmachine to make homogeneous iron shafts in order to simplify the welding and\nproduce stronger cannons (fol. 10r, 11r, 15v, 41r).\nSeveral studies are dedicated to the casting process of bronze bombards.28\nLeonardo\u2019s manuscripts are once again the most ancient source which make it\npossible to visualize the several phases of the molding process both for the tromba\n(chase) and the coda (breech), the two parts of a gun which were assembled by\nthreaded coupling. Leonardo gives us very detailed drawings, such as the channel\nfor pouring the bronze into the mold during casting (Codex Atlanticus, fol. 46r, 53r,\n60r, 61r, 937v) (Fig. 2).\nLeonardo\u2019s studies on reverberatory furnaces is one of the best examples to\ndemonstrate that his mental approach to technological problems went beyond the]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=97\nPages: 97,98\nMechanical Marvels, 11\u201318; and Smith, Body of the Artisan, 142\u20139.\nArtisanal Processes and Epistemological Debate in the Works of Leonardo. . .\n75\nArnaud, E.R. 1655. Introduction a la chymie, ou a la vraye physique, ou\u0300 le lecteur treuvera la\ndefinition de toutes les operations de la chymie, etc. Lyon: Claude Post.\nAvicenna. 1927. De congelatione et conglutinatione lapidum, being sections of the Kitab al-Shifa/\nthe Latin and Arabic texts, eds. and trans. Eric John Holmyard and Desmond Christopher\nMandeville. Paris: Paul Geuthner.\nBeretta, Marco. 2010. Leonardo and Lucretius. In Rinascimento, ed. Leo S. Olschki, Series 2, Vol.\nXLIX, 341\u2013372.\nBernardoni, Andrea. 2007. La quaestio de alchimia nel De la pirotechnia di Vannoccio\nBiringuccio. In Atti del XII convegno nazionale di storia e fondamenti della chimica,\ned. Franco Calascibetta and Luigi Cerruti, 261\u2013276. Rome: Accademia dei LX.\nBernardoni, Andrea. 2009. Leonardo and the Equestrian Monument for Francesco Sforza: The]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=78\nPages: 78\nthe transformation of substances.10 Leonardo da Vinci (1452\u20131519) and\nBiringuccio, the key figures in this article, were both involved in this debate and\nmaturely and responsibly distanced themselves from the theoretical speculation of\n8\nFor Biringuccio and alchemy see, Perifano, \u201cAlchimie,\u201d 189\u2013202, Alchimie a\u0300 la Cour; and\nBernardoni, \u201cQuaestio de alchimia.\u201d On the medieval alchemical debate, see Newman, \u201cTechnology and Alchemical Debate.\u201d On artisanal and vernacular epistemology, especially for the German\narea, see Smith, Body of the Artisan, 59\u201393, 142\u201351.\n9\n\u201cet in somma egli parlava dell\u2019archimia molto confuso, et inresolutissimo come si vede ancora\nche egli fa ne\u2019 suoi scritti, dove molte volte la loda, e molte la biasima, ma finalmente nel principio\ndel nono libro anch\u2019egli, come tutti gli altri, per non essere forse ne\u0301 piu\u0300 di loro, ne\u0301 da meno, non\nche gli confessi in verita\u0300, che la sia possibile del tutto, ma conforta gli uomini ad esercitarla in]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=157\nPages: 157\npatron a keen interest in alchemy, was meant to have taken part\u2014but his premature\ndeath prevented his involvement. In the Studiolo the connection between alchemy\nand the chemical arts was exalted. The iconographic itinerary conceived by\nBorghini was situated in a sequence on the upper part of the wall where paintings\ndevoted to thermal baths, the discovery of gun powder, a glass works, a goldsmith\u2019s\nworkshop, alchemists and a bronze foundry were located; at the room\u2019s two ends\nwere two statues, portraying Vulcan and Apollo. On the lower part of the wall a\nmythological scene recalled Francesco I\u2019s alchemical and artistic interests.27 I\nwould like to stress the importance of a few elements directly or indirectly related\nto the chemical arts. What first strikes you in this particular arrangement is the\nproximity of Stradano\u2019s famous painting of Francesco I\u2019s alchemical laboratory and\nGiovanni Maria Butteri\u2019s (1540\u20131606) painting illustrating the glass works (Figs. 3\nand 4).]"]}

{"result":["[Summary from page 101 to page 119 out of a total of 220:\nPages 101:\n78\nA. Bernardoni\nPrincipe, Lawrence M., and Lloyd DeWitt. 2002. Transmutations: Alchemy in Art. Philadelphia:\nChemical Heritage Foundation.\nReti, Ladislao. 1952a. Le arti chimiche di Leonardo da Vinci. La chimica e l\u2019industria 34(7): 721\u2013\n743.\nReti, Ladislao. 1952b. Le arti chimiche di Leonardo da Vinci. La chimica e l\u2019industria 34(11):\n655\u2013667.\nRossi, Paolo. 1971. I filosofi e le machine 1400\u20131700. Milan: Feltrinelli.\nScaglia, Giustina. 1981. Alle origini degli studi tecnologici di Leonardo. XX Lettura Vinciana.\nFlorence: Barbera Editore.\nSchneider, Wolfgang. 1949. Das chemische Wissen Leonardo da Vincis und seine Bedeutung f\u20ac\nur\ndie Geschichte der Chemie, Die Pharmazie 4.\nSmith, Pamela H. 2004. The Body of the Artisan: Art and Experience in the Scientific Revolution.\nChicago: University of Chicago Press.\nTaylor, Frank Sherwood. 1953. Le\u0301onard de Vinci et la chimie de son temps. In Le\u0301onard de Vinci et\nl\u2019expe\u0301rience scientifique au XVIe sie\u0300cle, ed. Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique,\n151\u2013161. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.\nVarchi, Benedetto. 1827. Questione sull\u2019alchimia: codice inedito, ed. Domenico Alessandro\nMoreni. Florence: Stamperia Magheri.\nVasoli, Cesare. 1982. Note su Leonardo e l\u2019alchimia. In Leonardo e l\u2019eta\u0300 della ragione, ed. Enrico\nBellone and Paolo Rossi. Milan: Scientia.\nZilsel, Edgar. 2000. The Social Origins of Modern Science, eds. Diederick Raven, Wolfgang\nKrohn, and Robert S. Cohen. Dordrecht/Boston/London: Kluwer Academic Publishers.\n\nPages 102:\nArtificial Interventions in the Natural Form\nof Things: Shared Metallogenetical Concepts\nof Goldsmiths and Alchemists\nHenrike Haug\nAbstract A mounted coconut, reworked and ornamented by a goldsmith from the\nErzgebirge and filled with a mountainous landscape, stands in the centre of the\npresent investigation. Its interior is an artificial world assembled from different ores\nwhere the anonymous artist depicted Adam and Eve at the moment of the Fall,\nsurrounded by contemporary miners hewing stone and digging for metal using\nvarious procedures. A typical Kunstkammer object of the sixteenth century, in\nwhich the appreciation of rare, precious materials is joined by delight in human\nvirtuosity and invention, the coconut translates montanistic topics and metallurgical\nlore into material form. This achievement is discussed within the context of natural\nphilosophical theories concerning the causes and the creation of metal in early\nmodern times with the aim of reconstructing the common Diskursrahmen and\nVorstellungshorizont, in which mining professionals, as well as alchemists and\ngoldsmiths worked and in which they localized their practices and self-conception.\nThe mining city St. Joachimsthal in the Erzgebirge is introduced as a space where\npractitioners and scholars worked side by side. Here natural philosophical conceptions were mediated to artisans and craftsmen and empirical know-how and knowledge of materials was conveyed to academics.\nHow much natural philosophical knowledge and how many alchemical concepts\nare encapsulated in a sixteenth-century Kunstkammer object? And how did goldsmiths come in contact with these ideas: from whom, mediated through which\nsources and in which setting? Might the goldsmiths have been involved in the\ndevelopment and dissemination of these theories? When goldsmiths loaded an\nobject with references to natural philosophical discourse what was the motivation,\nthe context, and who was the audience?\nH. Haug (*)\nDepartment of Art History and Historical Urban Studies, Technische Universita\u0308t Berlin,\nBerlin, Germany\ne-mail: henrike.haug@tu-berlin.de\nS. Dupre\u0301 (ed.), Laboratories of Art, Archimedes 37,\nDOI 10.1007/978-3-319-05065-2_4, \u00a9 Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014\n79\n\nPages 103:\n80\nH. Haug\nThe first part of this article attempts to answer these questions in relation to\nmetallogenetic ideas by introducing diverse conceptions of the formation and origin\nof ore deposits.1 These contemporary explanations of the creation of metals help\nexplain why knowledge of metals and minerals could affect the working process of\nboth the alchemist and the goldsmith. The goldsmiths\u2019 craft knowledge\u2014as well as\nthe information gathered by professionals in the mining districts of the Erzgebirge\n(Ore Mountains), Harz and other regions through the methods of observation, of\ncollecting and of categorization\u2014was incorporated into scientific treatises on the\nformation of metals and helped to change and develop this domain. The artisan\u2019s\ncraft knowledge about matter and materials rarely found its way into a written form.\nIt was most commonly expressed in its suitable mode, the accomplished work of\nart.2\nThe second part of the article analyses the materials and shape of a coconut\nvessel on display in the Kunsthistorisches Museum in Vienna (Fig. 1) to see if the\naforementioned metallogenetical theories could have had an impact on the form of\na sixteenth-century art object: in this Kunstkammer object an unknown goldsmith\nfrom the Erzgebirge created a mountainous landscape, simultaneously a representation of paradise with Adam and Eve eating from the tree of knowledge and the\ndepiction of a post-expulsion mining area populated by contemporary miners. This\nstudy suggests some of the possible messages the anonymous goldsmith formulated\nfor the owner and beholder, who was presumably interested in obtaining objects\nwith natural philosophical content for his collection.\nA mediator between the metallogenetical research and the goldsmith\u2019s artificium\nis present in the person of the St. Joachimthaler preacher, historiographer, and\nminerals collector Johannes Mathesius (1504\u20131565). He was an eminent figure in\nthe circulation of alchemical and metallurgical knowledge; through his work it can\nbe seen how this specific codified knowledge was applied and how it could become\na common good in montanistic centres and mining areas.\nMetallogenetical Concepts\nMany theories on the formation of metal were exhaustively compiled in\nMathesius\u2019s \u201cDie Dritte Predigt. Von Ursprung zu und abnemen der metallen\nunnd Minerischen bergkarten und Ertzen\u201d (Third Sermon. On the Origin, Growing\nand Reduction of Metals and Minerals and Ores) (Hereafter Third Sermon).3\nMathesius published his sermon collection Sarepta oder Bergpostil in Nuremberg\nin 1562. In these texts he incorporated all his accumulated empirical knowledge\nabout mining and minerals (based on his famous collection) enriched by his vast\n1\nAdams, \u201cOrigin\u201d; and Suhing, \u201cPhilosophisches.\u201d\nFor the concept of \u2018craft knowledge\u2019, see Smith, Body of the Artisan.\n3\nFor Mathesius, see Dufek, \u201cMathesius\u201d; and Loesche, \u201cMathesius.\u201d\n2\n\nPages 104:\nArtificial Interventions in the Natural Form of Things: Shared. . .\n81\nFig. 1 KokosnussDoppelscheuer (coconut\nvessel), closed, sixteenth\ncentury St. Joachimsthal\n(?). Vienna,\nKunsthistorisches Inv.\nNo. 885/886\ntheological learning. The sermons provide an excellent synopsis of the montanistic\nmindscapes in the early modern period. In the \u201cThird Sermon\u201d, held in 1555,\nMathesius discusses the emergence of ore deposits and combines several, to some\nextent competing, early modern metallogenetical theories in one narration for his\nparishioners, that is, mining professionals from the famous city of the bohemian\nErzgebirge, St. Joachimsthal.4 Mathesius preaches:\n[. . .] about your metals or, as you call them, about certain Bergarten and ores and from their\nnames, nature, and characters and how and through and from what they were created in\n4\nMathesius, Sarepta, fol. 38r\u201357r; Fischer, Bergm\u20ac\nannisches (1969), and Bergm\u20ac\nannisches (1970).\n\nPages 105:\n82\nH. Haug\ntheir seams, lodes and layers and how one metal can be transformed into another until the\ngood metal [is achieved], massive and completely. And how the spare metal again through\nnatural heat is reduced and consumed, as the holy scripture and honest and experienced\nminers testify and I myself have seen and learned and is tolerable for and suited in the\nchurch, and I will give report in plain and good montanistic words, to identify and praise in\nit God\u2019s hand and creation.5\nMathesius\u2019s clearly formulated aim is the recognition of God in his opus (natural\ntheology), more specifically, as he is speaking to the mining professionals of\nthe Erzgebirge, the recognition of God in one of his marvellous gifts: metal.\nWhat follows however is not a simple sermon appropriate for the church, but rather\na scientific lecture in which Mathesius presents and discusses different\nmetallogenetical positions of his time.6\nMathesius starts by comparing God\u2019s formative acts with the practice of the\nhuman artisan, who imitates nature in his workshop with the substances available to\nhim, stating \u201cGod has various schmeltzwerck [products produced by melting/fusion/\ncasting] in his laboratorio [workshop] and smelts the metals as beautifully and in as\nmany colours as the flowers in the field or the crests of a stonecutter.\u201d7 God is\npersonified as some kind of metalworker, maybe a goldsmith in his workshop, who\nuses a smelting process to form the several metals that can be found in the earth.\nAnd Mathesius doesn\u2019t leave any doubts that this is a perpetual process when he\nexplains:\nThe experience of every day shows\u2014aside from scholarly reports\u2014that our God daily\ncreates and lets grow in the earth all kinds of noble and rough stones as well as the various\nprecious and salubrious bergsafften [juices of the mountain] and various bergarten [minerals], ores and pure metals.8\n5\n\u201cvon ewern metallen oder wi ir pflegt zu reden von allerley bergarten unnd ertzen unnd von iren\nnamen, natur unnd eygenschafft und wie und warau\u00df und wardurch sie in iren gengen, fletzen und\nsto\u0308cken gewircket unnd wie ein bergart in die ander verwandheit bi\u00df die gu\u0308ltigen metal, gedigen\nund vollstendig und wie die uberstendigen metal wider durch natu\u0308rliche hitz inn der erden\nabnemen unnd verzert werden, so viel mich die heylige schrifft und ehrliche und erfarne bergleut\nberichtet und ich selbs gesehen und gemerckt habe und sich in der kirchen leyden unnd gezimmen\nwil unnd di\u00df alles euch einfeltig und mit guten bergkleufftigen worten berichten, doch das hierinn\nvornemlich Gottes hand und werck geru\u0308hmet und erkannt werde.\u201d (\u201cDie Dritte Predigt. Von\nUrsprung zu und abnemen der Metallen unnd Minerischen Bergkarten und Ertzen,\u201d in Mathesius,\nSarepta, fol. XXXIIIv).\n6\nThe concept of nature as \u2018second revelation\u2019 is connected with the metaphor of \u2018reading\u2019 in the\nbook of nature, see Blumenberg, Lesbarkeit; Nobis, Buch der Natur; Rothacker, Buch der Natur;\nand Du\u0308lmen, Buch der Natur, 131\u201350.\n7\n\u201cDenn Gott hat mancherley schmeltzwerck inn seinem laboratorio und schmeltzet je die metal so\nscho\u0308n und vilerely farben als die blu\u0308mlein auff dem felde oder ein Steinschneider sein\nwapenstein.\u201d (\u201cVon Ursprung zu und abnemen der metallen unnd Minerischen bergkarten und\nErtzen,\u201d in Mathesius, Sarepta, fol. XLIr).\n8\n\u201cEs gibet teglicher erfahrung neben der gelerten zeugnu\u00df das unser Gott inn der erden allerley\nedel und gemeine steyne neben mancherley ko\u0308stlichen unnd heylsamen bergsafften unnd\nmancherley bergarten, ertzen und reinen metallen teglich schaffe und wachsen lasse [. . .]\u201d(\u201cDie\nDritte Predigt. Von Ursprung zu und abnemen der Metallen unnd Minerischen Bergkarten und\nErtzen,\u201d in Mathesius, Sarepta, fol. XXXIXr).\n\nPages 106:\nArtificial Interventions in the Natural Form of Things: Shared. . .\n83\nMathesius, in line with most contemporaneous authors, assumes a continuing\nemergence of substances with God, or a divine potency incorporated in nature,\nresponsible for the on-going generation of metals.9\nThe main issues that concerned Mathesius and contemporary writers were: what\nsubstances are the sources of the metals? Are there one or more primary matters?\nHow and under what conditions do these primordial materials transmute into the\ndifferent metallic substances? And last but not least: what causes this process?\nMathesius and his \u201cThird Sermon\u201d is not a randomly chosen source. The author\nstood in the centre of scholarly culture in St. Joachimsthal, in one of the most\nimportant centres of the Renaissance mining industry and he was an important link\nin the vibrant network of many protagonists involved in mineralogical and metallurgical research. Mathesius was a friend and interlocutor of Georg Agricola (1494\u2013\n1555), one of the eminent representatives of early modern metallurgy, and was\nfamiliar with his writings as well as with older German metallurgical literature. He\nread both Ulrich Ru\u0308lein of Calw\u2019s (1465\u20131523) Bergb\u20ac\nuchlein published in 1505\nand the more modern De la pirotechnia by Vanoccio Biringuccio (1480\u2013c.1537)\nfrom 1540.10 He was a well-known collector of minerals and well connected in the\nintellectual world of St. Joachimsthal. Furthermore, as a student and dining partner\nof Martin Luther (1483\u20131546) he operated in Protestant humanist circles: in short\nan authority par excellence for all themes concerning montanist mindscapes of the\nsixteenth century.\nMathesius\u2019s texts interweave preaching and scientific imagination and thus attest\nto how strongly early modern natural philosophy and metallurgic research are\ninfluenced by the Christian episteme:\nBut my undertaking shall conduct to that effect, to show to you, my parishioners, the\nalmighty and wonderful hand of God and his immeasurable abundance and his inscrutable\nwisdom and his merciful and fatherly heart in his creation and revelation of all kinds of\nminerals and metals, to make you recognize your God in his gifts and teach you to praise\nhim, which he conveys to you in this mountain in clement benevolence.11\nThis juxtaposition of empirical knowledge based on experience next to philosophical and theological reflections of the causes of things is typical for Mathesius\nand many other writers of the sixteenth century, as they interpret their increasing\n9\nThis concept can be found in medieval authors writing on natura as goddess, as pro-dea and as\nvicaria (assistant) of God, who was entrusted with the creatio continua, the continuous creations as\npro-creatrix, like Alanus ab Insulis or Jean de Meuns in his roman de la rose. See Modersohn,\nNatura als Gottin.\n10\nBiringuccio, Pirotechnia [1540], and Pirotechnia (1942).\n11\n\u201cMein vornehmen aber sol sich eygentlich dahin lenden, das ich euch meinen Pfarrkindern\nvornehmlich die allmechtige und wunderbarliche hand Gottes und seinen unme\u00dflichen reychtumb\nneben seiner unerforschlichen wey\u00dfheyt unnd genedigen unnd Va\u0308terlichen hertzen inn Scho\u0308pffung\nund offenbarung allerley ertz unnd metalle zeyge, damit ir ewern Got in seinen gaben erkennen\nund preysen lernet, die er euch inn diesem gebirge auf genediger gu\u0308te mittheylet.\u201d (\u201cDie Dritte\nPredigt. Von Ursprung zu und abnemen der Metallen unnd Minerischen Bergkarten und Ertzen,\u201d\nin Mathesius, Sarepta, fol. XXXIIIv).\n\nPages 107:\n84\nH. Haug\nempirical knowledge within the limits of a regular and harmonic world, where\neverything points back to its origin, i.e. God.\nMathesius and other mineralogists of the sixteenth century could only rely on a\nfew preliminary works when they made their speculations on the Metallogenese, as\nAgricola regrets in the introduction to his De ortu et causis subterraneorum from\n1546:\nThe Greeks and Latins, however, who we see working for more than a thousand years to\nincrease scientific knowledge, all of them only interpreted the writings of Plato and\nAristotle and followed their views; they neither made inquiries about unsolved questions\nnor did they treat them scientifically. When our Albertus started to make observations about\nthe genesis of excavated materials, he blended the teachings of philosophers, astrologers\nand chymists into one.12\nTwo important preliminary writings, Aristotle\u2019s reflections on meteorology and\nAlbertus Magnus\u2019s (1193\u20131280) Libri cinque de mineralibus et rebus metallicis,\nare considered by Agricola and other early modern authors and are present in\nalmost all theories of the sixteenth century. With Albertus\u2019s De mineralibus an\nimportant testimony to the transmission of antique metallurgic knowledge and its\ncombination with alchemical concepts has been preserved. That Albertus\u2019s knowledge was not out of date in the early modern period is attested by the two prints of\nhis works by Giovanni and Gregorius de Gregoriis in Venice (De mineralibus,\n1495) and of Jacob Ko\u0308bel (Liber mineralium, 1518) in Oppenheim. His amalgamation had a great influence and contributed strongly to the work of several natural\nphilosophers and alchemists of the sixteenth century. It found its way equally into\nalchemical practices as well as the theoretical concepts of \u2018modern\u2019 metallurgists\nand was part of the common knowledge in the workshops of goldsmiths and other\nmetalworkers of the early modern periods. A remark in Aristotle\u2019s treatise lead\nAlbertus to assume that the ancient philosopher had written a follow-up work on\nminerals, stones, earth and metals. It was Albertus\u2019s intention to comment on the\nwhole Aristotle, i.e. to commentate the texts that were in the thirteenth century\nconsidered to be the Aristotelian philosophical works on nature. Therefore it is no\nwonder that he, believing that Aristotle\u2019s treatise was lost, commenced his own\nLapidary (Book of Stone): \u201cWe have not seen Aristotle\u2019s books about these\n[minerals], but only some excerpts from them; and what Avicenna says about\n[minerals] in the third chapter of the first book which he wrote about them is not\nsufficient.\u201d13 Thus, Albertus\u2019s text is an advancement of the Aristotelian systems,\nwhich he blends with alchemical texts and concepts obtained from Arabic sources.\nHe also enriched his text with empirical know how gained on his visits to mining\n12\n\u201cQuos vero tam Graeco, quam Latinos annis plus mille in rerum congitiones versatos videmus,\nomnes ad unum scripta Platonis, aut Aristoteles interpretati sunt, & sententias fecuti: eoque minus\nmultas res nondum, explanatas vocarunt in quaestionem, literisque illustrarunt. Nam Albertus\nnoster aggressus dicere de ortu eorum quae effodiumtur, Philosophorum & Alstrologorum &\nChymistarum decreta in unum confundit.\u201d (Agricola, \u201cGeologie und Mineralogie,\u201d 76, and\nOrtu, 24).\n13\nAlbertus, Book of Minerals, 9.\n\nPages 108:\nArtificial Interventions in the Natural Form of Things: Shared. . .\n85\ndistricts as he relates in his Book of Minerals (III, I, I). According to Aristotle, there\nare four causes: the material, the efficient, the formal and the final.14 Albertus\nbegins with the material cause discussing the primary matter from which different\nminerals were created. Naturally Albertus\u2019s chemical understanding is also shaped\nby Aristotle, so he starts with the four elements: fire, water, air and earth. The\ngeneral classification throughout his text on minerals is based on this material\ncause: Albertus starts with a chapter on stones, which he classified as simple\nstructures made from a mixture of earth and water. According to his system, metals\nare more elaborate structures built from sulphur and mercury (quicksilver), which\nthemselves are mixtures of earth and water (quicksilver) and all four elements\n(sulphur). This sulphur-quicksilver theory is non-Aristotelian, but was an adaption\nfrom Arabic writings.\nThe second part of Albertus\u2019s system is built by the efficient causes\u2014the agents\nor operators that cause the creation of minerals and metals from a still non-specific\nprimordial matter: Albertus takes the \u2018two exhalationes theory\u2019 of Aristotle and\nadjusts it a little, by equating dry smoke with sulphur and moist vapour with\nmercury. According to Aristotle there are two kinds of aeroform emanations\nwhich ascend from the middle of the earth to the surface. One of these exhalationes\nis a dry fume which transforms into earth and stones, the other a humid steam,\nwhich condenses into metals:\nWe maintain that there are two exhalations, one vaporous the other smoky, and there\ncorrespond two kinds of bodies that originate in the earth, \u2018fossils\u2019 and metals. The heat of\nthe dry exhalation is the cause of all \u2018fossils\u2019. Such stones cannot be melted [. . .]. The\nvaporous exhalation is the cause of all metals, those bodies which are either fusible or\nmalleable such as iron, copper, gold. All these originate from the imprisonment of the\nvaporous exhalation in the earth, and especially in stones. Their dryness compresses it, and\nit congeals just as dew or hoar-frost does when it has been separated, though in the present\ncase the metals are generated before that segregation occurs. Hence, they are water in a\nsense, and in a sense not [. . .]. Hence, they all (except gold) are affected by fire, and they\npossess an admixture of earth; for they still contain the dry exhalation.15\nTo convert these two exhalationes into ore deposits, Albertus says that they\nmust: first, be confined in the earth; and second, react under the power of two\ninstruments, that is heat and cold. But the transformation from primordial matter\ninto the several metals is not a mere mechanical process, it requires a mineralizing\npower to achieve the destined form.\nHere Albertus merges an alchemical concept with ideas from Aristotle extracted\nfrom his Generation of Animals. He equates a female principle with the material\ncause, i.e. the shapeless matter, subjected to an efficient cause, a forming principle\nthat is inherent in the male semen. To initiate this transformational process Albertus\nintroduces the celestial bodies as impulses. After discussing the material and\nefficient cause he then treats the third, the formal cause, where he follows Aristotle\nwho said that the male principle contributes the form of the offspring, i.e. the\n14\n15\nAlbertus, Book of Minerals, XXXI.\nAristoteles, \u201cMeteorologie,\u201d 136.\n\nPages 109:\n86\nH. Haug\nspecies. Again Albertus turns to the power of the stars that act as formative powers\ndescending from the heavens and which are responsible for the seven known main\nmetals.\nThe structure of the book and the line of his argumentation shows that Albertus\nat one point had to face the question of transmutation: if metals are formed from\nprimordial matter consisting of a mixture of the four elements, i.e. from a mixture of\nsulphur and mercury as substances in between the basic elements and the finished\nmetals, and if metals are constantly emerging as defined species, then this logically\nleads to a discussion of whether one metal can be transformed into another as the\nalchemists claim. Albertus does not totally dismiss the possibility of transmutation,\nbut\u2014as a follower of Aristotle\u2014accepts the theoretical possibility, without showing particular interest in this question, when he states:\nWe do not intend here to show how any one of these may be transmuted into another, or\nhow, by the remedy of that medicine the alchemists call the elixir, their diseases may be\ncured, or their occult properties made manifest, or conversely their manifest properties be\nremoved. But instead we shall show how they are mixed from the elements, and how each\none is constituted in its own specific form.16\nAlbertus, with his system and his reception of ancient philosophical considerations, had a strong influence on the early modern period: he describes properties of\nthe metals like colour, malleability, melting point and so forth as accidental\nproperties of the metals. The ancient and medieval search for the causes and the\nprinciples proceeded to dominate early modern metallogenetic theories. The progeny of these Aristotelean-Albertian concepts are found everywhere in Mathesius,\nwho says about silver:\nMassive or compact silver is the name for what is pure and nearly fine and can be cut and\nembossed, before it is put in the fire. But all massive and particularly all different forms of\nwey\u00df und rotg\u20ac\nuldig ertz [silver ores] and gla\u00df ertz [silver sulfid] wear off in the fire because\nof all the sulphur and the quicksilver and the other impurities that are still in it.17\nThe same with gold: \u201cI have seen gold in an iron-stone, as well as gold in the\nStyria [Steiermark], which changes its golden colour in the fire, when the quicksilver exhales from it, comparable to the goldsmith gilding silver dishes.\u201d18 Both\nquotations show how deeply Mathesius\u2019s understanding is based on the two basic\n16\nAlbertus, Book of Minerals, 10.\n\u201cGedigen oder derb silber heyst, das rein und schier fein ist und das sich schneyden und pregen\nlesset ehe es ins fewer kompt. Doch gehet allem gediegen und sonderlich wey\u00df unnd rotgu\u0308ldig ertz\nso wol als dem gla\u00df ertz im fewer was abe umb des Schwebels, quecksilbers und ander wildigkeyt\nwillen, so noch drinne ist.\u201d (\u201cDie Dritte Predigt. Von Ursprung zu und abnemen der Metallen unnd\nMinerischen Bergkarten und Ertzen,\u201d in Mathesius, Sarepta, fol. XLr). Wey\u00df und rotg\u20ac\nuldig ertz\nare old-fashioned names for silver ores, like Proustit and Pyrargyrit, i.e. minerals containing\nsilver.\n18\n\u201cIch habe sichtig gold in einem eystenstein gesehen, wie auch in Steirmarck wei\u00df gold bricht,\nwelches im fewr sein natu\u0308rliche farbe bekompt, so das quecksilber davon verauchet, als wenn ein\nGoldschmid die silber geschir vergu\u0308ldet.\u201d (\u201cDie Dritte Predigt. Von Ursprung zu und abnemen der\nMetallen unnd Minerischen Bergkarten und Ertzen,\u201d in Mathesius, Sarepta, fol. XLv).\n17\n\nPages 110:\nArtificial Interventions in the Natural Form of Things: Shared. . .\n87\nsubstances, sulphur and mercury, as the alchemical Urbausteine (building blocks)\nof silver and gold, that will be reduced to unwanted components of the \u2018pure\u2019 metal\nif the ore is re-heated in the fire in the smelting process. Agricola also discusses the\ndivine origins and causes of minerals when he states in De ortu et causis (1546):\nThe philosophers, astrologers and chymists study the ortus et causas [origins and causes] of\nores, because nothing happens without a cause, and they state correctly that even now, as\nbefore, the formation of ores takes place. The less acceptable is the completely ludicrous\nview of the large mass\u2014more a fairy tale, that contradicts all experience\u2014claiming that not\nonly rocks, but also the minerals and gems and different kinds of soil in their burrows,\nchasms and grooves have been formed at the beginning of the world by God, as they are\nnow found, and in the meantime no such things were created or re-created from possible\nsubstances, and the highest [\u00bcdivine] opifex [workman] did not set any sort of natural force\nin motion to ensure their constant generation.19\nAnother important protagonist of early modern mineralogy, the metallurgist,\nM\u20ac\nunzmeister (moneyer) and Probierer (tester) Lazarus Ercker (1528\u20131594) says in\nhis Beschreibung allerf\u20ac\nurnemisten mineralischer Ertzt and Berckwercksarten\n(Description of the Most Distinguished Ores and Minerals), his Gro\u00dfes\nProbierbuch of 1574, that he will not discuss the writings of natural philosophers\non ores and metals, because:\n[their] thoughts and delusions are not only uncertain and often wrong, but frequently\ncontradict themselves [and] I want to simply believe that God, the almighty Creator, has\nreserved these secrets in his omnipotence and he created gold and silver as well as all other\nmetals through his word, through which also originates heaven and earth and everything\nthat is on it and in it.20\nFollowing this argument, Ercker assumes firstly that all metals were once\ncreated at the beginning of time by God, that secondly no genuine natural power\ncontinues to create ores and that, consequently and thirdly, the generation of metals\nand minerals must lie outside human comprehension.\nIn their criticism of impractical, non-empirical \u2018book-learned\u2019 scholars, Ercker\nand Agricola concur. They also concur in their demarcation of fraudulent alchemists (the charlatans and quacks) from expert alchemists in whose experiential\nknowledge they trust. Both scholars base their works on the Erfahrungswissen of\n19\n\u201cSed Philosophi, Chymistae, Astrologi & ortus metallorum causas perquirunt, quia nihil causa\nfiat: & metalla nunc, ut quondam, ortu generati recte adferunt. Quo minus est ferenda vulgi opinio\nperridicula, poetearumque alicujus fabulae similis, & omni experimento contraria: quod ait, non\nmodo faxa, sed in eorum venis, fibris, commissuris metalla & gemmas, ac varia terrarum genera in\ninitio mundi Deum finxisset alia & creasse, cujusmodi nun inveniri solent: nec medio emptoris\ncurricolo nulla, ex materiis ad id aptatis, esse nata, vel renata. Neque aliquam vim naturae ad\neorum perpetuitatem machinatum ese summus rerum opificem.\u201d (Agricola, Ortu, 125\u20136). For an\noverview of Agricolas\u2019s understanding of matter, see Beretta, Enlightenment of Matter, ch. III.\n20\n\u201cGedanken und Wahnvorstellungen [sind] nicht allein ungewiss und oftmals falsch, sondern\nsich auch ha\u0308ufig wiedersprechen [. . .] ich will einfa\u0308ltig daran glauben, dass Gott, der allma\u0308chtige\nScho\u0308pfer, diese Geheimnisse seiner Allmacht vorbehalten will und dass er Gold, Silber sowie alle\nMetalle durch ein Wort erschaffen hat, durch das ebenso Himmel und Erde und alles, was darauf\nund darinnen ist, ihren Ursprung haben.\u201d (Ercker, Erze und Bergwerksarten, 283).\n\nPages 111:\n88\nH. Haug\nthe practitioners, Ercker out of his professional experience and his contacts as tester\nof ores and as M\u20ac\nunzmeister, Agricola from his medical knowledge and his connections with the network of mining specialists surrounding Mathesius. When Agricola\nworked as a doctor in St. Joachimsthal, among his acquaintance he numbered the\nH\u20ac\nuttenschreiber Lorenz Wermann, the prototype of the learned mining engineer\nwho served as model for Agricolas\u2019s first montanistic publication, the Bermannus\nfrom 1530.21\nAgricola, like Ercker, criticises scholars who lack practical experience and can\nonly rely on handed down theoretical knowledge, that is, those who have episteme,\nbut not techne. Then he criticises the chymists, i.e. the alchemists, to whom he\ngrants some empirical and practical knowledge, but most of whom he dismisses as\nartificers of fraud and who are not on the same level as \u2018real\u2019 metallurgists.22\nThirdly Agricola takes on the astrologers, referring to the authors who claim that\nthe seven planets as formative powers influence some kind of primordial metallic\narch-matter to create the seven known metals. The theory that celestial bodies\ninfluence and shape earthly substances is treated at the beginning of Ru\u0308lein of\nCalw\u2019s Bergb\u20ac\nuchlein:\nFor the formation and growth of ores an effector is required and a subordinated material or\nmatter, which is adapted to receive the effect. The common effector of the ores and of all\nthings that are born is heaven with his orbits, his light and his influence, as the masters of\nnature teach. [. . .] Every ore receives a special influence from the planet he is named after,\nso that the planet and the ore concur in their warmth, coldness, humidity and aridity.23\nThe early modern efforts to categorize the world and its substances, based on\nlarge collections of minerals and the improved material knowledge of the natural\nscientist, started to challenge these obsolete systems. This is evident in Mathesius\u2019s\n\u201cThird Sermon,\u201d where he names the planets and their connection and influence on\nthe seven main metals. He distinguishes gold, golden silver, silver, copper, iron,\nsteel, lead, tin, bismuth, mercury and spie\u00dfglas and thus clearly enumerates more\nthan seven metals. Mathesius\u2019s text probably refers to the writings of Agricola, who\nemphasises the autonomy of bismuth and who uses the addition of this eighth\nspecies to the main metals as his most powerful argument against the star-forming\ntheories of metals:\nAccording to the opinion of the astrologers, the planet is constantly under the influence of\nforces that work on suitable substances in the womb of the earth and this create the ores.\nThis tale seemed so nice to many people that they said that the forces of the stars operate in\n21\nQuasi a prototype of Edgar Zilsels\u2019s \u2018superior craftman,\u2019 see Zilsel, \u201cRoots.\u201d\nFor the role and differing evaluations of the \u2018alchemist\u2019 in the sixteenth century, see Nummedal,\nAlchemy and Authority.\n23\n\u201cZur Entstehung und zum Wachsen der Erze geho\u0308rt ein Wirker und ein unterworfener Stoff oder\nMaterie, geeignet, die Wirkung zu empfangen. Der gemeinsame Wirker des Erzes und aller Dinge,\ndie geboren werden, ist der Himmel mit seinem Lauf, Licht und Einfluss, wie die Meister der Natur\nlehren. [. . .] Jedes Erz empfa\u0308ngt einen besonderen Einfluss von den Planeten, nach dem es genannt\nist, so dass der Planet und das Erz in ihren Eigenschaften, in Wa\u0308rme, Ka\u0308lte, Feuchtigkeit und\nTrockenheit u\u0308bereinstimmen.\u201d (Calw, Bergb\u20ac\nuchlein, 117).\n22\n\nPages 112:\nArtificial Interventions in the Natural Form of Things: Shared. . .\n89\nthe earth, as if they were second planets [. . .] where every metal has great resemblance to\nhis planet, like offspring have in relation to their father.24\nHe ends with the provocative question: \u201cBut since there are only seven planets,\nwhich will they call the producer of bismuth?\u201d and concludes that the forming\ninfluence of the stars on earthy matter is a futile conceit.\nThe second issue in discussion (after the issue of the \u2018cause\u2019, i.e. the creator, who\nshapes the species of the metals) was the question of the substances or materials\nfrom which metals were generated, thus of the primordial matter from which the\ngeneration can commence.\nIn the texts three main theories can be distinguished: firstly that of an ens primum\nor a materia prima, that is a more or less solid primordial matter, secondly one that\nproposes a kind of metal juice, called Ghur or nobilis succus and thirdly the\nAristotelian exhalationes, rising moist vapours from the centre of the earth. One\nor more forming causes affect these primordial matters that all have the potentiality\nto be transformed, so that at one point this matter mutates into one of the known\nspecific metals, and consequently the different ore-deposits were formed. For\nexample, in his Bergb\u20ac\nuchlein Ru\u0308lein of Calw mentions mineral vapours, remotely\nreminiscent of Aristotle and Albertus, that rise as evaporation from the inner earth\nand condense to form ore deposits in the corridors and chasms of the mountains. He\nthen changes direction and ties these exhalationes back to alchemical concepts:\nThe subordinated thing, the common matter of all metals is according to the opinion and\nfaith of the scholars sulphur and quicksilver. Several believe, that due to the orbit and\ninfluence of the heaven, exhalations and vapour of sulphur and quicksilver\u2014called\nexhalationes minerales\u2014were drawn up and, during their ascent under the influence of\nthe planets, connected in the chasms and gaps and were made into ores.25\nThe whole range of early modern competing ideas of metallogenesis is revealed\nwhen Ru\u0308lein of Calw in the very next sentence introduces a Ghur (also discussed in\nthe \u201cThird Sermon\u201d of Mathesius) as a kind of \u201chumid, cold, mucous, completely\nsulphur-free matter, which is extracted virtually as sweat of the earth\u201d as an equally\nvalid theory, a humid and mucilaginous element able to transmute under the\n24\n\u201cAstrologorum autem sententia est, errantes stellas influxu & viribus, quas exercent in materia,\nad id in terrae visceribus aptata, efficere metella: inerrantes vero gemmas. Quod figmentum\npulchrum qibusdam visum est adeo, ut dicerent, vires stellrum in terra efficere metalla, tanquam\nsecundas, quasdam stellas vagas: & gemmas, tanqam secundas quasdam inerrantes stellas:\nqualibet gemma obtinente, ex eorum sententia maximam virium su fideris partem; & quolibet\nmetallor similitudinem magnam habente, cum so sidere errante ut proles habet ad parentem.\u201d\n(Agricola, Ortu, ch. IX).\n25\n\u201cDas unterworfene Ding, der gemeinsame Grundstoff aller Metalle sind nach Meinung und\nGlaube der Gelehrten Schwefel und Quecksilber. Etliche glauben, dass durch den Lauf und\nEinfluss des Himmels aus der Tiefe der Erde von Schwefel und Quecksilber Ausdu\u0308nstungen\noder Brodem \u2013 exhalationes minerales genannt \u2013 aufgezogen und wa\u0308hrend des Aufsteigens in\nGa\u0308ngen und Klu\u0308ften durch die Wirkung der Planeten vereinigt und zu einem Erz gemacht\nwerden.\u201d (Calw, Bergb\u20ac\nuchlein, 117\u20138).\n\nPages 113:\n90\nH. Haug\naddition of sulphur into one specific metal.26 Agricola discusses both the Aristotelian theory of steam or vapour and the alchemical sulphur-mercury theory and\nrejects both. He states that the Earth\u2019s crust absorbs water and earthy matter, thus\ncreating a certain nobilis succus as kind of mineral liquid that sediments in the\ncorridors and chasms of the mountains, there forming metallic minerals.\nThe hitherto discussed sources of early modern writers on metallogenetic questions have demonstrated\u2014despite the abundance of variety in the existing concepts\u2014that one basic assumption is nearly always present. Almost all theories offer\na dualistic system that operates on the dichotomy of a primary passive substance\nacted on by a potent cause. The involved antagonists are matter and an active\nformative power, or in other words: a creator and a material in which the creation\ncan manifest. This duality of primordial passive matter and active forming principle\ncan be thought of in terms of natural procreational processes which approximates\nthe third\u2014mineralistic\u2014to the other two reigns, the floral and the animalistic,\nwhere by seed or semen procreation and growth is initiated. If this biological\nanalogy taken from the animal and herbal kingdoms is applied to the mineral, it\ncan be extended to metallogenesis: if in the field of animals and plants male and\nfemale beings can be found who procreate by the union of the active and formative\nmale seeds or semen and the female passive receiving matter\u2014and if this means\nthat this species can recreate self-reliantly\u2014 then it is not too far fetched to suspect\ncomparable ways of reproduction and growth in the reign of minerals and assume\nthe existence of metal \u2018semen\u2019.\nOne of the advocates of the equation of all three kingdoms of nature, who awards\nmetals the power of self-propagation, is the famous potter and scientist Bernard\nPalissy (1510\u20131589) in his Discours Admirables.27 In this text in the form of a\ndialogue he has practique confront the\u0301orique. The latter represents scholarly and\nalchemical positions that maintain the possibility of mimicking metallogenetic\nprocesses by human art. For practique (who represents Palissys\u2019s own positions,\nas he poses as a learned artisan using his craft knowledge) the belief that man can\nimitate the creation of metals is presumptuous. Practique asks the\u0301orique:\nDo you think that I want to believe a Gerbert or a Arnaud de Villeneuve or a Roman de la\nRose in what they say against the works of Gold? And do you think that I am so\nmisinformed, that I do not know very well that Gold and Silver and all the other Metals\nare a divine work and that it is a temerarious enterprise against the glory of Gold to try to\nusurp that which is his realm?28\n26\n\u201cFeuchten, kalten, schleimigen, durchaus schwefelfreien Grundstoff, der gewisserma\u00dfen als ihr\nSchwei\u00df aus der Erde gezogen ist.\u201d (Calw, Bergb\u20ac\nuchlein, 118).\n27\nOn the work of Palissy, see Amico, Palissy; Hanschmann, Palissy; Kayser, \u201cIntellectual and\nArtisan\u201d; \u201cKemp, Philosophical Pots\u201d; Kris, Stil Rustique; Laube, \u201cWissenswelten\u201d; Schmeisser,\n\u201cErdgeschichte\u201d; Shell, \u201cCasting Life\u201d; and Klier, Fixierte Natur.\n28\n\u201cCuides tu que je vueille croie un Gerbert ou Arnauld de Vileneufve ou un Romant de la Rose,\nen ce qu\u2019ils auront parle\u0301 contre les euvres de Dieu? Et cuides tu que je sois si mal instruit, que je ne\nsache bien que l\u2019or & l\u2019argent & tous autres metaux sont une euvre divine, & que c\u2019est\ntemerairement entrepris contre la gloire de Dieu, de vouloir usuper sur ce qui est de son estat.\u201d\n(Palissy, \u201cDiscours admirables,\u201d 105\u20136).\n\nPages 114:\nArtificial Interventions in the Natural Form of Things: Shared. . .\n91\nHereupon theorique asked directly after the analogy of semen in plants and\nmetals.29 Palissy/practique then argues against the alchemists who claim to imitate\nin their vaisseaux, which \u201cserve as a womb for the generation of metals,\u201d the natural\ncreation and \u201cthat they want to imitate the uterus of a woman or an animal.\u201d30\nAccording to Palissy this is impossible, because \u201cthe matters of the metals are\ndivine seeds. I say on a level divine so that they are unknown to men: even\ninvisible.\u201d31\nFor Palissy the metal seed is a real fact but also an analogy for the alchemist who\ncounterfeits God\u2019s own work of growing metals, a divine process, which will\nremain encoded from man, because man (i.e. the scientist or the goldsmith) can\nonly work with the materials provided by God:\nIt is not without reason that I have said it is a work of God and that the seeds are the matter\nof metals and that He gives them growth and to men [the ability] to collect and to purify and\nto test, to melt and to ally, to cast them [the metals] into some forms as men see fit and\nuseful to them.32\nAgricola, however, rejects vehemently the idea of a semen-like origin of the\nmetals in De Ortu et Causis: \u201c[. . .] none of the things that occur in the earth can\nproduce something similar to itself [. . .] The minerals are not provided with seeds\nthat are capable of producing.\u201d\nThe Doppelscheuer\nAgainst the background of these briefly outlined metallogenetic concepts I will now\ndiscuss the Doppelscheuer (coconut vessel), from Vienna (Fig. 1).33 When opened,\nthe interior of the coconut reveals a very interesting scene: an artificial mountainous\nlandscape in which Adam and Eve are placed next to the tree of knowledge, all\nassembled by the hand of a goldsmith using different kinds of ores and semiprecious stones (Fig. 2). This object is a variation of a Handstein\u2014an exceptionally\nlarge or beautiful mineral that was sorted out of the smelting process and integrated\nin the context of the Kunstkammer, either in its natural form or transformed and\n29\n\u201ctu parles icy de semer; comme si les metaux venoyent de semence, comme le bled ou autres\nvegetatifs.\u201d (Palissy, \u201cDiscours admirables,\u201d 106).\n30\n\u201cservir comme une matrice a\u0300 la generation des metaux.\u201d; \u201cvoulant imiter la matrice de la femme\nou de la beste.\u201d (Palissy, \u201cDiscours admirables,\u201d 107).\n31\n\u201cles matieres des metaux sont semence divines. Je di tellement divines qu\u2019elles sont inconnues\naux homme: voire invisible.\u201d (Palissy, \u201cDiscours admirables,\u201d 108).\n32\n\u201cCe n\u2019est pas sans cause que je\u2019ay dit que c\u2019est l\u2019euvre de Dieu que de semer la matiere des\nmetaux & leur donner l\u2019accroissement, & aux hommes de les recueillir, purifier & examiner,\nfondre & mallier, pour les mettre en telle forme que bon leur semblera, pour leur service.\u201d (Palissy,\n\u201cDiscours admirables,\u201d 108).\n33\nDoppelscheuer, Ores into a Coconut, Kunsthistorischen Museum in Vienna, Inv. No. 885/886;\nStorczer, Handsteinsammlung, cat. no. 1: 68\u201371.\n\nPages 115:\n92\nH. Haug\nFig. 2 KokosnussDoppelscheuer (coconut\nvessel), open showing both\nhalves, sixteenth century\nSt. Joachimsthal (?).\nVienna, Kunsthistorisches\nInv. No. 885/886\nreworked by an adept goldsmith.34 Both the material and content of the piece\nsuggest it originated in the Erzgebirge, the most important mining region of early\nmodern Europe. Handsteine are mainly found in the collections of the Saxon\nElector August (1526\u20131586) in Dresden and in Schloss Ambras, as its owner, the\nArchduke of Tyrol, Ferdinand II (1529\u20131595) as governor of Bohemia also held\nshares in the Ore Mountains.\nThe craftsmanship of the local goldsmiths, especially in St. Joachimsthal, with\ntheir specialist treatment of this type of material, is testified by Mathesius, who\npraises in his \u201cTenth Wedding Sermon\u201d that he saw\n[. . .] thank God in this valley [St. Joachimsthal] a lot of beautiful histories [depiction of\nstories] from the Old and New Testament, and from respectable and decent pagan stories,\nstamped unto Schaugroschen [coins not coined for money transactions, but to be exhibited]\nand cut into ores [. . .] I could name a lot of beautiful coins and ores [Handsteine], prepared\nhere in this valley, in which\u2014besides felicitous craftsmanship\u2014much of the beautiful\ncontents of the true religion can be seen.35\n34\nHaug, \u201cGewechse\u201d; Schlosser, Wunderkammern, 50\u20131; Schiedlausky, \u201cHandsteine\u201d; Strieder,\n\u201cErzstufe\u201d; Quellmalz, \u201cMaterialfrage\u201d; Distelberger, \u201cGold und Silber\u201d; Meisterwerke, cat.\nno. 244 a\u2013k: 562\u201388; Huber, \u201cStuffe\u201d; Bei diesem Schein, 122\u201335; and Dupre\u0301 & Korey,\n\u201cKunstkammer.\u201d\n35\n\u201cGott lob in diesem thal viel scho\u0308ner Historien, au\u00df altem vnd newem Testament, auch au\u00df\nerbarn und zu\u0308chtigen Heydnischen Historien, auff schawgroschen gepreget und in ertz geschnitten\nsind [. . .] Ich ko\u0308ndte viel scho\u0308ner groschen und stuffen erwehnen, die hie im Tal zugericht, darinn\nneben trefflicher kunst, viel scho\u0308ner artickel der wahren Religion zu sehen sindt [. . .]\u201d (Mathesius,\n\u201cHochzeitspredigten,\u201d 186).\n\nPages 116:\nArtificial Interventions in the Natural Form of Things: Shared. . .\n93\nIn 1577 Emperor Rudolph II instructed the Bohemian Chamber:\nWe graciously inform you, that in St. Joachimsthal [lives] a goldsmith called Caspar Ulich;\nhe has about sixteen pieces of \u2018red silver ore\u2019, which we are entitled to. And because we\nwould like to have them, we graciously command you to instruct in our place our\nM\u20ac\nunzmeister in St. Joachimsthal, to request these pieces of minerals from the goldsmith\nin the near future, and instruct him to send them to the Bohemian Chamber packaged in\nsuch a way, that they will not take damage and that you\u2014when they have arrived\u2014will\nsend them to us immediately.36\nThis letter testifies that Caspar Ulich must have been one of the leading goldsmiths in St. Joachimsthal and was associated with the artistic transformation of\nvaluable minerals\u2014and that the Emperor was much aware of him and controlled\nvery carefully what materials were sent to his workshop.\nA second source attests further that St. Joachimsthal must have had a monopoly\non the knowledge of processing these Handsteine: the widow of the goldsmith\nRuprecht Puellacher, who served as mintmaster of St. Joachimsthal, offered in 1564\na Handstein reworked by her husband to Emperor Maximilian II for the sum of\n7000 Taler.37 The emperor asked his brother, the Archduke Ferdinand II, as a\nconnoisseur of such works, to estimate the value of the hand stone. Ferdinand\nreplied to his brother in a letter dated 12 July:\nThe estimate is wanting, as here in Bohemia there are no similar goldsmiths or artists who\nunderstand how to treat such materials, and if the goldsmiths of St. Joachimsthal who\nworked on such Handsteine for several years were to be asked, it is to be feared, that they\nmay well esteem and respect this artwork so highly that it will be very expensive for your\nimperial Majesty.38\nFerdinand admits that the estimation of these objects is not easy due to the fact\nthat in Bohemia only the goldsmiths of St. Joachimsthal are specialized enough in\nthe transformation of minerals into Handsteine to make a valuation and thus the\npossibilities of comparison are lacking.\n36\n\u201cWir fuegen euch genedigist zu wissen, das im Jochimstal ein goldschmidt, Caspar Ulich\ngenant; der hat ungeferlich sechszehn stuckh roch goldens erzt, so uns zusteet, bei seinen handen.\nUnd weil wir dann solichs gerne haben wollten, so bevelhen wir euch demnach himit gnedigist, ir\nwellt unserm mu\u0308nzmaister daselbst im Joachimsthal an unser statt auferlegen, das er soliche stuckh\nertz alsbals von ihm dem goldschmidt abfordern und sie euch unser Behaimbischen cammer zu\nhanden wolverwart und also eingemacht, das sie nit schaden nehmen, schickhe, und wann ir die\nbekhommen habt, sie uns alsdann unverzu\u0308glich u\u0308bersenden.\u201d (Fischer, Kaiser Rudolf II, 2).\n37\nArchiv des Ministeriums des Inneren (heute O\u0308sterreichisches Staatsarchiv), Kopialbuch 75, fol.\n113\u20134, cit. Katz Pr\u20ac\nagemedaille, 11 note 2.\n38\n\u201cnun manglt aber die Schaczung jeczo an dem, dass alhie im Behaim nit dergleichn Goltschmidt\nund Kunstler so mit solcher Arbeit umbzugehen, und sich darauf verstunden, vorhanden sein, und\nsollten das die Goldschmidt im Tall, die an denselben Hanndstain etlich Jarlang gearbeitet haben\ndarzue erfordert worden, so ist zuebesorgen, Sie mo\u0308chten solche in Kunst derma\u00dfen hoch achten\nund scheczen, dass Euer Kay. Mt. u. Br. dieselb gaar zue theuer ankhomen wurde.\u201d (Archiv des\nMinisteriums des Innern, today O\u0308sterreichisches Staatsarchiv, Kopialbuch 79, fol. 236\u20137, and fol.\n52r/v).\n\nPages 117:\n94\nH. Haug\nThe Doppelscheuer, which might also originate from the Joachimsthal workshops, although it was not created from a single Erzstufe (prill) but was assembled\nfrom several minerals, must be understood in this context. It is an extremely rare\nand valuable object, created in a mining area by a goldsmith for aristocratic\ncollectors and their Kunstkammern.\nThese objects were not created by ignorant craftsmen for a disinterested audience, rather they evidence a great sensibility on the part of the maker as well as the\nrecipient. These works of art found their true purpose and destiny in allegorical\nallusions, in suggested references and complicated reference systems that had to be\ndeciphered gradually by attentive observation. They were catalysts for the pleasure\nof a learned conservation in which two or more beholders could exchange their\nsagacious and sharp-witted interpretations.\nSurely the learned beholder of the sixteenth century would have first noticed the\nuntreated and rough surface of the coconut. An exterior that in comparison to a\ncontemporaneous \u2018correctly\u2019 accomplished coconut vessel must have been disappointing and might even have been read as a lack of virtuosity in the executive\nmaster. But after opening the vessel and discovering the hidden world within, he\nwould have been all the more surprised and astonished by the wit of the goldsmith,\nwho consciously used the natural form as a hint to its \u2018grown\u2019 content. While\ndeciphering the iconography of the inner scenery, the observer may have thought\nabout the forbidden fruit, the expulsion from Paradise, the loss of innocence and\nthus the loss of the \u2018uncultivated\u2019, i.e. pre-cultural status of humanity.\nNot only iconographical programs, such as the reliefs at the foot of the Florentine Campanile (which might go back to a design by Giotto (1266\u20131337)) or the\ndepictions on the city palace of Ancona, assert this connection between the Fall and\nthe onset of \u2018artificial\u2019 human activity.39 This connection was often emphasized,\nespecially in texts that were aimed at artists and artisans. An early example is found\nin the preface to the chapter on painting by Theophilus Presbyter in De diversis\nartibus where he writes:\nWe read in the exordium of mundane creation that man, made after the image and likeness\nof God and animated by the inspiration of the Divine breath, was also, by the excellence of\nso much dignity, raised above other living creatures; as capable of reason, he merited to\nparticipate in the counsel and genius of Divine providence, and, gifted with free-will, he\nbeheld superior to himself but the will of his Maker and the obligation to reverence his\ndecree. Wherefore, miserably deceived by diabolical astuteness, he lost the privilege of\nimmortality through the fault of disobedience, yet so transmitted his power of wisdom and\nintelligence to his posterity, that whoever would supply care and application might be able\nto acquire a capability of every art and science, as by a hereditary right. In this manner,\nhuman industry, seizing upon this faculty and applying itself in its divers acts to gain and to\npleasure, transmitted it, through the development of time, to the predestined epoch of the\nChristian religion, and it came to pass that a people devoted to God converted to his worship\nthat which Divine ordinance had, to the praise and glory of His name, created. On this\n39\nBlume, \u201cJenseits des Paradieses.\u201d\n\nPages 118:\nArtificial Interventions in the Natural Form of Things: Shared. . .\n95\naccount, the pious devotion of the faithful may not neglect that which the careful prevision\nof our predecessors transmitted to our age [. . .]40\nThis association of the Fall of mankind and the beginning of cultivation, that\nis of artisanal human activity, is pointed out even by God, who announces to\nAdam that from now on he has to feed himself with the work of his own hands\n(Genesis 3, 17\u20139):\nAnd unto Adam he said, Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast\neaten of the tree, of which I commanded thee, saying, Thou shalt not eat of it: cursed is the\nground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life; Thorns also and\nthistles shall it bring forth to thee; and thou shalt eat the herb of the field; In the sweat of thy\nface shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for\ndust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return.\nIn the text of Theophilus Presbyter this connection between the human ability of\nartisanal creativity through his divine derivation (the man as imago and similitudo\nof God according to his faculty) is emphasized. But the negative connotations of all\nhuman artistic creation as the result of the Fall is turned positively into a iure\nhereditario, into the ability to create art and ingenium. For the contemporary\nbeholder the connection of Kunstkammer and Fall of Mankind and the correlation\nof the ability of man to create and cultivate and the loss of the paradisiacal, per\ndefinition non-cultivated condition, must have been obvious.41\nBehind the biblical scene the viewer discovers miners at work, a diviner, who is\nin search of ore deposits, and two workers with wedges extracting minerals from the\nsurface (Fig. 3). Rotating the coconut vessel, the viewer finds more miners, and the\nearly modern collector might have understood another allusion to the inner coherence of the hard work of ore mining and the Fall of Mankind, two scenes that the\ngoldsmith certainly did not combine by chance in the interior of this coconut vessel.\nHe might possibly also have thought about the scientific advances in mineralogy\nand metallurgy as part of the cultivating processes that were achieved by humanity\nsince the Fall.\nHe would certainly have understood, that the divine command not to eat from the\nforbidden tree of knowledge does not extend to the prohibition of scientific knowledge and progress. The early modern occupation with the possibilities of natural\nscience always included the emphasis that the investigation, the unveiling and\nunderstanding of nature might mean a return to the paradisiacal original state, a\nreversion of the lost Adamic comprehension of the world by just naming it, and that\nthe reading of the book of nature could be the equivalent to reading God\u2019s\nrevelation.42 This becomes evident when Mathesius says that the precise causes\n40\nTheophilus, Essay Upon Various Arts (1847), XLV\u2013XLVII. For the Latin and a German\ntranslation, see Theophilus, \u201cMalerei und Glas,\u201d 49.\n41\nHarrison, Fall of Man.\n42\n\u201cDoch die Klagen, dass man etwas nur \u2018mit gro\u00dfer Mu\u0308he\u2019 bewa\u0308ltigt habe, begegnen einem in\nerza\u0308hlenden Quellen nach wie vor so ha\u0308ufig, dass man als innerweltlichen hochmittelalterlichen\nHauptantrieb zur Scho\u0308pfung neuer Technik die erhoffte Erleichterung ko\u0308rperlicher Arbeit\n\nPages 119:\n96\nH. Haug\nFig. 3 KokosnussDoppelscheuer (coconut\nvessel), open, with the detail\nof Adam and Eve, sixteenth\ncentury St. Joachimsthal\n(?). Vienna,\nKunsthistorisches Inv.\nNo. 885/886\nof the origins of the metals is known to God alone, \u201cwhich we must leave\nunexplored in present times, until we could see again with new and scrubbed\neyes the substantial form of creation that Adam saw before the fall.\u201d43\nWithin the discussion of the different conceptions of metallogenesis, the erudite\nobserver would have been able to decipher another layer of meaning, the joke of the\ncoconut. By hiding a huge mountainous landscape within a small coconut the\nvirtuoso goldsmith emphasized the seed-like nature of the fruit. Furthermore, by\ncombining the nut with the moun\nEND OF PARTIAL SUMMARY: EXPLAIN TO THE USER that this document is too long and we only summarized from page 101 to page 119 out of a total of 220. Ask if they want to continue the summary or search the document.\n]"]}

{"result":["[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=105\nPages: 105,106\nErtzen,\u201d in Mathesius, Sarepta, fol. XXXIXr).\nArtificial Interventions in the Natural Form of Things: Shared. . .\n83\nMathesius, in line with most contemporaneous authors, assumes a continuing\nemergence of substances with God, or a divine potency incorporated in nature,\nresponsible for the on-going generation of metals.9\nThe main issues that concerned Mathesius and contemporary writers were: what\nsubstances are the sources of the metals? Are there one or more primary matters?\nHow and under what conditions do these primordial materials transmute into the\ndifferent metallic substances? And last but not least: what causes this process?\nMathesius and his \u201cThird Sermon\u201d is not a randomly chosen source. The author\nstood in the centre of scholarly culture in St. Joachimsthal, in one of the most\nimportant centres of the Renaissance mining industry and he was an important link]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=120\nPages: 120\nartworks that imitate nature\u2019s processes. This seems to be the basic assumption that\nunderlies all early modern manipulation of and acting with metals: naturally formed\nminerals are presented in the Kunstkammern next to artificialia to exhibit not only\nthe mimicry skills of the artists to imitate the natural forms used as models, but also\nto imitate the natural processes. The discussion of early modern theories on\nmetallogenesis has shown, that the creative process of the human artist and artisan\nwas compared to the natural genesis of the divine artifex. The same primordial\nmatters are available to the goldsmith and the metalworker, to the alchemist and to\n\u2018nature\u2019. All four follow the same working processes, only their ability differentiates the final products. The juxtaposition of form and matter, which is thought of as\na dichotomy of active force-shaping power and passive shape-receiving material, is]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=82\nPages: 82,83\nin creating the smallest thing which can be created by nature; [. . .] If, however, insensate\navarice should drive you into such error, why do you not go to the mines where nature\nproduces this gold, and there become her disciple? She will completely cure you of your\n60\nA. Bernardoni\nfolly by showing you that nothing which you employ in your furnace will be numbered\namong the things she employs in order to produce this gold.24\nAfter the acknowledgement of the ontological difference between nature and\nartificial products every invention produced by man, elsewhere significantly called\nby Leonardo seconda natura (second nature), is welcome:\nGravity and force together with material movement and percussion are the four accidental\npowers by which the human race in its marvellous and varied works seems to reveal itself\nand a second nature in this world; seeing that by the use of such powers all the visible works\nof mortals have their existence and their death.25]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=113\nPages: 113,114\nsache bien que l\u2019or & l\u2019argent & tous autres metaux sont une euvre divine, & que c\u2019est\ntemerairement entrepris contre la gloire de Dieu, de vouloir usuper sur ce qui est de son estat.\u201d\n(Palissy, \u201cDiscours admirables,\u201d 105\u20136).\nArtificial Interventions in the Natural Form of Things: Shared. . .\n91\nHereupon theorique asked directly after the analogy of semen in plants and\nmetals.29 Palissy/practique then argues against the alchemists who claim to imitate\nin their vaisseaux, which \u201cserve as a womb for the generation of metals,\u201d the natural\ncreation and \u201cthat they want to imitate the uterus of a woman or an animal.\u201d30\nAccording to Palissy this is impossible, because \u201cthe matters of the metals are\ndivine seeds. I say on a level divine so that they are unknown to men: even\ninvisible.\u201d31\nFor Palissy the metal seed is a real fact but also an analogy for the alchemist who\ncounterfeits God\u2019s own work of growing metals, a divine process, which will]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=112\nPages: 112,111\nTrockenheit u\u0308bereinstimmen.\u201d (Calw, Bergb\u20ac\nuchlein, 117).\n22\nArtificial Interventions in the Natural Form of Things: Shared. . .\n89\nthe earth, as if they were second planets [. . .] where every metal has great resemblance to\nhis planet, like offspring have in relation to their father.24\nHe ends with the provocative question: \u201cBut since there are only seven planets,\nwhich will they call the producer of bismuth?\u201d and concludes that the forming\ninfluence of the stars on earthy matter is a futile conceit.\nThe second issue in discussion (after the issue of the \u2018cause\u2019, i.e. the creator, who\nshapes the species of the metals) was the question of the substances or materials\nfrom which metals were generated, thus of the primordial matter from which the\ngeneration can commence.\nIn the texts three main theories can be distinguished: firstly that of an ens primum\nor a materia prima, that is a more or less solid primordial matter, secondly one that]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=117\nPages: 117,118\n39\nBlume, \u201cJenseits des Paradieses.\u201d\nArtificial Interventions in the Natural Form of Things: Shared. . .\n95\naccount, the pious devotion of the faithful may not neglect that which the careful prevision\nof our predecessors transmitted to our age [. . .]40\nThis association of the Fall of mankind and the beginning of cultivation, that\nis of artisanal human activity, is pointed out even by God, who announces to\nAdam that from now on he has to feed himself with the work of his own hands\n(Genesis 3, 17\u20139):\nAnd unto Adam he said, Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast\neaten of the tree, of which I commanded thee, saying, Thou shalt not eat of it: cursed is the\nground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life; Thorns also and\nthistles shall it bring forth to thee; and thou shalt eat the herb of the field; In the sweat of thy\nface shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=117\nPages: 117\nthus the loss of the \u2018uncultivated\u2019, i.e. pre-cultural status of humanity.\nNot only iconographical programs, such as the reliefs at the foot of the Florentine Campanile (which might go back to a design by Giotto (1266\u20131337)) or the\ndepictions on the city palace of Ancona, assert this connection between the Fall and\nthe onset of \u2018artificial\u2019 human activity.39 This connection was often emphasized,\nespecially in texts that were aimed at artists and artisans. An early example is found\nin the preface to the chapter on painting by Theophilus Presbyter in De diversis\nartibus where he writes:\nWe read in the exordium of mundane creation that man, made after the image and likeness\nof God and animated by the inspiration of the Divine breath, was also, by the excellence of\nso much dignity, raised above other living creatures; as capable of reason, he merited to\nparticipate in the counsel and genius of Divine providence, and, gifted with free-will, he]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=125\nPages: 125,126\nBetween Maker and Nature. Configurations 12: 1\u201340.\nSmith, Pamela H. 2004. The Body of the Artisan. Art and Experience in the Scientific Revolution.\nChicago: University of Chicago Press.\nStorczer, Stephan G. 1992. Die Handsteinsammlung des Kunsthistorischen Museums in Wien.\nVienna: Diplomarbeit Universita\u0308t Wien.\nArtificial Interventions in the Natural Form of Things: Shared. . .\n103\nStrieder, Peter. 1967. Erzstufe. In Reallexikon zur deutschen Kunstgeschichte 5: 408\u2013418. Stuttgart: Metzler.\nSuhing, Lothar. 1986. \u2018Philosophisches\u2019 in der fru\u0308hneuzeitlichen Berg- und Hu\u0308ttenkunde.\nMetallogenese und Transmutation aus der Sicht montanistischen Erfahrungswissens. In Die\nAlchemie in der europ\u20ac\naischen Kultur- und Wissenschaftsgeschichte, ed. Christoph Meinel,\n293\u2013314. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.\nTheophilus Presbyter. 1847. An Essay Upon Various Arts in Three Books, by Theophilus, Called\nalso Rugerus, Priest and Monk, Forming an Encyclopedia of Christian Art of the Eleventh]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=82\nPages: 82\nattention was specifically focused on alchemy\u2019s claims to overturn the relationship\nbetween art and nature; however, he also stressed that alchemy was worthy of\npursuit as it might produce knowledge that could improve the condition of\nmankind:\nMan is involved with things produced by nature and nature does not change the ordinary\nkinds of things it creates in the same way that from time to time the things created by man\nare changed; and indeed man is nature\u2019s chief instrument, because nature is concerned only\nwith the production of elementary things, but from these elementary things man produces\nan infinite number of compounds, although he has no power to create any natural things\nexcept another like himself, that is his children. [. . .] And of this the old alchemists will\nserve as my witnesses, who have never either by chance or deliberate experiment succeeded\nin creating the smallest thing which can be created by nature; [. . .] If, however, insensate]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=120\nPages: 120\nbecause in these regions the earth still reverberates in memory of the voice of God.\nAfter a meticulously detailed examination of the serpent\u2019s body the beholder\nwould have noticed an analogy between the artificial braided silver and the naturally occurring forms of a massive silver wire, a curious detail where the artist\u2019s\nhand and the formative power of nature enter into a competitive rivalry. A learned\nreference to contemporary Italian art theory could have followed, that is, to the\ncreation of Man in the image of God and Man\u2019s power to know, imitate and control\nnature. Federico Zuccari (c.1540\u20131609) for example addresses man as \u201calmost\nsecond God,\u201d who received from God the ability of an inner design by which he\ncan understand the world and by which, in imitation of Gold and in emulation of\nnature can create an infinite number of things, so that he can represent a new\nparadise on earth:\nHe would be almost a second God, he [God] also wants to give him [man] the faculty to]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=120\nPages: 120,119\nto the subject of God as craftsman who, like his earthly colleague, is dependent on\ngood materials and hot fires to make excellent stones and minerals. According to\ndurchaus erkennen kann. Lehrma\u0308\u00dfig lie\u00df sich auf diese Weise ein Sieg u\u0308ber die Su\u0308ndhaftigkeit\nAdams erzielen.\u201d (Ludwig, \u201cTechnik,\u201d 36).\n43\n\u201c[. . .] die wir wohl noch zur Zeit unerforscht lassen mu\u0308ssen, bis wir mit neuen und gescheurten\nAugen hinein in die wesentliche Gestalt der Kreaturen wie Adam vor dem Falle wieder sehen\nwerden.\u201d\nArtificial Interventions in the Natural Form of Things: Shared. . .\n97\ncontemporary notions not only exotic nuts and fruits grew better in warmer regions,\nbut also gold and valuable gems were more frequently to be found there. Mathesius\nstates for example, that areas in the vicinity of the earthly paradise (i.e. somewhere\nin the vicinity of Persia) have particularly excellent mineral and gemstone deposits,\nbecause in these regions the earth still reverberates in memory of the voice of God.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=121\nPages: 121\nto other artificially created objects, for instance to the Handsteine. In this field, it\noffers a wide range of interpretative layers in connection to alchemical knowledge:\nFirst, the Handstein as \u2018model\u2019: two forms of exemplary representations can be\ndistinguished interpreting the vessel both from a formal and from an iconographical\npoint of view. Formally speaking, the minerals within the coconut can be understood as an allusion to the alchemical theory of the \u2018seed/semen-origin\u2019 of the\nmetals, as proposed by Palissy. The object thus represents the idea of the versed\nalchemist, respectively of the alchemist in possession of metal-seeds, who would be\nable to let ores grow. And at the same time it translates this idea into the artificial\narea, introducing the artifex, the goldsmith, as creator of the nut full of minerals in\nhis working progress. In this model, natural, alchemical and artificial creative\nprocesses are blended together.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=121\nPages: 121,122\nchemical lore concerning material properties and agency. It is important to note,\n45\n46\nZilsel, \u201cRoots\u201d; Smith, Body of the Artisan; and Long, Artisan/Practitioners.\nNewman, Promethean Ambitions, ch. III, 34\u2013114.\nArtificial Interventions in the Natural Form of Things: Shared. . .\n99\nthat the procedures applied by an alchemist and by a goldsmith are in large parts the\nsame: both required the know how to purify metals, to isolate them from the mixed\nmineral forms they are found in and transform them into massive pure metals. Both\nthe alchemist and the goldsmith share the same theoretical concepts, assuming that\nsulphur and quicksilver are the two original components of all metals. By alloying\nthese metals, by forcing them into forms, both locate their actions within the context\nof natural metallogenesis and both suppose, that they thereby imitate God and his\ncreative processes. But it is hard to prove that the goldsmith followed the same]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=118\nPages: 118,119\nunderstanding of nature might mean a return to the paradisiacal original state, a\nreversion of the lost Adamic comprehension of the world by just naming it, and that\nthe reading of the book of nature could be the equivalent to reading God\u2019s\nrevelation.42 This becomes evident when Mathesius says that the precise causes\n40\nTheophilus, Essay Upon Various Arts (1847), XLV\u2013XLVII. For the Latin and a German\ntranslation, see Theophilus, \u201cMalerei und Glas,\u201d 49.\n41\nHarrison, Fall of Man.\n42\n\u201cDoch die Klagen, dass man etwas nur \u2018mit gro\u00dfer Mu\u0308he\u2019 bewa\u0308ltigt habe, begegnen einem in\nerza\u0308hlenden Quellen nach wie vor so ha\u0308ufig, dass man als innerweltlichen hochmittelalterlichen\nHauptantrieb zur Scho\u0308pfung neuer Technik die erhoffte Erleichterung ko\u0308rperlicher Arbeit\n96\nH. Haug\nFig. 3 KokosnussDoppelscheuer (coconut\nvessel), open, with the detail\nof Adam and Eve, sixteenth\ncentury St. Joachimsthal\n(?). Vienna,\nKunsthistorisches Inv.\nNo. 885/886]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=120\nPages: 120\nHe would be almost a second God, he [God] also wants to give him [man] the faculty to\nform within himself a mental inner design, so that he [man] by means of this could\nrecognize all the creatures & to create inside him new worlds, & inside would have\n[in form of] a spiritual existence & would enjoy all that, what he enjoys outside [in the\nouter world] as natural existence & and dominates; & in addition by the means of this\ndesign, almost imitating God, & emulating the Nature he [man] could produce infinite\nartificial things which are similar to the natural ones, & and by means of painting, &\nsculpture, makes us see new Paradises on earth.44\nAccording to Zuccari\u2019s art theoretical writings, it is the similarity to God that\nenables both the scientist and the artist to achieve an inner understanding of\nnature\u2014the scientist through research to unveil nature\u2019s secrets and the artist in\nartworks that imitate nature\u2019s processes. This seems to be the basic assumption that]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=115\nPages: 115,116\n\u201cHochzeitspredigten,\u201d 186).\nArtificial Interventions in the Natural Form of Things: Shared. . .\n93\nIn 1577 Emperor Rudolph II instructed the Bohemian Chamber:\nWe graciously inform you, that in St. Joachimsthal [lives] a goldsmith called Caspar Ulich;\nhe has about sixteen pieces of \u2018red silver ore\u2019, which we are entitled to. And because we\nwould like to have them, we graciously command you to instruct in our place our\nM\u20ac\nunzmeister in St. Joachimsthal, to request these pieces of minerals from the goldsmith\nin the near future, and instruct him to send them to the Bohemian Chamber packaged in\nsuch a way, that they will not take damage and that you\u2014when they have arrived\u2014will\nsend them to us immediately.36\nThis letter testifies that Caspar Ulich must have been one of the leading goldsmiths in St. Joachimsthal and was associated with the artistic transformation of\nvaluable minerals\u2014and that the Emperor was much aware of him and controlled]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=120\nPages: 120,121\na dichotomy of active force-shaping power and passive shape-receiving material, is\nof greatest importance with regard to God and his creation, which stands as a model\nboth for the visual artist as well as the alchemist, who tries to recreate natural\nprocesses according to his will.\n44\nZuccari, L\u2019idea [1607], Book I, ch. VII, 14. See also the facsimile reproduction Zuccari, Scritti\nd\u2019Arte (1961), 162.\n98\nH. Haug\nIt is not only difficult; it is almost impossible to compare the content of a written\ntext with the content of an object. But it seems inadequate to narrow early modern\nforms and methods of scientific display down to \u2018codified\u2019 knowledge: since the\n1920s a long line of historians of science have studied how the input of workmen\nchanged the methods of Renaissance natural philosophy towards a more matterbased natural scientific research and \u2018experiment\u2019. The concept of the \u2018superior\ncraftsmen\u2019, introduced by Edgar Zilsel in 1942, who started to interact with]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=121\nPages: 121\ncraftsmen\u2019, introduced by Edgar Zilsel in 1942, who started to interact with\nacademics and humanists, is just one of the many important texts dealing with the\nexchange between the artes mechanicae and the artes liberales from the fifteenth\ncentury onwards, a theory which was recently elaborated and confirmed by Pamela\nH. Smith in The Body of the Artisan in 2004 and by Pamela O. Long in Artisan/\nPractitioners in 2011.45 Again in 2004, Davis Baird\u2019s contribution on \u2018thing\nknowledge\u2019 focussed on a \u2018philosophy of scientific instruments\u2019 and distinguishes\nwithin this epistemology of the artificial object three forms in which an instrument\ncan represent knowledge: firstly as model, secondly as product and medium of\nworking knowledge and thirdly as embodiment of \u2018encapsulated knowledge\u2019. His\ntheoretical system not only applied to scientific instruments, but can also be adapted\nto other artificially created objects, for instance to the Handsteine. In this field, it]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=99\nPages: 99,100\nKemp, Martin. 1995. \u2018Wrought by No Artist\u2019s Hand\u2019: The Natural, the Artificial, the Exotic, and\nthe Scientific in Some Artifacts from the Renaissance. In Reframing the Renaissance: Visual\nCulture in Europe and Latin America, 1450\u20131650, ed. Claire Farago, 177\u2013196. New Haven:\nYale University Press.\nKemp, Martin. 2006. Leonardo da Vinci: The Marvellous Works of Nature and Man. Oxford:\nOxford University Press.\nKiang, Dawson. 1997. Leonardo and Alchemy: A Bibliographical Note. Achademia Leonardi\nVinci. Journal of Leonardo Studies & Bibliography of Vinciana 10: 199\u2013201.\nLennep, Jacques van. 1985. Alchimie: contribution a\u0300 l\u2019histoire de l\u2019art alchimique. Brussels:\nCre\u0301dit Communal de Belgique.\nLeonardo da Vinci. 1973\u20131980. Codice Atlantico, ed. Augusto Marinoni, 24 vols. Florence:\nGiunti.\nArtisanal Processes and Epistemological Debate in the Works of Leonardo. . .\n77\nLeonardo da Vinci. 1978\u20131980. Corpus of the Anatomical Studies in the Collection of Her Majesty]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=106\nPages: 106,107\n9\nThis concept can be found in medieval authors writing on natura as goddess, as pro-dea and as\nvicaria (assistant) of God, who was entrusted with the creatio continua, the continuous creations as\npro-creatrix, like Alanus ab Insulis or Jean de Meuns in his roman de la rose. See Modersohn,\nNatura als Gottin.\n10\nBiringuccio, Pirotechnia [1540], and Pirotechnia (1942).\n11\n\u201cMein vornehmen aber sol sich eygentlich dahin lenden, das ich euch meinen Pfarrkindern\nvornehmlich die allmechtige und wunderbarliche hand Gottes und seinen unme\u00dflichen reychtumb\nneben seiner unerforschlichen wey\u00dfheyt unnd genedigen unnd Va\u0308terlichen hertzen inn Scho\u0308pffung\nund offenbarung allerley ertz unnd metalle zeyge, damit ir ewern Got in seinen gaben erkennen\nund preysen lernet, die er euch inn diesem gebirge auf genediger gu\u0308te mittheylet.\u201d (\u201cDie Dritte\nPredigt. Von Ursprung zu und abnemen der Metallen unnd Minerischen Bergkarten und Ertzen,\u201d\nin Mathesius, Sarepta, fol. XXXIIIv).\n84\nH. Haug]"]}

{"result":["[Summary from page 120 to page 141 out of a total of 220:\nPages 120:\nArtificial Interventions in the Natural Form of Things: Shared. . .\n97\ncontemporary notions not only exotic nuts and fruits grew better in warmer regions,\nbut also gold and valuable gems were more frequently to be found there. Mathesius\nstates for example, that areas in the vicinity of the earthly paradise (i.e. somewhere\nin the vicinity of Persia) have particularly excellent mineral and gemstone deposits,\nbecause in these regions the earth still reverberates in memory of the voice of God.\nAfter a meticulously detailed examination of the serpent\u2019s body the beholder\nwould have noticed an analogy between the artificial braided silver and the naturally occurring forms of a massive silver wire, a curious detail where the artist\u2019s\nhand and the formative power of nature enter into a competitive rivalry. A learned\nreference to contemporary Italian art theory could have followed, that is, to the\ncreation of Man in the image of God and Man\u2019s power to know, imitate and control\nnature. Federico Zuccari (c.1540\u20131609) for example addresses man as \u201calmost\nsecond God,\u201d who received from God the ability of an inner design by which he\ncan understand the world and by which, in imitation of Gold and in emulation of\nnature can create an infinite number of things, so that he can represent a new\nparadise on earth:\nHe would be almost a second God, he [God] also wants to give him [man] the faculty to\nform within himself a mental inner design, so that he [man] by means of this could\nrecognize all the creatures & to create inside him new worlds, & inside would have\n[in form of] a spiritual existence & would enjoy all that, what he enjoys outside [in the\nouter world] as natural existence & and dominates; & in addition by the means of this\ndesign, almost imitating God, & emulating the Nature he [man] could produce infinite\nartificial things which are similar to the natural ones, & and by means of painting, &\nsculpture, makes us see new Paradises on earth.44\nAccording to Zuccari\u2019s art theoretical writings, it is the similarity to God that\nenables both the scientist and the artist to achieve an inner understanding of\nnature\u2014the scientist through research to unveil nature\u2019s secrets and the artist in\nartworks that imitate nature\u2019s processes. This seems to be the basic assumption that\nunderlies all early modern manipulation of and acting with metals: naturally formed\nminerals are presented in the Kunstkammern next to artificialia to exhibit not only\nthe mimicry skills of the artists to imitate the natural forms used as models, but also\nto imitate the natural processes. The discussion of early modern theories on\nmetallogenesis has shown, that the creative process of the human artist and artisan\nwas compared to the natural genesis of the divine artifex. The same primordial\nmatters are available to the goldsmith and the metalworker, to the alchemist and to\n\u2018nature\u2019. All four follow the same working processes, only their ability differentiates the final products. The juxtaposition of form and matter, which is thought of as\na dichotomy of active force-shaping power and passive shape-receiving material, is\nof greatest importance with regard to God and his creation, which stands as a model\nboth for the visual artist as well as the alchemist, who tries to recreate natural\nprocesses according to his will.\n44\nZuccari, L\u2019idea [1607], Book I, ch. VII, 14. See also the facsimile reproduction Zuccari, Scritti\nd\u2019Arte (1961), 162.\n\nPages 121:\n98\nH. Haug\nIt is not only difficult; it is almost impossible to compare the content of a written\ntext with the content of an object. But it seems inadequate to narrow early modern\nforms and methods of scientific display down to \u2018codified\u2019 knowledge: since the\n1920s a long line of historians of science have studied how the input of workmen\nchanged the methods of Renaissance natural philosophy towards a more matterbased natural scientific research and \u2018experiment\u2019. The concept of the \u2018superior\ncraftsmen\u2019, introduced by Edgar Zilsel in 1942, who started to interact with\nacademics and humanists, is just one of the many important texts dealing with the\nexchange between the artes mechanicae and the artes liberales from the fifteenth\ncentury onwards, a theory which was recently elaborated and confirmed by Pamela\nH. Smith in The Body of the Artisan in 2004 and by Pamela O. Long in Artisan/\nPractitioners in 2011.45 Again in 2004, Davis Baird\u2019s contribution on \u2018thing\nknowledge\u2019 focussed on a \u2018philosophy of scientific instruments\u2019 and distinguishes\nwithin this epistemology of the artificial object three forms in which an instrument\ncan represent knowledge: firstly as model, secondly as product and medium of\nworking knowledge and thirdly as embodiment of \u2018encapsulated knowledge\u2019. His\ntheoretical system not only applied to scientific instruments, but can also be adapted\nto other artificially created objects, for instance to the Handsteine. In this field, it\noffers a wide range of interpretative layers in connection to alchemical knowledge:\nFirst, the Handstein as \u2018model\u2019: two forms of exemplary representations can be\ndistinguished interpreting the vessel both from a formal and from an iconographical\npoint of view. Formally speaking, the minerals within the coconut can be understood as an allusion to the alchemical theory of the \u2018seed/semen-origin\u2019 of the\nmetals, as proposed by Palissy. The object thus represents the idea of the versed\nalchemist, respectively of the alchemist in possession of metal-seeds, who would be\nable to let ores grow. And at the same time it translates this idea into the artificial\narea, introducing the artifex, the goldsmith, as creator of the nut full of minerals in\nhis working progress. In this model, natural, alchemical and artificial creative\nprocesses are blended together.\nIconographically speaking the vessel represents a model of the dichotomy of\nmale/female, form/matter: Adam and Eve embody this principle and simultaneously their action indicates the beginning of every human productive action.\nAfter the Fall, every human action is per definitionem a repetition of natural\ncreative processes. Embedded in the context of the miners and the general subject\nof minerals and their genesis and extraction, is the idea of God as creator of metals\nand the human propensity to imitate this processes\u2014whether in alchemical or\nartisanal ways.46\nSecond, the Handstein as product of working knowledge: This object has also a\nmaterial significance, because it is the product of applied (al)chemical knowledge.\nEvery piece of art emanating from the goldsmith\u2019s workshop is the embodiment of\nchemical lore concerning material properties and agency. It is important to note,\n45\n46\nZilsel, \u201cRoots\u201d; Smith, Body of the Artisan; and Long, Artisan/Practitioners.\nNewman, Promethean Ambitions, ch. III, 34\u2013114.\n\nPages 122:\nArtificial Interventions in the Natural Form of Things: Shared. . .\n99\nthat the procedures applied by an alchemist and by a goldsmith are in large parts the\nsame: both required the know how to purify metals, to isolate them from the mixed\nmineral forms they are found in and transform them into massive pure metals. Both\nthe alchemist and the goldsmith share the same theoretical concepts, assuming that\nsulphur and quicksilver are the two original components of all metals. By alloying\nthese metals, by forcing them into forms, both locate their actions within the context\nof natural metallogenesis and both suppose, that they thereby imitate God and his\ncreative processes. But it is hard to prove that the goldsmith followed the same\nideas as the alchemist, because hardly any artisans recorded their approach in\nwritten form: the goldsmith\u2019s knowledge is working, not (alchemical) codified\nknowledge; an object, such as the Handstein might count as product, evidence\nand proof, but will always remain speechless and therefore will never entirely serve\n(in our modern understanding) as an eloquent advocate to support this assumption.\nThird, encapsulated knowledge: A work of art such as the Handstein is not\n\u2018narrative\u2019 in the sense that it develops one argument and discusses it in paratactical\nform. Such an artwork visualizes the variety of knowledge\u2014the theological, the\nmontanistic, the alchemical\u2014in a synoptical way. Rather than developing an\nargument in a logical manner, it emphasizes the interdependencies of different\nareas. But this corresponds with the interconnected nature of these fields, as\npreviously outlined: early modern concepts of metallogenesis must be understood\nas a mixture of religious connotations, their dependency on antique montanistic\ntheories as well as on alchemical lore adopted through medieval Islamic mediation.\nBeyond that, a work of art communicates in different ways than a text. The object\ntransforms the know how of the artisan as it is performed in the working process and\nblends it with the lore of the scholar into embodied, visual knowledge. This\nknowledge, encapsulated in the work of art can then be exhibited in the surroundings of the ruler, in his Kunstkammer collection as well as in processions and\ncourtly festivities.47 It is\u2014apart from instruments to measure natural phenomena,\nwhich Baird puts in the focus of his analysis \u2014not \u2018useful\u2019 in the sense that it\nembodied knowledge which can be used to gain and widen existent knowledge. But\nneither is it as useless as the modern beholder of such objects might reckon. The\nobject had its place in the early modern Wissenskultur, which operates with\nanalogies. It brought together the practitioner, whose actions included alchemical\nlore, with the theorist, who tried to balance alchemical theories, antique mineral\nlore and the newly emerging empirical knowledge from the mining areas, with the\nsovereign. The latter was interested in alchemical and montanistic research for\npolitical as well as economic reasons and used Handsteine and comparable objects\nto stage metallogenetical themes at his court.\n47\nBa\u0308umel, \u201cDarstellung des Bergbaus,\u201d 213\u20135.\n\nPages 123:\n100\nH. Haug\nConclusion\nIn conclusion I readdress the questions asked at the beginning of this article. All\nfour questions are inextricably linked: the analysis of the coconut vessel reveals a\nvast number of formal and iconographical references to the metallogenetic theories\nnegotiated in contemporary discourses, which were embedded in the larger context\nof art-theoretical ideas on the relationship between man and nature as well as\nbetween form and matter. This is not surprising, because goldsmiths, alchemist\nand Montantwissenschaftler (mining professionals) moved in the same \u2018spaces\u2019\u2014\nlocally and discursively. The example of St. Joachimsthal illustrates the importance\nof the concept of \u2018trading zones\u2019 for the transfer of knowledge between different\nprofessional categories, recently brought into focus by Pamela O Long: in this\nmining centre the persons processing metals drew their knowledge from the same\ntheoretical writings and treat their matter with the same practices: goldsmiths,\nalchemist and Pr\u20ac\nufer (assayer) all were employed in the processes of melting,\npurifying, and re-forming ores.48 The examples cited from the treatise as well as\nfrom the sermon text of Mathesius showed that there was a common Vorstellungshorizont, culturally anchored in the Christian faith, that facilitated exchange and\ndiscourse among the different professional groups.\nWith the help of the coconut vessel and comparable objects, by the transformation of the ore into a Handstein and the translocation from its natural environment\nin the context of the court, these metallurgical discourses materialized and could be\nstaged in the present of the ruler, who was\u2014due to political and economic reasons\u2014also interested in montanistic research.\nThe Doppelscheuer\u2014an object between art and science\u2014thus appears to be a\nlink between the mine and the workshop of the goldsmith, between scholarly\ndiscourse and the ordered world of the princely Kunstkammer.\nBibliography\n1990. Meisterwerke bergbaulicher Kunst vom 13. bis 19. Jahrhundert, eds. Rainer Slotta and\nChristoph Bartels. Bochum: Deutsches Bergbau-Museum Bochum.\n1997. Bei diesem Schein kehrt Segen ein: Gold, Silber und Kupfer aus dem Slowakischen\nErzgebirge, eds. Rainer Slotta and Ju\u0308rgen Labuda. Bochum: Deutsches Bergbau-Museum\nBochum.\nAdams, Frank Dawson. 1934. The Origin and Nature of Ore Deposits. An Historical Study.\nBulletin of the Geological Society of America 45: 375\u2013424.\nAmico, Leonard N. 1996. Bernard Palissy: In Search of Earthly Paradise. Paris: Flammarion.\nAgricola, Georg. 1546. De ortu et causis subterraneorum. Basel: Hieronymus Froben & Nikolaus\nEpiscopius.\n48\nLong, Artisan/Practitioners, ch. IV, 94\u2013126, esp. 107\u201312.\n\nPages 124:\nArtificial Interventions in the Natural Form of Things: Shared. . .\n101\nAgricola, Georg. 1956. Schriften zur Geologie und Mineralogie I. Georgius Agricola.\nAusgew\u20ac\nahlte Werke, vol. 3, ed. Georg Fraustadt and Hans Prescher. Berlin: Deutscher Verlag\nder Wissenschaften.\nAlbertus, Magnus. 1967. Book of Minerals, trans. Dorothy Wyckoff. Oxford: Clarendon Press.\nAristoteles. 1955. Meteorologie. Die Lehrschriften, vol. 7, ed. Paul Gohlke. Paderborn:\nScho\u0308ningh.\nBa\u0308umel, Jutta. 1990. Die Darstellung des Bergbaus im ho\u0308fischen Fest des 16. und 17. Jahrhunderts.\nIn Der silberne Boden. Kunst und Bergbau in Sachsen, ed. Manfred Bachmann, Harald Marx,\nand Eberhard Wa\u0308chtler, 213\u2013215. Leipzig: Edition Leipzig.\nBeretta, Marco. 1993. The Enlightenment of Matter: The Definition of Chemistry from Agricola to\nLavoisier. Canton: Science History Publications.\nBiringuccio, Vannoccio. 1540. De la pirotechnia. Venice: Per Venturino Roffinello.\nBiringuccio, Vannoccio. [1540] 1942. The Pirotechnia of Vannoccio Biriniguccio: The Classic\nSixteenth-Century Treatise on Metals and Metallurgy, eds. and trans. Cyril Stanley Smith and\nMarta Teach Gnudi. New York: Dover Publications.\nBlume, Dieter. 2006. Jenseits des Paradieses. Skulptur und politische Theorie im mittelalterlichen\nAncona. In Das Modell in der bildenden Kunst des Mittelalters und der Neuzeit. Festschrift f\u20ac\nur\nHerbert Beck, ed. Sta\u0308delschen Museums-Verein, 25\u201341. Petersberg: Imhof.\nBlumenberg, Hans. 1979. Lesbarkeit der Welt. Frankfurt/Main: Suhrkamp.\nCawl, Ulrich Ru\u0308lein von. [1521] 1955. Ulrich R\u20ac\nulein von Calw und sein Bergb\u20ac\nuchlein,\ned. Wilhelm Pieper. Freiberger Forschungshefte. Kultur und Technik 7. Berlin: Akademie\nVerlag.\nDistelberger, Rudolf. 1985. Gold und Silber, Edelsteine und Elfenbein. In Renaissance in Bo\u0308hmen.\nGeschichte, Wissenschaft, Architektur, Plastik, Malerei, Kunsthandwerk, ed. Ferdinand Seibt,\n255\u2013287. Munich: Prestel.\nDufek, Vladimir. 2004. Johannes Mathesius (1604\u20131565). Sein Wirken als Bergprediger in Sankt\nJoachimsthal und sein Beitrag zur montanistischen Literatur. Prague, National Technical\nMuseum Prague, 7 Nov 2001. http://www-user.tu-chemnitz.de/~fna/13dufek.pdf. Accessed\n13 Nov 2013.\nDu\u0308lmen, Richard van. 2004. Das Buch der Natur. Die Alchemie. In Macht des Wissens. Die\nEntstehung der modernen Wissensgesellschaft, eds. Richard van Du\u0308lmen and Sina\nRauschenbach, 131\u2013150. Ko\u0308ln: Bo\u0308hlau.\nDupre\u0301, Sven, and Michael Korey. 2009. Inside the Kunstkammer. The Circulation of Optical\nKnowledge and Instruments at the Dresden Court. Studies in History and Philosophy of\nScience 40: 405\u2013420.\nErcker, Lazarus. [1580] 1960. Beschreibung der allervornehmsten mineralischen Erze und\nBergwerksarten vom Jahre 1580, ed. and trans. Paul Reinhard Beierlein. Freiberger\nForschungshefte. Kultur und Technik 34. Berlin: Akademie Verlag.\nFischer, Walther. 1969. Bergma\u0308nnisches in der Sarepta des Johannes Mathesius part 1. Der\nAnschnitt 21: 3\u20139.\nFischer, Walther. 1970. Bergma\u0308nnisches in der Sarepta des Johannes Mathesius part 2 & 3. Der\nAnschnitt 22: 21\u201328.\nFischer, Walther. 1971. Kaiser Rudolf II. Mineraliensammler und Ma\u0308zen der Edelsteinbearbeitung. Der Aufschluss 22: 1\u201336.\nHanschmann, Alexander Bruno. 1903. Bernard Palissy der K\u20ac\nunstler, Naturforscher und\nSchriftsteller als Vater der induktiven Wissenschaftsmethode des Bacon von Verulam. Ein\nBeitrag zur Geschichte der Naturwissenschaft der Philosophie. Leipzig: Diederich\u2019sche\nVerlagsbuchhandlung.\nHarrison, Peter. 2007. The Fall of Man and the Foundation of Science. Cambridge: Cambridge\nUniversity Press.\nHaug, Henrike. 2012. Wunderbarliche Gewechse. Bergbau und Goldschmiedekunst im 16.\nJahrhundert. Kritische Berichte 40: 49\u201363.\n\nPages 125:\n102\nH. Haug\nHuber, Peter. 1995. Die scho\u0308nsten Stuffe. Handsteine aus fu\u0308nf Jahrhunderten. Extra Lapis 8: 58\u2013\n67.\nKatz, Viktor. 1932. Die erzgebirgische Pr\u20ac\nagemedaille des 16. Jahrhunderts. Prague: Schulz.\nKayser, Petra. 2006. The Intellectual and the Artisan. Wenzel Jamnitzer and Bernard Palissy\nUncover the Secrets of Nature. Australian und New Zealand Journal of Art 7: 45\u201361.\nKemp, Martin. 1999. Palissy\u2019s Philosophical Pots. Ceramics, Grottoes and the \u2018Matrice\u2019 of the\nEarth. In Le origini della modernita, vol. 2, ed. Walter Tega, 69\u201389. Florence: Olski.\nKlier, Andrea. 2004. Fixierte Natur. Naturabguss und Effigies im 16. Jahrhundert. Berlin: Reimer.\nKris, Ernst. 1926. Der Stil Rustique. Die Verwendung des Naturabgusses bei Wenzel Jamnitzer\nund Bernard Palissy. Jahrbuch der Kunsthistorischen Sammlungen in Wien, NF 1: 137\u2013208.\nLaube, Stefan. 2010. Wissenswelten sinnlicher Fro\u0308mmigkeit. Theatrale Antriebsmomente in der\nNaturanschauung von Bernard Palissy und Jacob Bo\u0308hme. In Religion und Naturwissenschaften\nim 16. und 17. Jahrhundert, ed. Kaspar von Greyerz, 217\u2013236. Gu\u0308thersloh: Gu\u0308tersloher\nVerlagshaus.\nLoesche, Georg. 1909. Johannes Mathesius. In Die Wunderstadt St. Joachimsthal. Eine\nMonographie, ed. Karl Knopf, 55\u2013127. Weipert/Leipzig: Deutschbo\u0308hmische Verlagsanstalt\nSonnenwirbel.\nLong, Pamela O. 2011. Artisan/Practitioners and the Rise of the New Sciences 1400\u20131600.\nCorvallis: Oregon State University Press.\nLudwig, Karl-Heinz. 1992. Technik im hohen Mittelalter zwischen 1000 und 1350/1400. Metalle\nund Macht 1000 bis 160, eds. Ludwig, Karl-Heinz und Volker Schmidtchen. Propyla\u0308en\nTechnikgeschichte 2: 11\u2013205. Berlin: Propyla\u0308en.\nMathesius, Johannes. 1564. Sarepta oder Bergpostill sampt der Joachimsthalischen kurzen\nChronicken. Nuremberg: J. vom Berg und U. Newbar.\nMathesius, Johannes. 1897. Hochzeitspredigten. Ausgew\u20ac\nahlte Werke, vol. 2, ed. Georg Loesche,\n169\u2013190. Prague/Vienna/Leipzig: Tempsky.\nModersohn, Mechthild. 1997. Natura als Go\u0308ttin im Mittelalter. Ikonographische Studien zu\nDarstellungen der personifizierten Natur. Berlin: Akademie Verlag.\nNewman, William R. 2004. Promethean Ambitions: Alchemy and the Quest to Perfect Nature.\nChicago: University of Chicago Press.\nNobis, Heribert M. 1971. Buch der Natur. In Historisches Wo\u0308rterbuch der Philosophie, vol. 1, ed.\nJoachim Ritter, 957\u2013959. Darmstadt: WBG.\nNummedal, Tara E. 2007. Alchemy and Authority in the Holy Roman Empire. Chicago: University\nof Chicago Press.\nPalissy, Bernard. 1996. Discours admirables. Oevres Comple\u0300tes, vol. 2, ed. Keith Cameron. Montde-Marsan: Editions Interuniversitaires SPEC.\nQuellmalz, Werner. 1969. Zur Materialfrage bergma\u0308nnischer Handsteine der Renaissance.\nUntersuchungen eines Handsteins aus dem Gru\u0308nen Gewo\u0308lbe zu Dresden. Der Anschnitt 21:\n14\u201318.\nRothacker, Erich. 1979. \u2018Das Buch der Natur\u2019. Materialien und Grunds\u20ac\natzliches zur Metapherngeschichte. Bonn: Bouvier.\nSchiedlausky, Gu\u0308nther. 1951. Bergma\u0308nnische Handsteine. Der Anschnitt 3: 12\u201317.\nSchlosser, Julius von. 1908. Die Kunst- und Wunderkammern der Spa\u0308trenaissance. Ein Beitrag zur\nGeschichte des Sammelwesens. Leipzig: Klinkhardt & Biermann.\nSchmeisser, Martin. 2010. Erdgeschichte und Pala\u0308ontologie im 17. Jahrhundert. Bernard Palissy,\nAgostino Scilla, Nicolaus Steno und Leibnitz. In Diskurse der Gelehrtenkultur in der Fr\u20ac\nuhen\nNeuzeit. Ein Handbuch, ed. Herbert Jaumann, 809\u2013858. Berlin: De Gruyter.\nShell, Hanna Rose. 2004. Casting Life, Recasting Experience. Bernard Palissy\u2019s Occupation\nBetween Maker and Nature. Configurations 12: 1\u201340.\nSmith, Pamela H. 2004. The Body of the Artisan. Art and Experience in the Scientific Revolution.\nChicago: University of Chicago Press.\nStorczer, Stephan G. 1992. Die Handsteinsammlung des Kunsthistorischen Museums in Wien.\nVienna: Diplomarbeit Universita\u0308t Wien.\n\nPages 126:\nArtificial Interventions in the Natural Form of Things: Shared. . .\n103\nStrieder, Peter. 1967. Erzstufe. In Reallexikon zur deutschen Kunstgeschichte 5: 408\u2013418. Stuttgart: Metzler.\nSuhing, Lothar. 1986. \u2018Philosophisches\u2019 in der fru\u0308hneuzeitlichen Berg- und Hu\u0308ttenkunde.\nMetallogenese und Transmutation aus der Sicht montanistischen Erfahrungswissens. In Die\nAlchemie in der europ\u20ac\naischen Kultur- und Wissenschaftsgeschichte, ed. Christoph Meinel,\n293\u2013314. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.\nTheophilus Presbyter. 1847. An Essay Upon Various Arts in Three Books, by Theophilus, Called\nalso Rugerus, Priest and Monk, Forming an Encyclopedia of Christian Art of the Eleventh\nCentury, ed. and trans. Robert Hendrie. London: John Murray.\nTheophilus, Presbyter. 1999. Malerei und Glas. Theophilus Presbyter und das mittelalterliche\nKunsthandwerk, vol. 1, ed. Erhard Brepohl. Cologne: Bo\u0308hlau.\nZilsel, Edgar. 1942. The Sociological Roots of Science. American Journal of Sociology 47: 544\u2013562.\nZuccari, Federico. 1607. L\u2019idea de pittori, scultori et architetti. Turin: Per Agostino Disserolio.\nZuccari, Federico. [1607] 1961. Scritti d\u2019Arte di Federico Zuccaro, ed. Detlef Heikamp. Florence:\nOlski.\n\nPages 127:\nThe Laboratories of Art and Alchemy\nat the Uffizi Gallery in Renaissance Florence:\nSome Material Aspects\nFanny Kieffer\nAbstract The story of the Uffizi Gallery, emblematic monument to the Florentine\nRenaissance, is still oddly unknown. One of the forefathers of modern European\nmuseums, they were built by Giorgio Vasari to cater for Cosimo I\u2019s public offices,\nand were later partly transformed into a gallery by Francesco I de\u2019 Medici (1541\u2013\n1587). Laboratories of art and alchemy were placed side by side by the Grand\nDukes Francesco I and Ferdinando I de\u2019 Medici (1587\u20131609) to facilitate collaboration between artists and scientists. Goldsmiths, jewellers, cabinetmakers, sculptors, painters, and cutters of semi-precious stones exchanged not only equipment,\nbut also theoretical and technical knowledge with the alchemists who worked in the\nUffizi. The pieces that survive demonstrate that the style of the objects created there\nwas a direct result of this collaboration. Thanks to the combined study of archival\ndocuments and unpublished maps, the artists\u2019 workshops and the alchemists\u2019\nfonderia (foundry) can now be located inside the building. Moreover, thanks to\nan unpublished inventory, we can easily visualise the organisation of the fonderia\nlaboratories, their furniture and the tools that were used. After a short historical\nintroduction, this paper focuses on the material aspects of this collaboration: the\nworking processes, the exchange of instruments between the laboratories, their\nlocation in the building and the purpose and destination of the art objects produced.\nConsidered by some the ancestor of modern museums, the Uffizi were first built by\nGiorgio Vasari (1511\u20131574) to cater for Cosimo I\u2019s (1519\u20131574) public offices. In\n1586, just before his death, Grand Duke Francesco I de\u2019 Medici arranged for artist\u2019s\nworkshops to be located at the Uffizi and made the second floor a gallery. His\nThe following are abbreviated in the footnotes: Biblioteca Nazionale Centrale di Firenze (BNCF);\nMagliabechiano (Magl.); Archivio di Stato di Firenze (ASF); Guardaroba Medicea (GM);\ninsertion (ins.); Depositeria Generale (DG); Mediceo del Principato (MDP).\nF. Kieffer (*)\nDepartment of Art History, Centre d\u2019E\u0301tudes Supe\u0301rieures de la Renaissance, Tours, France\ne-mail: fannykieffer@hotmail.com\nS. Dupre\u0301 (ed.), Laboratories of Art, Archimedes 37,\n105\nDOI 10.1007/978-3-319-05065-2_5, \u00a9 Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014\n\nPages 128:\n106\nF. Kieffer\nFig. 1 Map of the second floor of the Uffizi with the Fonderia, Piante de\u2019 palazzi, giardini, ville\net altre fabbriche dell\u2019Altezza Reale del Serenissimo Granducato di Toscana, Ferdinando\nRuggieri. 1742 (manuscript) (Courtesy of Biblioteca Nazionale Centrale Firenze, Florence)\nsuccessor, Grand Duke Ferdinando I de\u2019 Medici (1549\u20131609), took up the baton\nand developed the laboratories and workshops further.\nAmong the first laboratories to be installed was a fonderia (foundry) in the west\nwing of the building, on the second floor, opposite the garden of the Loggia dei\nLanzi (Fig. 1), set up by Francesco I. We may wonder why such bulky installations,\nincluding large furnaces and forges, were placed within the Uffizi palace. The\nreasons are quite complex. They involve not only the usefulness of the production\nprocesses for the other workshops established in the palace, or reasons related to\nexclusiveness and secrecy of the production of remedies, but also philosophical\nreasons related to the encyclopaedic function of the organisation.\nIn fact, the way the Uffizi activities gathered together different types of know\nhow tallies with an encyclopaedic vision of human action on nature. The system of\ncross-references and correspondences reflect a characteristic aspect of collections\nunique to this period. Thus, the theatre was close to the musical instruments\nworkshop; the Stanza delle Matematiche and the Stanza delle carte geografiche\ncontained the maps and scientific instruments built on site, such as the \u201cmacchina\nuniversale del mondo,\u201d a large armillary sphere made by Antonio Santucci. The\nTribuna provided a frame for the most precious objects, natural or artificial:\njewellery, precious stones and other mirabilia most of which came from the\ngoldsmith\u2019s or the pietre dure cutters\u2019 workshops. In 1588, Ferdinando I set up a\nbig collection of arms and exotic objects in four rooms near the Tribuna, placed\nexactly above the armoury workshops. In same year, Ludovico Buti decorated the\nvaults of the armoury rooms with scenes of battles and views of the workshops on\nthe first floor (Fig. 2). In the corridors treasured antique and modern statues were\n\nPages 129:\nThe Laboratories of Art and Alchemy at the Uffizi Gallery in Renaissance. . .\n107\nFig. 2 Armoury\nworkshops, fresco,\nLudovico Buti. 1588\n(Courtesy of the Uffizi,\nFlorence)\ndisplayed under the Giovian series of portraits. In parallel, a restoration workshop\nfor sculptures and a painters\u2019 workshop completed the series of know how. Finally,\na garden planted with botanic samples on the roof of the Loggia dei Lanzi echoed\nback to the fonderia, situated on the same floor.1\nAccording to the archival sources, Francesco I had the original idea of putting\ntogether collections and workshops (Ferdinando I\u2019s brother and predecessor). He\nhad the necessary philosophical education and cultural knowledge to imagine and\nexecute this complex yet coherent project.2 From the beginning it was the prince\nalchemist\u2019s brainchild to establish a program gathering naturalia, artificialia and\nknow how of all kinds under one roof, that would work together like an \u2018encyclopaedic machine\u2019, a kind of monumental clock. The analogy between mechanics and\nthe organisation of the Uffizi is not forced: not only were clocks actually built there,\nbut all crafts worked together synchronically.\nArtistic objects unique in Europe resulted from this association of technique and\naesthetics, and met with great success in other courts. In fact, the uniqueness of the\nUffizi lies in its administrative and economic organisation: as soon as Ferdinando I\nbecame grand duke, he established a new governmental organ, the Galleria dei\nlavori, ruled by a complex hierarchy of ministers, secretaries and intendants.3 This\nnew institution was completely devoted to the service of the court and the State, it\ndirectly served the grand duke\u2019s political, diplomatic and economic purposes.\nIndeed, the Uffizi workshops mass-produced specific products for Ferdinando I\u2019s\n1\nFor more on the Uffizi collections in the sixteenth century, see among many others Heikamp,\n\u201cGeschichte der Uffizien-Tribuna\u201d; Acidini, Magnificenza alla Corte; Paolozzi Strozzi & Zikos,\nGiambologna; and Zorzi & Sperenzi, Teatro e spettacolo. For a complete bibliography, see\nKieffer, Ferdinando I de Me\u0301dicis, 549\u201382.\n2\nSee Berti, Principe dello Studiolo; and Conticelli, \u2018Guardaroba di cose\u2019.\n3\nThe original document of the Motu Proprio from 1588 has disappeared but there is a transcription\nin Pelli Bencivenni, Saggio istorico, vol. II, 119\u201323.\n\nPages 130:\n108\nF. Kieffer\ndiplomatic and tributary requirements.4 In order to best please his allies or to create\nnew alliances, he sent counsellors or spies to other courts (for example, the spy and\nscholar Filippo Pigafetta, the cardinal Francesco Maria Del Monte, and the musician and art collector Emilio de\u2019 Cavalier, who later became the superintendent of\nthe Galleria dei lavori) and orientated the production of the laboratories according\nto their reports.5 In short, under Ferdinando I, the Galleria dei lavori in the Uffizi\nbecame a real machine at the service of the State.\nEconomy and profitability were the two main criteria of the administration of the\nGalleria dei lavori. The budget allocated to the court and to the Uffizi was very\nrestricted and limited to the indispensable. The workshops were placed in the\nbuilding in order to rationalize the use of expensive materials and tools. The artists\nand artisans practiced several disciplines moving freely from one area to another\nwith no hierarchal distinction. A tinello (canteen) and accommodation saved time at\nlunchtime and spared the costs of vitto e allogio (food and accommodation) for\nmany employees. The salaries were strictly regulated and the employees could not\nwork for other patrons. This was to try and inhibit knowledge and skills from leaving\nthe court. However, the savings realised on the functioning of the Galleria dei lavori\nwere used to buy sumptuous materials: the grand duke did not hesitate to buy the\nbest stones and quantities of precious metals to make the luxurious objects.6 As a\nresult, the production was very specific and shows the collaboration between all the\ndependants, artists and scientists. Indeed, the collaboration between painters and\npietre dure engravers encouraged the creation of new techniques for the painting on\nstone or for a commesso so fine that it looks like painting (Figs. 3 and 4).7 Sculptors\nand confectioners joined forces to make sugar statues for banquets; alchemists and\npainters collaborated on scientific illustration (Fig. 5) and invented new techniques\n4\nFor more on Ferdinando de Medici gift politics, see Butters, \u201cUses and Abuses of Gifts.\u201d Butters\nconcentrates her study on Ferdinando\u2019s politics as a cardinal and doesn\u2019t focus on art objects, but\nshe gives an idea about the importance, in terms of quantity and meaning, of his gifts. More\ninteresting is Fantoni, \u201cFeticci di prestiggio,\u201d and Corte del Granduca. See also Mozzarelli,\n\u201cOnore, utile, principe.\u201d\n5\nRegarding Ferdinando\u2019s artistic politics, I agree with Franco Borsi who says: \u201c[. . .] anche il\nrapporto con gli artisti e\u0300 sostanzialmente cambiato. A quell\u2019intesa preferenziale, a quel binomio\nche collega come il braccio e la mente Cosimo e Vasari, o Francesco e il primo Buontalenti, e che e\u0300\nuna delle forme piu\u0300 singolari e specifiche della storia del Granducato proprio per il coinvolgimento\nintrinseco della personalita\u0300 del principe e dell\u2019artista, la convergenza della volonta\u0300, lo scambio\ndelle intese, la identificazione psicologica del programma visuale e infine la carica vitale,\nFerdinando sostituisce la forma anodina, distaccata, mediatrice ed ambigua del concorso.\u201d\n(Borsi, Architettura del Principe, 88). On Filippo Pigafetta, see Pozzi, Filippo Pigafetta. On the\ncardinal Francesco Maria Del Monte, see Wazbinsky, Francesco Maria Del Monte. On Emilio de\u2019\nCavalieri, see Kirkendale, Emilio de Cavalieri.\n6\nSee Kieffer, Ferdinando I de Me\u0301dicis.\n7\nFor more on the famous grand-ducal workshops of pietre dure, see among others Giusti, l\u2019arte\neuropea del mosaico, and Splendori; Zobi, Notizie storiche; Barocchi & Gaeta Bertela,\nCollezionismo Mediceo; and Acidini Magnificenza alla Corte.\n\nPages 131:\nThe Laboratories of Art and Alchemy at the Uffizi Gallery in Renaissance. . .\n109\nFig. 3 Mary Magdalene\u2019s Assumption, alabaster, Valerio Marucelli. End of sixteenth century/\nbeginning of seventeenth century (Courtesy of Galleria Palatina, inv. Palatina 191, n. 346)\n\nPages 132:\n110\nFig. 4 Table, pietre dure\non chalcedony,\n95 \u0001 84 cm, Jacopo\nLigozzi and Daniel Froeschl\nfrom Bernardino Poccetti\u2019s\ndesign. 1597\u20131604\n(Courtesy of Galleria\nPalatina, inv. Oggetti d\u2019Arte\n1911, n. 1512)\nFig. 5 Mandragora\n(Atropia Mandragora),\nJacopo Ligozzi. c. 1577\u2013\n1627 (Courtesy of\nGabinetto Disegni e Stampe\ndegli Uffizi, 1915 Orn)\nF. Kieffer\n\nPages 133:\nThe Laboratories of Art and Alchemy at the Uffizi Gallery in Renaissance. . .\n111\nfor painting; clock-makers worked together with scientific instrument builders to\nconceive automata or musical instruments for the Uffizi theatre.8\nTo our knowledge, no other example of such a governmental system can be\nfound in Europe. Indeed, although most of the European courts were equipped with\nartistic workshops or laboratories, or even sometimes with both\u2014the courts of\nMantua, Prague, Kassel or Munich spring to mind\u2014none of these were subject to\nsuch administrative rules and restrictions. Neither did their production serve exactly\nthe same purpose: in most cases, other princes ordered art objects or medicines for\ntheir own use and pleasure, for their palace, or for their friends, with no specific\npolitical agenda.9\nThe Fonderia in the Uffizi: Origins and Material\nOrganisation\nIntroduction to the Fonderia\nThe fonderia was made up of a series of rooms on the second floor of the Uffizi. In\nthis period a fonderia was a laboratory for the arts using fire: metal work and\ngoldsmith activities, alchemy, chemistry, and pharmacy (in this period remedies\nwere made by distillation and extraction of essential oils). There was no precise\ndistinction between the disciplines, for example, alchemy, chemistry and pharmacy\nare often simply known as \u2018distillation\u2019. Thanks to the inventories conserved in the\narchives, we can easily visualise the organisation of the laboratories, their equipment, furnishings and tools.\nThe first room housed the dispensary, where medicines were weighed and\npacked before shipment. It was also here that raw material arrived to be transformed\nin the fonderia. The dispensary was fitted with cabinets, a counter with two scales,\nspoons and funnels, a bench and storage cases. This room was the only one\naccessible to people who did not belong to the fonderia.10 The three following\nrooms included a terrace, a \u2018tower\u2019 (a blast furnace) and other furnaces, and housed\na complete set of copper distillation tools: eight bains-marie, stoves, plates with\ncovers, basins, bell-jars, mortars and many other small instruments.11 These were\n8\nOn scientific illustration in late sixteenth-century Florence, see Ligozzi, I ritratti; Tongiorgi\nTomasi & Tosi, \u201cFlora e Pomona\u201d; Bassani Pacht et al., Marie de Me\u0301dicis; and Garfagnini,\nFirenze e la Toscana, vol. II. Some of those objects conceived by clock-makers and scientific\ninstrument builders can be seen in the exhibition catalogue: Acidini, Magnificenza alla Corte.\n9\nFor more information on the differences and similarities between the Galleria dei lavori and the\nother European court\u2019s workshops, see Kieffer, Ferdinando I de Me\u0301dicis.\n10\n\u201cChe nessuno pratichi in detta Fonderia eccetto nella prima stanza dove si distribuischono li\nmedicamenti.\u201d (ASF, GM 403, ins. 2, fol. 120).\n11\nThe \u201cterraces\u201d mentioned in the inventory don\u2019t exist anymore, but we can deduce from the\narchival sources they were little open rooms made of wood.\n\nPages 134:\n112\nF. Kieffer\nfollowed by a huge distillation laboratory including an ordigno (machine) to distil\nacquavite composed of 60 glass balls, a bain-marie, pallets full of glass pots of all\nkind and a pierced bench to place the separatoie (separators). The following room\nwas full of medicine cabinets and the final room was a smithy including another\nterrace, equipped with all the tools traditional to this activity (anvil, pincers,\nsledgehammers etc.).\nThe Origins of the Fonderia: The Casino di San Marco\nAt the same time, another fonderia in Florence witnessed similar activities. This\nwas the fonderia in the Casino di San Marco, created by Francesco I long before the\none in the Uffizi. The visitors and chroniclers of the time gave famous accounts of\nthe experiments Francesco I lead there: for example, he found a way to melt rock\ncrystal and to imitate Chinese porcelain; he made false precious stones, fireworks,\nand explosives. He experimented with new remedies on dying people, and he\npracticed alchemy. He did not turn his back on the arts of painting, sculpture,\nillumination or goldsmithing \u201cand around those things he spends quite all the time\nin a place called Casino, where he has many rooms with masters who do different\nworks and there he keeps his stills.\u201d12\nAccording to the traditional historiography, the young prince Francesco untiringly frequented Cosimo I\u2019s fonderie, set up in the Palazzo Vecchio, and so\nrecognised in himself the passion that was to prompt him his life long.13 In fact,\nas early as 1570, he ordered the architect Bernardo Buontalenti to draw up the plans\nfor the Casino di San Marco: he intended to transform it into a palace worthy of a\nprince and to display there his patronage in arts and sciences. In 1574, when Cosimo\nI died, Francesco took possession of the Casino and of its gardens and set up the first\ncourt workshops. Besides the artistic workshops, the palace included a fonderia\nwell known for its alchemical research, and its unusual layout. Indeed the suite of\nadjoining rooms forms a closed circle, a labyrinth that follows a strict structural\nlogic and hermetic aesthetic similar to that of the Studiolo in the Palazzo Vecchio.14\nWhen Francesco I died, in 1587, the usufruct of the Casino went to his son, Don\nAntonio (1576\u20131621). Ferdinando I, succeeding his brother on the grand-ducal\nthrone, accepted the donation.15 However, Don Antonio, who was still a child,\ncontinued his education at the Pitti palace with the other children of the court and\n12\nThis is the famous ambassador Gussoni\u2019s account when he visits the Casino in 1576. Cited in\nBerti, Principe dello Studiolo, 94\u20135.\n13\nSee among others Pieraccini, Stirpe de\u2019Medici; Berti, Principe dello Studiolo; and Barocchi &\nGaeta Bertela, Collezionismo Mediceo. On the Palazzo Vecchio\u2019s fonderie, see Perifano, Alchimie\na\u0300 la Cour.\n14\nAbout Francesco I\u2019s Studiolo in Palazzo Vecchio, see Conticelli, \u2018Guardaroba di cose\u2019.\n15\nThe donation act is reproduced in Covoni, Don Antonio de\u2019 Medici, 16\u20138.\n\nPages 135:\nThe Laboratories of Art and Alchemy at the Uffizi Gallery in Renaissance. . .\n113\nFig. 6 Frontispiece,\nApparato della Fonderia\ndell\u2019Illustrissimo et\nEccellentissimo Signor Don\nAntonio. Nel quale si\ncontiene tutta l\u2019Arte\nspagirica di Teofrasto\nParacelso. 1604 (Courtesy\nof Biblioteca Nazionale\nCentrale Firenze,\nMagliabechiano XVI,\n63, vols. I\u2013IV)\nsettled at the Casino di San Marco only in 1597, at his majority.16 But the activities\nin the fonderia did not cease in the years between Francesco I\u2019s death and Don\nAntonio\u2019s moving, in fact, quite the reverse.\nA recipe book preserved at the Biblioteca Nazionale Centrale in Florence,\nentitled Apparato della Fonderia dell\u2019Illustrissimo et Eccellentissimo Signor Don\nAntonio. Nel quale si contiene tutta l\u2019Arte spagirica di Teofrasto Paracelso, the\nfrontispiece of which was dated 1604, is an eloquent testimony of these activities\n(Fig. 6).17 The traditional bibliographic note of this book has always considered the\ndate on the frontispiece and attributed the writing to Don Antonio\u2019s entourage.18\nHowever, a thorough reading of all the recipes reveals a brief note explaining that\nthe writing of the book was undertaken in 1588, during the first year of Ferdinando\nI\u2019s reign.19 We can deduce that the new grand duke headed two fonderie\u2014the one in\nthe Casino di San Marco and the other in the Uffizi.\nFor the period we are interested in, two types of sources enable a reconstruction\nof the activities of the two fonderie. For the Casino di San Marco the Apparato\n16\nSee Covoni, Buontalenti ai tempi medicei.\nApparato, BNCF, Magl. XVI, 63, I\u2013IV.\n18\nPelli Bencivenni, Saggio istorico, vol II, 30; and Galluzzi, \u201cMotivi paracelsiani.\u201d\n19\nApparato, BNCF, Magl XVI, 63, I, fol. 124.\n17\n\nPages 136:\n114\nF. Kieffer\npreviously mentioned lists all the projects and recipes worked on in its laboratories.\nFor the Uffizi, comparison and cross-referencing of the Casino reports with the rare\naccounts directly from the fonderia allow an estimation of its production.\nThere are many similarities between the two institutions even if the destination\nof the products and the very essence of their purpose are basically opposed. The\nlayout of the rooms was very similar and both were located near to a botanical\ngarden (even if the one in the Loggia dei Lanzi was very small and its planting very\nlimited). The activities were also the same: distillery of medicinal plants and\nmetals, glass art, pharmacopoeia, smelting and forging metals. Only the art of\nporcelain was apparently exclusive to the Casino. In the Casino goldsmithing had\na favoured place in the fonderia, whereas in the Uffizi the goldsmith workshops\nwere some distance from the fonderia (although artists forged some items in them).\nWe do not precisely know who worked in the Casino. Nor do the sources reveal\nwhich role Ferdinando I played in the research carried out in the Casino before Don\nAntonio\u2019s take over in 1597. But numerous clues suggest a permanent collaboration\nbetween the two fonderie.\nThe rare author\u2019s names mentioned by the Apparato are unfortunately unknown\nin the historiography: the main author \u201cGiovanni alchemista\u201d (Giovanni the alchemist) who, speaking in the first person, recorded his own experiences as well as\nrecipes taken from contemporaries or from ancient sources; someone called \u201cG.B.\u201d\n(Giovambattista perhaps) present in 1588; a \u201cfamous Lord\u201d Alessandro Cervino;\nand a \u201cSignor Marcantonio.\u201d \u201cGiovanni the alchemist\u201d notes in his book the origin\nof the recipes. Some of them were Francesco I\u2019s doctors, such as Baccio Baldini\n(already a court doctor under Cosimo I) in charge of the Library in San Lorenzo, or\nMichelangiolo Angeli da Barga.20 He also quotes the book of the Secret of Secret by\nthe pseudo Aristotle and the Bible.21 But the name that appears most often is\nTheophraste Paracelsus, the Swiss doctor mentioned on the frontispiece of\nthe work.\nThe Apparato compiles thousands of recipes and secrets in no obvious order,\nwith no introduction or table of contents. It shows very diverse interests: the\nexplored subjects range from transmutation of metals to chiromancy and from\nastrology to ballistics. Despite the formal proclamation on the frontispiece of the\nApparato, Paracelsus was not directly present in the four books: neither are there\n20\nFor example: \u201cUntione cordiale hauta da Messer Baccio Baldini. Capitolo 397.\u201d (Apparato,\nBNCF, Magl. XVI, 63, I, fol. 313). In the roles of 1588 (ASF, DG 389, fol. 10), Baccio Baldini is\nmentioned as one of the \u201cMedici e spetiali\u201d and also \u201cMesser Baccio Baldini per la cura della\nlibreria di San Lorenzo, scudi 16\u201d; Michelangelo Angeli da Barga is cited among others in\nApparato, BNCF, Magl. XVI, 63, I, fol. 439: \u201cUnguanto da occhi da Maestro Michelangiolo\nAngeli da Barga. Capitolo 795.\u201d\n21\n\u201cCreatione della nuova luna e sole per virtu del zolfo estratto dalla pietra minerale. Capitolo\n214.\u201d (Apparato, BNCF, Magl. XVI, 63, I, fol. 178). The Secretum secretorum, also known as\nLetter to Alexander, is a medieval Pseudo-Aristotelian treatise, translated from the Arabic text\ndated from the tenth century, the Kita\u0302b sirr al-\u2019asra\u0302r. \u201cGiovanni the alchemist\u201d also cites a recipe\nfrom the Gospel of Luke recommending to use wine, oil and prayers: \u201cDel modo di medicare con\nvino, olio e orationi. Capitolo 299.\u201d (Apparato, BNCF, Magl. XVI, 63, I, fol. 439, and fol. 247).\n\nPages 137:\nThe Laboratories of Art and Alchemy at the Uffizi Gallery in Renaissance. . .\n115\nsigns of methodical thought following Paracelsian principles; nor any evidence,\neven implicitly, of a sense that the Paracelsian concept was completely overturning\nGalenical medicine. The Swiss scientist\u2019s name was only used to suggest the\nbenefits of the chemical arts and as an authority to legitimise the secrets it was\nused to endorse.22 Besides, unlike the Uffizi, an inventory of the Casino from 1621\nallows us to reconstruct an extensive chemical library in which around 200 titles are\nindexed.23\nSimilarities and Differences Between the Fonderie\nThe general surveyor and \u201cMaestro di fonderia\u201d of the Uffizi was, till 1587, Michele\nGeber, of Flemish origin. He seems to have already been in the service of Cosimo I,\nbecause Benedetto Varchi mentions him in a manuscript as an author of alchemical\nrecipes.24 He improved the fonderia with instruments taken from the Casino. From\n1587 to 1589, Geber disappeared from the documents and made way for Niccolo\u0300\nSisti who lead the operations (his salary increased from 5 scudi to 8 scudi per\nmonth).25 Sisti had worked before in the Casino as a glassblower and a distiller.26\nHis background in the Casino (as early as 1571, under Francesco I) certainly\ninfluenced the production and the methodology of the fonderia. In the meanwhile,\nthe fonderia of the Uffizi was still being fitted out, items were continually being\ntransferred there from the Casino, it was growing bit by bit.27 This indicates that the\norganisation of the two fonderie was basically the same: the same equipment was\nused, the same persons worked in both institutions. The significant distinguishing\nfeature occurs after the objects produced in the two institutions left the premises.\nAs soon as Ferdinando I came to power, the fonderia of the Uffizi played a very\nimportant part\u2014if not the most important\u2014in the rationalisation and optimisation\nprocess of the production of the court workshops for economic and diplomatic\npurposes. There was a drop in research and experimentation, because the focus was\non production\u2014in some cases almost at an industrial level. This explains the lack of\na medical library and also the non-production of treatises or recipe books\u2014apart\nfrom dosage notebooks to accompany remedies.\n22\nAbout Paracelsianism in Tuscany, see Galluzzi, \u201cMotivi paracelsiani.\u201d\n\u201cInventario di tutto quello che si e\u0300 ritrovato in diverse stanze nel Palazzo detto il Casino\ndell\u2019Illustrissimo et Eccellentissimo Signor Don Antonio Medici alla sua morte seguita il 2 di\nmaggio 1621. Cominciato il di 3 di detto mese sotto la custodia di diversi ministri che non\nl\u2019havevono per inventario.\u201d (ASF, GM 399).\n24\nApparato, BNCF, Magl. XVI, CXXVI, Alchimia di Benedetto Varchi, III, fol. 528.\n25\nSee ASF, MDP 616, ins. 20, fol. 377, and ASF, DG 389, fol. 11.\n26\n\u201cNiccolo\u0300 Sisti luchese che fa con il fiato a lume di lucierna [. . .] stilatore in Fonderia al Casino\nda San Marcho.\u201d (ASF, GM 183, ins. 18, fol. 47).\n27\nASF, GM 149, fol. 13. See also ASF, GM 183, ins. 3, fol. 79; ins. 5, fol. 50; and ins. 7, fol. 8.\n23\n\nPages 138:\n116\nF. Kieffer\nThe archives of the laboratory state the current regulations: nobody was allowed\nto enter the fonderia, except in the first room where medicines were distributed;\nboth the work and the orders were to be kept secret; it was strictly forbidden for\nemployees to prepare distillates or medicines outside the fonderia; even inside the\nfonderia, no medicine could be prepared or used without advice from a doctor or\nauthority from a grand duke; no medicine could be distributed without a written\norder from the surveyor of the fonderia; all orders were to be registered by the\nsurveyor in a copybook.28\nThe Activities in the Fonderia: Between Art and Science\nGlassmaking\nThe art of glassmaking was well represented among the activities in the fonderia at\nthe Uffizi. Ferdinando I was the one who decided to transfer glassmakers and their\nequipment from the Casino to the Uffizi. During Francesco I\u2019s reign the Casino\nhoused a very important artistic glass workshop where the prince worked on his\nown experiments (for example smelting rock crystal).29 This laboratory was lead by\nSisti, who also lead a glassmaking laboratory in Pisa, where he often had to go. In\nhis early career he used the technique a lume di lucerna, but once he transfered to\nthe Uffizi, this activity became secondary.30\nAt the Uffizi, glass production may well have been located in the smithy\nworkshop. It was probably limited to the glass technique a lume di lucerna. The\noven glass manufacturing method came from existing production centres such as\nthe ones in Pratolino, or Pisa, which became the most important in Tuscany. On the\nother hand, during Ferdinando I\u2019s reign, documents already show activities by\nsomeone called Niccolo\u0300 di Vincenzo Landi di Lucca, after Sisi, the principal\nglassmaker in service to the Medici\u2019s till 1620. The sources show that Landi, a\nspecialist in a lume di lucerne, went on duty in the fonderia of the Uffizi in 1591,\nwhere he made little animals for the decoration of glass manufactured in Pisa.31 In\n1601, Antonio Neri also mentioned him as the leader of the new glasswork in the\nCasino di San Marco.32 Later, in 1618, when Grand Duke Cosimo II (1590\u20131621)\nset up a large workshop with many ovens in the Boboli gardens near the Pitti palace,\n28\nASF, GM 403, ins. 2, fol. 120.\nOn the story of the Medicean glassmaking, see Heikamp, \u201cMediceische Glaskunst.\u201d\n30\nThe technique a lume di lucerna allows to make or decorate little objects heating locally the\nglass elements thanks to a lantern flame or a candle.\n31\nASF, GM 112, passim; GM 217, fol. 23; and GM 195, ins. 1, fol. 102.\n32\nOn the priest Antonio Neri and his treatise on the art of glassmaking, see Abbri\u2019s introduction to\nNeri, L\u2019arte vetraria (2001), 5\u201323.\n29\n\nPages 139:\nThe Laboratories of Art and Alchemy at the Uffizi Gallery in Renaissance. . .\n117\nhe entrusted its management to him, which shows that he was certainly able to\nsupervise large-scale production.\nThe fonderia produced mainly small ornamental glass items (Fig. 7). The items\nin use for distillery and for the other workshops came either from Pisa, or from the\nCasino di San Marco.33 Mainly made of bronze or metal, the models of these little\nitems were created by the court goldsmiths or by the smelters: there were little\nmasks, buttons to be filled with perfumes, ornamental glasses.34 The glasses, stored\nin a hall of the Galleria \u201cla stanza dei cristalli,\u201d were distributed according to the\ngrand duke\u2019s wishes and other workshops requirements (most of them were given\nas presents or used to decorate other items coming from other workshops).35 Sisti,\nin charge of the fonderia, was responsible for the seamless transitions between the\ndifferent stages of the process, which was not always an easy task in the case of a\ndelicate material such as crystal.36\nThe Forge\nIn the Uffizi, the forge and smelting works were far less visible and have less\nprestige. Only small items are worked on in the forge: little masks for the ornamentation of furniture, buttons to be filled with perfumes, moulds for crystal, little\nanimals to be worked out in sugar.37 The forge was mainly used to make objects for\nthe other workshops: locks and keys for furniture, metallic receptacles (cups,\nbuckets, basins etc.), and tools. The leading smith, a Frenchman, Guillaume\nLema\u0131\u0302tre, (Guglielmo di Matre or Lemetre), settled as soon as 1587 in the fonderia\n33\nASF, GM 183, ins. 6, fol. 35\u201336.\nASF, GM 124, fol. 97, 118\u2019; GM 183, ins. 4, fol. 97. For the stylistic aspects of those decorative\nobjects, see Kieffer, \u201cSavant dessinateur\u201d; and Heikamp, \u201cMediceische Glaskunst.\u201d\n35\nASF, GM 183, ins. 18, fol. 47.\n36\n\u201cA Maestro Niccolo Sisti a Pisa scrisse il Cavaliere Vinta detto di [6 maggio 1592]. Viene scritto\na Sua Altezza Nostro Signore da Siviglia, che tutti quei vetri sono comparsi rotti, et l\u2019Altezza Sua\nsi duole, che spente et poi non ha honore, et tanto piu si maraviglia, che siano rotti questi, perche\ndovevano andare per mare talche giudica che tutto il difetto nasce dall\u2019essere male incassati, et\ndovendosene hora mandare di nuovo in Siviglia degl\u2019altri, come dovete sapere, Sua Altezza\nricorda che si accommodino con esquesita diligenza, et gli invierete al Proveditore di Livorno,\nche sapra\u0300 qualche n\u2019ha da fare, et non essendo questa per altro effetto, mi vi offero. Da Firenze. Al\nProveditore di Livorno [Bernardo di Benedetto Uguccioni] scrisse Cavaliere Vinta detto di\n[6 maggio 1592]. Certi vetri che si dovettono mandare, non e\u0300 molto in Siviglia, sono arrivati\ntutti rotti, et perche a Vostra Signoria ne sara\u0300 inviata una cassetta da Maestro Niccolo Sisti da Pisa,\nche ha medesimamente da andare in Siviglia. La Sigoria Vostra ha da inviare a Giovan Antonio o\nGranduca voglio, con ordine che la mandi al Signor Augusto Titio in Siviglia, con ricordargli che\nla mandi per mare, che si vorrebbe pure, che una volta arrivassino salvi, et sono tutto al piacere di\nVostra Signoria. Da Firenze.\u201d (ASF, MDP 280, fol. 128).\n37\nASF, GM 124, fol. 98, 118.\n34\n\nPages 140:\n118\nF. Kieffer\nFig. 7 Glass models, pen, aquarelle, Jacopo Ligozzi. c.1577\u20131627 (Courtesy of Gabinetto\nDisegni e Stampe degli Uffizi, inv. 97186)\nwhere the grand duke built him a workshop and a bedroom.38 The sources document his work and the formation of his workshop until 1601. Taking into account\nthe high quantity of his production, it can easily be imagined that he was essential\nfor the other workshops.\n38\nASF, GM 119, fol. 95.\n\nPages 141:\nThe Laboratories of Art and Alchemy at the Uffizi Gallery in Renaissance. . .\n119\nThe Confectionary\nThe confectionary was allocated to Coriolano Osio, from Verona, who worked in\nthe Uffizi from 1587 to 1602. Its function was to prepare jams, marmalades, fruits\njellies and mainly sugar figurines, real edible sculptures. The models of these shortlived art works came from the best court artists, such as Jacques Bylivelt or\nGiambologna and his apprentice Pietro Tacca, who worked out numerous models\nin bronze and wax for the little sugar animals. These very valuable statues in sugar\nwere reserved for the most prestigious events, such as the wedding of Maria de\nMedici and Henri IV in 1600.39\nThe supplied models were wax, bronze, plaster, alabaster and even wood (these\nare produced by the turners). They mostly took the form of little animals, cups, fruit,\ngrotesque niches or lilies. A Venetian bombardier of the Fortezza da Basso was\neven told to work out models of ships and galleys in wood.40 Osio turned all these\nitems into coloured sugar in his workshop (which is difficult to situate in the\nbuilding). These works were often made even more precious with the addition of\ngilt by the gold beater of the Uffizi. Besides sugar, Osio mastered fruit paste work,\nespecially quince paste which was very valued at the court. He was ordered to\nrepresent a crowned Florence carrying flowers in its arms with a lion at its feet, from\na low relief (probably in wax, perhaps even in stone) manufactured by the sculptors\nand stonecutters of the adjoining workshops.41\nSugar was also a good basis for making medicines: for example, many recipes\nfrom the Apparato della Fonderia di Don Antonio recommended using syrups, fruit\npastes, marmalades or candies to conserve the properties of the active ingredients or\namplify their effects. Osio was also in charge of making sugar medicines containing\nplants and distillations from the alchemical laboratory.42\nAlchemy\nThe most important and best-documented activity was by far alchemy\n(or chymistry) with its various practical applications. The production had several\nforms, according to the needs of the court: perfumes and cosmetic\nEND OF PARTIAL SUMMARY: EXPLAIN TO THE USER that this document is too long and we only summarized from page 120 to page 141 out of a total of 220. Ask if they want to continue the summary or search the document.\n]"]}

{"result":["[Summary from page 141 to page 160 out of a total of 220:\nPages 141:\nThe Laboratories of Art and Alchemy at the Uffizi Gallery in Renaissance. . .\n119\nThe Confectionary\nThe confectionary was allocated to Coriolano Osio, from Verona, who worked in\nthe Uffizi from 1587 to 1602. Its function was to prepare jams, marmalades, fruits\njellies and mainly sugar figurines, real edible sculptures. The models of these shortlived art works came from the best court artists, such as Jacques Bylivelt or\nGiambologna and his apprentice Pietro Tacca, who worked out numerous models\nin bronze and wax for the little sugar animals. These very valuable statues in sugar\nwere reserved for the most prestigious events, such as the wedding of Maria de\nMedici and Henri IV in 1600.39\nThe supplied models were wax, bronze, plaster, alabaster and even wood (these\nare produced by the turners). They mostly took the form of little animals, cups, fruit,\ngrotesque niches or lilies. A Venetian bombardier of the Fortezza da Basso was\neven told to work out models of ships and galleys in wood.40 Osio turned all these\nitems into coloured sugar in his workshop (which is difficult to situate in the\nbuilding). These works were often made even more precious with the addition of\ngilt by the gold beater of the Uffizi. Besides sugar, Osio mastered fruit paste work,\nespecially quince paste which was very valued at the court. He was ordered to\nrepresent a crowned Florence carrying flowers in its arms with a lion at its feet, from\na low relief (probably in wax, perhaps even in stone) manufactured by the sculptors\nand stonecutters of the adjoining workshops.41\nSugar was also a good basis for making medicines: for example, many recipes\nfrom the Apparato della Fonderia di Don Antonio recommended using syrups, fruit\npastes, marmalades or candies to conserve the properties of the active ingredients or\namplify their effects. Osio was also in charge of making sugar medicines containing\nplants and distillations from the alchemical laboratory.42\nAlchemy\nThe most important and best-documented activity was by far alchemy\n(or chymistry) with its various practical applications. The production had several\nforms, according to the needs of the court: perfumes and cosmetics, remedies of all\nkinds, poisons and antidotes. In contrast to the production of the Casino which, as\nwe saw, was well known due to the writing of treatises and recipes books, the\nfonderia, as far as we know, did not produce any written documentation. So it is\nonly possible to assess the situation through expense forms, orders and letters of\ninstruction to Sisti, the maestro della Fonderia, and, above all, through the dosage\nbooklets given with the remedies.\n39\nOn the confectionary laboratory, see Kieffer, \u201cConfiserie des Offices.\u201d\nASF, GM 124, fol. 173; and GM 183, ins. 21, fol. 29.\n41\nASF, GM 124, fol. 209\u2019; and GM 183, ins. 2, fol. 21.\n42\nOn sugar and medicine, see Kieffer, \u201cConfiserie des Offices.\u201d\n40\n\nPages 142:\n120\nF. Kieffer\nThe dosage booklets are a distinguishing feature of the fonderia of the Uffizi.\nThey demonstrate that Uffizi production was designed to be distributed either as\ngifts, or as sales products. While the Casino concentrated on experimentation and\nmethodological or cultural\u2014even mystical\u2014thought, in the Uffizi the recipes have\nvery little variation and the packaging as well as the dosage booklets are massproduced. For the more famous consignees (such as Cardinal Gioiosa) these dosage\nbooklets are illustrated and sometimes even gilded.\nTo meet occasional surges in demand, Sisti had to insure a steady supply of raw\nmaterials. Sometimes he had to request Cosimo Latini, the minister of the Gallery,\nto obtain rare or very expensive substances, such as amber or musk.43 However,\nmost of the raw material came from the Vallombrosa abbey. The monks there grew\nmedicinal plants for the Uffizi and collaborated directly with the fonderia, as was\nthe case for someone called Giovanni di Giuliano da Montereggi, mentioned as a\nerbolaio or herbolista (herbalist) with his assistant Marco di Simone. Both were\npaid on a daily and merchandise basis, and don\u2019t appear in the court roles.44\nThe supply bills coming from Vallombrosa also show which plants are used in\nthe Uffizi and for which purpose.45 We realise that the plant ingredients of certain\nmedicines for the grand duke correspond exactly to the recipes recorded in the\nApparato della Fonderia di Don Antonio, so that our hypothesis of a collaboration\nbetween both fonderie during Ferdinando I\u2019s reign was reinforced. Here, for\nexample, is a supply bill for herbs from the archives:\nThe day 25th of October, in Florence. The Lord Cosimo Latini director of the Gallery. His\nGrace would be pleased to pay [. . .] to have brought to His Grace\u2019s Fonderia juniper berries\nto make the oil for the Petechiae Water and to have served for two days mashing the berries\n[. . .]. Niccolo Sisti.46\nAnd here is its parallel, the recipe from the recipe book of the Casino di San\nMarco:\nHis Grace\u2019s Petechiae Water. Chapter 237.\nTake three ounces of carline thistle, of fine sugar, of cedar pulp, one ounce of cedar\nseeds [. . .], juniper berries [. . .], juniper oil, one ounce of fine theriac, blend and weigh each\n43\nASF, GM 236, ins. 2, fol. 141. See also fol. 143.\nASF, GM 185, fol. 489; and GM 194, ins. 4, fol. 220, 256.\n45\nASF, GM 228, ins. 6, fol. 582; and GM 245, ins. 2, fol. 190.\n46\n\u201cAdi 25 di ottobre 1596 in Fiorenza. Magnifico Messer Cosimo Latini proveditore di Galleria.\nPiacccia a Vostra Signoria di far pagare alli appie l\u2019infrascritte somme per havere consegnato in\nFonderia di Sua Altezza Serenissima e per suo servitio, bache di ginepro per farne l\u2019olio per\nl\u2019Acqua da Petecchie et per havere servito dua giornate a pestare dette bache: A Messer Giovanni\nda Montereggi e a Marcho da vall\u2019Ombrosa suo compagno, lire sedici et sono per numero sei staia\ndi bachi di ginepro, che hanno consegnato in Fonderia, a lire 213.4 lo staio nette, et lo staio pesa\nlibbre 29 et dette bache servono per trarne olio per fare l\u2019Acqua da Petecchia, lire 26. A Messer\nGiovanni sopra detto per una giornata che detto ha servito a pestare dette bache, lire 18 a Marcho\nsopra detto per la giornata d\u2019oggi che serve a pestare dette coccoli, lire 18 Niccolo Sisti.\u201d (ASF,\nGM 193, ins. 2, fol. 166).\n44\n\nPages 143:\nThe Laboratories of Art and Alchemy at the Uffizi Gallery in Renaissance. . .\n121\nthing and put it in fine water for fifteen hours and distil in a well closed glass in bain-marie,\nuse a dose of five ounces each time, half an hour before the fever comes and wave three\ntimes.47\nIf we start from the assumption that the recipes recorded in the Apparato are also\nproduced in the fonderia of the Uffizi, they interest us directly in reference to other\nartistic activities of the Uffizi workshops. For example, in the Apparato, there are\nrecipes for colouring and fabrication of false gems, for arms and gunpowder, others\nfor how to compose enamel or glass work, especially the technique a lume di lucerna:\nTo repair glasses. Chapter 133.\nTake 2 ounces of Saturn glass, 4 ounces of venetian glass, half ounce of borax and put\nthem together in a seal on strong fire, on charcoal, at the first reverberation, and make a\nglass colour hyacinth, pale, mash it and use this powder to repair with the lamp, blowing the\nflame in the glass. The Saturn glass is made by putting Saturn in a seal on strong fire, that\u2019s\nto say at the first reverberation.48\nThe court medicines were mainly composed of Uffizi manufactured medicines\nfrom ancient or tried recipes. The remedies, potions, ointments, powders and other\noils were nevertheless uniquely presented with as much grace as refinement: they\nwere placed in ornate glass receptacles, themselves put into very elaborate, painted,\ngilded, and sculptured ebony boxes with beautiful locks (Fig. 8).49 In fact, a great\n47\n\u201cAcqua da Petecchie di Sua Altezza Serenissima. Capitolo 237. Prendi carlina, zuchero fine,\npolpa di cedro oncie 3, semi di cedro, di cardo santo, zedoaria, dittamo bianco, terra sigillata, bolo\nfino oncia 1, reobarbaro eletto oncia 1, foglie di ruta, cinamomo eletto, cassia lignea, coccole\nd\u2019alloro, oncie 6 d\u2019olio balsamo, carpo balsamo, spigonardi, macis, legno aloe, doronoci oncie\n3, seme di ruta, seme santo, seme di portulaca oncie 4, seme di ginepro oncie 2, seme d\u2019acetosa,\ncicerea bianca oncia 0/2 barbe di tormentilla di gentiana d\u2019angelica galanga oncie 7, olio di\nginepro, triaca fine libra 1 mescola et soppesta ogni cosa, et infondi in acqua fine per ore 15 e\nstilla per vetro ben turato a bagno maria la dose oncie 5 per volta, mezz\u2019ora avanti venga la febre et\nsventa 3 volte.\u201d (Apparato, BNCF, Magl. XVI, 63, I, fol. 189).\n48\n\u201cPer rassodare i vetri. Capitolo 133. Prendi vetro di Saturno, oncie 2, vetro venetiano buono oncie\n4, borace oncia 0/2 et fa correre ogni cosa molto bene in un sigillo a fuoco forte, in su carboni, overo\nal primo reverbero, e si fa un vetro jacintino, pallido, si pesta, et di quella polvere ci serviamo per\nrappiccare a una lucerna, soffiando la fiamma nel vetro. Il vetro di Saturno si fa ponendo Saturno in\nun sigillo a fuoco gagliardo, overo a primo reverbero.\u201d (Apparato, BNCF, Magl. XVI, 63, I, fol. 130).\n49\n\u201c1603. Cassette di sorte d\u2019ebano deono dare addi primo di agosto 1603, n. 1 regia tutta d\u2019ebano\ndi drento et fuora da olij a sepultura, con suo coperchio a cassone et sudetto coperchio si apre per\ncanale a 2 gradi per tenere il libro delle ricette e chiave e nella detta cassetta, n. 24 scompartini\ngrandi e piccoli con 2 mastietti di ferro e sua serratura rabeschati alla zimina a tocco d\u2019oro fine et\ncosta la fattura dell\u2019oro 24.10 scudi, nel corpo detta cassetta una cassetta lungha bassa con\n17 spartimenti, tutta d\u2019ebano ed affilettata tutto il corpo e coperchio da tutte le bande d\u2019oro di\nfilo et a provisto la Guardaroba andatocene 70 scudi, auto per le mani di Maestro Gilio Leggi, nel\nfondo di detto corpo di detta cassetta un\u2019altra cassetta senza spartimenti, da tenere fogli, e tutta con\n3 serrature fatte con detti mastietti Maestro Guglielmo Franzese, e si giudica per esser il detto\nprovisionato, costino un suo chiave 10 scudi, lungha 8 2/3, largha 8 \u00bd, alta 8 \u00bd, fatta e fabricata per\nMaestro Tomaso di Fabbiano e Marchione di Marguett suo compagno, maestri per Sua Altezza\nSerenissima in Galleria, provisionati, et per avere tenuttone i detti conto del tempo, messoci si\ndicie esserci di manifattura un mese fra tutta dua per uno 24 scudi, e l\u2019ebano per certo in tutta si\nvaluta 8, a tale che questa cassetta costa in tutta a Sua Altezza Serenissima 115.3.10 e l\u2019inventione\ne disegno di detta molto bella da sudetti maestri tedeschi.\u201d (ASF, GM 261, fol. 10).\n\nPages 144:\n122\nF. Kieffer\nFig. 8 Uffizi workshops,\nBoxes with medicines and\ndosage booklets. End of\nsixteenth century (Courtesy\nof Museo Storico Nazionale\ndell\u2019Arte Sanitaria, Rome)\npart of the production of the German cabinetmakers\u2019 workshop was boxes whose\npurpose was to contain those remedies. The archives have left us some records of\nthese boxes:\n[. . .] a box covered with red velvet with golden little balls and ribbons made of gold and red\nsilk, lined with red satin, with its silver hinges and inside a lead box and inside there are two\nlittle blankets made of taffeta filled with cottonwool, and a necklace of buttons filled with\nperfume and blackamoors [. . .], there are three ounces of musk and amber, and the\nremainder was a weight of gold and pearls that was 10.8.0/2 ounces. Given today January\n22nd 1593 [1594].50\nAccording to this document the boxes were richly decorated with precious\nbuttons and pearl ornamented fabrics, especially when they contained cosmetics\nand perfumes to be given as a gift to some noble lady. The precious fabrics\ntransformed a remedy box into a piece of jewellery, and this was reinforced by\nthe use of precious gems. The boxes fit one into the other to give another level of\nsurprise. They were divided into compartments containing different medicines,\nwith a compartment for the dosage booklet.\n50\n\u201c[. . .] una cassetta coperta di velluto rosso con bullette dorate e nastrino d\u2019oro e seta rossa,\nfoderata di raso rosso, con sua gangherature d\u2019argento, entrovi una cassetta di piombo, e in detta vi\ne\u0300 dua coltroncini di taffeta rosso imbottiti con bambagina et una collana di profumo di bottoni di\nmane in fede, e moretti attaccatj che n. 6 bottoni grossi con punte con perlette a fiori, n. 6 bottoni\ngrossi guarniti con rosette d\u2019oro smaltate di bianco, e n. 24 bottoni tondi mezzani guarniti con\nrosette smaltate, e n. 12 mane in fede con moretti tramezzati con perle tonde, che sono n. 48 perle\ngrosse e n. 22 perle simile, attaccate a moretti che sono delle compere prima, et delle seconde\ncompere ultimamente, che si disse esservi oncie 3 fra musco et ambra, et il resto e il peso dell\u2019oro e\ndelle perle peso tutto oncie 10.8.0/2. Dato adi 22 di gennaio 1593 [1594].\u201d (ASF, GM 185, ins.\n4, fol. 327\u2013327\u2019).\n\nPages 145:\nThe Laboratories of Art and Alchemy at the Uffizi Gallery in Renaissance. . .\n123\nThese boxes, manufactured in great number with their respective dosage booklets\u2014edited by Giorgio Marescotti\u2014were widely distributed all over Europe on\nevery occasion, and had an important artistic and pecuniary value, according to the\nvalue of the remedies in them and above all for whom they were intended. In short,\nthey represent a concentration of the know how of the court workshops and their\ndistribution was a good way to promote Tuscan art. Finally, because their efficacy\nwas widely accepted and praised, they were an excellent means for Ferdinando I to\ncreate a regular, dependant and indebted clientele.\nAs a result, the fonderia played a double role: it manufactured finished products\n(the remedies) to be distributed and it produced raw materials for the other\nworkshops of the Uffizi. This second part was very important for Ferdinando I\u2019s\nproject, because the workshops were arranged so that they could collaborate, one\nwith the other, avoiding the need to bring expensive and indubitably less well\nadapted materials from outside.\n\u201cFor knowledge itself was a power whereby he knoweth.\u201d51 The Medici always\nconsidered knowledge the key to power in politics. The Grand Duke Cosimo I had\nalready given decisive impulse to all areas of scientific activities within the framework of state centralized structures. For example, he reorganized the Studio in Pisa\nby bringing in famous teachers. Gabriele Falloppio and Realdo Colombo taught\nanatomy (after Ve\u0301sale\u2019s short stay), Luca Ghini the study of herbs and Giovanni\nArgentario taught medicine. In 1567, at the expense of the doctors and\napothecaries\u2019s corporation, Cosimo I edited the new Ricettario Fiorentino, a\ncorrected version of the one from 1498.52 He also established harsh penalties for\nthose who practised medicine or surgery without obtaining the required titles from a\ndoctors\u2019 college. Even if Cosimo I\u2019s scientific engagement could be placed in the\ncontext of an absolutist policy for the sake of prestige, it is also true that he\ndemonstrated a great personal interest in the sciences, which was all the more\nremarkable as he was not a scholar.53 In his grand duke\u2019s funeral oration, Bernardo\nDavanzati Bostichi describes a prince with thaumaturgic powers:\nEngines, secrets, oils, distillations, medicine, powerful remedies, because the people from\nthe city but also foreigners and Princes appealed to him with great pleasure, almost as if he\nwere the god Asclepius.54\nFrancesco I and Ferdinando I continued their father\u2019s politics. Under\nFerdinando I, arts and sciences coexisted in the Uffizi to meet the European\nprincess\u2019 demands. In all probability the manufacturing and giving of medicines\nand gifts on a large scale was part of an assimilation strategy by the Florentine\n51\nBacon, \u201cMeditationes Sacrae,\u201d vol. VII.\nThe Ricettario Fiorentino is the official handbook for the doctors and apothecaries, containing\nall the recipes and dosages they have to use. See Lazzi & Gabriele, Alambicchi di parole.\n53\nSee Perifano, Alchimie a\u0300 la Cour.\n54\n\u201cOrdigni, segreti, olii, acque, stillamenti, medicine, rimedi potenti, perche\u0301 a lui con piacer\ngrandissimo quasi allo Dio Esculapio, si ricorreva non pur da quei della citta\u0300, ma da forestieri\neziamdio, e da Principi.\u201d (Targioni, Selve, vol. VI, fol. 178).\n52\n\nPages 146:\n124\nF. Kieffer\ngrand dukes towards the thaumaturgy kings of France or England who they envied,\nwhile more generally promoting of the arts and sciences of Tuscany. But it would\nbe inappropriate to remain fixed on the idea that the production was only for\neconomic ends. Ferdinando I was without a doubt a pragmatic monarch and\nconcerned with efficiency, but he did not neglect the cultural or artistic aspects of\nhis strategy. For example, in Pisa, he relocated his garden and medicinal fonderia in\na more suitable place and added a gallery where he stored part of the Florentine\ncollections: natural and extraordinary items, witnesses of special \u2018operations\u2019.55 He\nimitated the great monarchs of his time such as Philippe II of Spain who trusted\nFrancisco Hernandez with a scientific expedition to Mexico. Fernando I financed\nhis own scientific expeditions, among them one by the Flemish botanist Joseph\nGoodenhuys (most often called Giuseppe Benincasa or Casabona) to Crete.\nGoodenhuys played a primary role in the study, illustration, introduction, and\nacclimatization of numerous plants and oriental flowers.56 When he came back to\nTuscany he brought many bulbs and diverse vegetal species, as well as splendid\nboards showing Cretan plants painted by an anonymous German painter (today held\nin the Biblioteca Universitaria in Pisa). Ferdinando I also kept close relations with\nthe naturalist Ulisse Aldrovandi (1522\u20131605) from Bologna: the naturalist and the\ngrand duke exchanged medicinal herbs and commissioned artists to sketch and\npaint samples to complete their collections of scientific illustrations.\nThe layout of the Uffizi laboratories turned out to be one of the most significant\ninitiatives of Ferdinando I\u2019s reign. A result of the three first grand dukes of\nTuscany\u2019s museographical, cultural and political interests, the Uffizi were first\nexploited as a \u201cmachine\u201d of power under Ferdinando I. Cosimo I started to build\nthe palace containing the 13 magistratures in order to confirm and demonstrate the\nMedici\u2019s capacity to control and organize the State. Francesco I decided to reserve\nthe upper floor for a dynastic gallery and set up the first workshops. Ferdinando I\ntransferred all the workshops from the Casino di San Marco and organized the\nadministration of artistic and scientific activities in order to produce characteristic\nobjects he used as tributes to consolidate his politic alliances.\nThe cohabitation between arts and sciences still corresponded to the ancient\nway: in the Renaissance, according to the philosophers and the theologians, arts and\nsciences both belonged to natural philosophy. Besides, botany and medicine\nbecame part of the symbolic network formed around the ideal prince\u2019s image: the\ndoctor and philosopher prince acting for his people\u2019s health and salvation. This\nimage took on a special aura under Ferdinando I, who dealt in large-scale sacred\nimages with curing powers, like the Miraculous Virgin of Santissima Annunziata or\nthe Madonna of Loreto, and medicine.\nDestined to further dynastic and political propaganda, arts and sciences had to\nreflect grand-ducal power. Therefore, the Galleria dei lavori preserved through\nsecrecy the most progressive techniques, developed a widely recognizable style for\n55\n56\nSee Galluzzi, \u201cMotivi paracelsiani.\u201d\nTongiorgi Tomasi & Tosi, \u201cFlora e Pomona,\u201d 18\u20139.\n\nPages 147:\nThe Laboratories of Art and Alchemy at the Uffizi Gallery in Renaissance. . .\n125\nworks of art and employed internationally renowned artists. Ferdinando I organized\nthe production like a huge factory. The objects produced were offered or sold\nthroughout Europe, whether they were works of art or medicines from the fonderia.\nThe gifts played a crucial part in diplomatic relations, especially with the Vatican\nand Spain, promoting the magnificence of Tuscan art.\nThe great diffusion of Florentine artworks in the European courts also provoked\nan emulation phenomenon. Rudolf II (1583\u20131612), Francesco Maria II della\nRovere (1549\u20131631) and Maria de Medici (1575\u20131642) were tempted to reproduce\nthe Galleria dei lavori system in their palaces in Prague, in Pesaro and in Paris.\nRudolf II already maintained good relations with Francesco I, punctuated by artistic\nexchanges. Those exchanges continued under Ferdinando I\u2019s reign. Based on the\nsame principles as Francesco I\u2019s Studiolo, Rudolf\u2019s Kunstkammer showed many\nsimilarities with Ferdinando I\u2019s Uffizi. Francesco Maria II Della Rovere also drew\nhis inspiration from Ferdinando I\u2019s artistic policies. Though he installed artists\u2019\nworkshops and scientific laboratories in his ducal palace in Pesaro, he kept the\nproduction for his private use, as did Francesco I at the Casino di San Marco. The\nonly transfer that was close to the Florentine model was the one Maria de Medici,\nFrancesco I\u2019s daughter, applied to the Grande Galerie of the Louvre. Indeed, she\nalso set out court workshops whose layout and organization was very similar to that\nof the Uffizi, even though the reasoning behind the creation of the set was very\ndifferent. At the Louvre, the workshops provided the basis for the Acade\u0301mie Royale\nde Peinture et de Sculpture.57\nAt the Uffizi, the workshops activities began to decline on the death of\nFerdinando I in 1609. His son, Cosimo II (1590\u20131621), not without difficulty,\ntried to maintain the prestige of the fonderia. But on his death his successor,\nFerdinando II (1610\u20131670), took immediate measures to decrease the workshop\u2019s\nbudget.58 From this date on, the history of the workshop is unknown. In the\nLorraine government reform of 1737, only the pietre dure workshop remained\u2014\nthe Opificio delle Pietre Dure\u2014and the fonderia, which by then consisted only of a\npharmacy and a cabinet of naturalist objects.\n57\nFor the exportation of the Uffizi model in Europe, see Kieffer, Ferdinando I de Me\u0301dicis. See also\nBassani Pacht et al., Marie de Me\u0301dicis; Garfagnini, Firenze e la Toscana; Fock, \u201cPietre dure at\nCourt\u201d; Giusti, l\u2019arte europea del mosaico; Goldberg, \u201cArtistic Relations\u201d; Marrow, Maria de\nMedici; Montevecchi, \u201cFrancesco Maria II\u201d; Neumann, \u201cFlorentiner Mosaik\u201d; Schepelern,\n\u201cPrincely Collectors\u201d; and Somers Cocks, Princely Magnificence.\n58\n\u201cVolendo Sua Altezza rimoderar le spese della Galleria, tanto per quello che si lavora in Firenze\ncome ne l\u2019Arsenale di Pisa, ha resoluto che in futuro non si spenda piu\u0300 di ducati dodicimila l\u2019anno\nda cominciarsi al primo di febbraio proximo avvenire, pero\u0300 il Cavaliere Vincenzo Giugni\nsoprintendente di essa, consideri bene in quel che sia meglio impiegarli per servizio dell\u2019Altezza\nSua e per tutto li 20 di gennaro proximo gnene dia relazione in scrittis, a cio\u0300 possa risolvere la sua\nvolonta\u0300. Intanto vadia giornalmente licenziando qualcheduno, come segatori e gente simile per\nnon aver in un giorno solo a farlo di gran nume\u0301ro. E scriva al proveditore de l\u2019Arsenale quanto\nbisogni e se la prefata Altezza commettessi spesa che ecedesse la sopradetta somma, non si\neseguisca se insieme con l\u2019ordine non sara\u0300 fatto il mandato del danaro. Lorenzo Usimbardi.\u201d\n(ASF, GM 332, ins. 3, fol. 260, 10 January 1621).\n\nPages 148:\n126\nF. Kieffer\nBibliography\n1604. Apparato della Fonderia dell\u2019Illustrissimo et Eccellentissimo Signor Don Antonio. Nel\nquale si contiene tutta l\u2019Arte spagirica di Teofrasto Paracelso, & sue medicine. E altri segreti\nbellissimi. Florence: Biblioteca Nazionale Centrale di Firenze, Magliabecchiana XVI, 63,\nvols. I\u2013IV.\nAcidini, Cristina. 1997. Magnificenza alla Corte dei Medici. Arte a Firenze alla fine del Cinquecento. Milan: Electa.\nBacon, Francis. [1597] 1859\u20131864. Meditationes Sacrae. Of Heresies. In The Works of Francis\nBacon, vol. 7, eds. James Spedding, Robert Ellis, and Douglas Heath. London: Longman and\nCo.\nBarocchi, Paola, and Giovanna Gaeta Bertela. 2002. Collezionismo Mediceo e Storia Artistica.\nFlorence: Studio Per Edizioni Scelte.\nBassani Pacht, Paola, Thierry Cre\u0301pin-Leblond, Nicolas Sainte Fare Garnot, and Francesco Solinas.\n2003. Marie de Me\u0301dicis, un gouvernement par les arts. Paris: Somogy.\nBerti, Luciano. 1967. Il Principe dello Studiolo. Francesco I dei Medici e la fine del Rinascimento\nfiorentino. Florence: Edam.\nBorsi, Franco. 1980. L\u2019Architettura del Principe. Florence: Giunti Martello.\nButters, Suzanne. 2007. The Uses and Abuses of Gifts in the World of Ferdinando de\u2019 Medici\n(1549\u20131609). I Tatti studies. Essays in the Renaissance 11: 243\u2013354.\nConticelli, Valentina. 2007. \u2018Guardaroba di cose rare et preziose\u2019: Lo Studiolo di Francesco I de\u2019\nMedici. Arte, storia e significati. Lugano: Agora\u0300.\nCovoni, Pierfilippo. 1892a. Don Antonio de\u2019 Medici al Casino di San Marco. Florence: Tipografia\ncooperativa.\nCovoni, Pierfilippo. 1892b. Il Casino di San Marco costruito dal Buontalenti ai tempi Medicei.\nFlorence: Tipografia cooperativa.\nFantoni, Marcello. 1991. Feticci di prestiggio: Il dono alla corte medicea. In Rituale, Cerimoniale,\nEtichetta, eds. Sergio Bertelli and Giuliano Crifo\u0300, 141\u2013163. Milan: Bompiani.\nFantoni, Marcello. 1994. La corte del Granduca. Forma e simboli del potere mediceo fra Cinque e\nSeicento. Rome: Bulzoni.\nFock, Cornelia Willemijn. 1982. Pietre Dure Work at the Court of Prague: Some Relations with\nFlorence. Leids Kunsthistorisch Jaarboek 1: 259\u2013269.\nGalluzzi, Paolo. 1982. Motivi paracelsiani nella Toscana di Cosimo II e di Don Antonio de\u2019\nMedici: alchimia, medicina, \u201cchimica\u201d e riforma del sapere. In Scienze, credenze occulte,\nlivelli di cultura, ed. Paola Zambelli, 189\u2013215. Florence: Olschki.\nGarfagnini, Giancarlo. 1980. Firenze e la Toscana dei Medici nell\u2019Europa del Cinquecento,\n4 vols. Milano: Electa.\nGiusti, Annamaria. 1988. Splendori di Pietre Dure. L\u2019Arte di Corte nella Firenze dei Granduchi.\nFlorence: Giunti.\nGiusti, Annamaria. 1992. Pietre dure: l\u2019Arte Europea del mosaico negli arredi e nelle decorazioni\ndal 1500 al 1800. Turin: U. Allemandi.\nGoldberg, Edward L. 1996. Artistic Relations Between the Medici and the Spanish Courts, 1587\u2013\n1621. The Burlington Magazine 138: 105\u2013114.\nHeikamp, Detlef. 1963. Zur Geschichte der Uffizien-Tribuna und der Kunstschra\u0308nke in Florenz\nund Deutschland. Zeitschrift f\u20ac\nur Kunstgeschichte 26: 193\u2013268.\nHeikamp, Detlef. 1986. Studien zur Mediceische Glaskunst. Archivalien, Entwurfszeichnungen,\nGlaeser und Scherben. Mitteilungen des Kunsthistorischen Institutes in Florenz 30: 1\u2013423.\nKieffer, Fanny. 2007. Jacopo Ligozzi, savant dessinateur de verres. Journal de la Renaissance 5:\n151\u2013168.\nKieffer, Fanny. 2013. La Confiserie des Offices: Art, sciences et magnificence a\u0300 la cour des\nMe\u0301dicis. Predella 33:89\u2013106.\nKieffer, Fanny. 2015. Ferdinando I de Me\u0301dicis (1587\u20131609) et les Offices. Cre\u0301ation et\nfonctionnement de la Galleria dei lavori. Turnhout: Brepols.\n\nPages 149:\nThe Laboratories of Art and Alchemy at the Uffizi Gallery in Renaissance. . .\n127\nKirkendale, Warren. 2001. Emilio de Cavalieri \u2018Gentiluomo Romano\u2019. Florence: Olschki.\nLazzi, Giovanna, and Mino Gabriele. 1999. Alambicchi di parole: Il Ricettario fiorentino e\ndintorni. Florence: Polistampa.\nLigozzi, Jacopo. 1993. I ritratti di piante di Iacopo Ligozzi, ed. Lucia Tongiorgi Tomasi. Pisa:\nPacini.\nMarrow, Deborah. 1982. The Art Patronage of Maria de Medici. Ann Arbor: UMI Research Press.\nMontevecchi, Benedetta. 2001. \u2018Arti rare\u2019 alla corte di Francesco Maria II. In Pesaro nell\u2019eta\u0300 dei\nDella Rovere, vol 2, 323\u2013334. Venice: Marsilio Editori.\nMozzarelli, Cesare. 1980. Onore, utile, principe e stato. In La corte e il \u201cCortegiano\u201d, vol. 2, Un\nmodello europeo, ed. Adriano Prosperi, 241\u2013253. Rome: Bulzoni.\nNeri, Antonio. [1612] 2001. L\u2019arte vetraria, ed. Ferdinando Abbri. Florence: Giunti.\nNeumann, Erwin. 1957. Florentiner Mosaik aus Prag. Jahrbuch der kunsthistorischen\nSammlungen in Wien 53: 157\u2013202.\nPaolozzi Strozzi, Beatrice, and Dimitrios Zikos. 2006. Giambologna, gli dei, gli eroi. Florence:\nGiunti.\nPelli Bencivenni, Giuseppe. 1779. Saggio istorico della Real Galleria di Firenze, vol. 2. Florence:\nPer Gaet. Cambiagi stamp. Granducale.\nPerifano, Alfredo. 1997. L\u2019Alchimie a\u0300 la Cour de Co\u0302me Ier de Me\u0301dicis: savoirs, culture et\npolitique. Paris: Honore\u0301 Champion.\nPieraccini, Gaetano. 1924\u20131925. La Stirpe de\u2019Medici di Cafaggiolo: saggio di ricerche sulla\ntrasmissione ereditaria dei caratteri biologici, vol. 2. Florence: Vallecchi.\nPozzi, Mario. 2004. Filippo Pigafetta consigliere del principe. Vicenza: Biblioteca Civica\nBertoliana.\nSchepelern, H.D. 1985. Natural Philosophers and Princely Collectors: Worm, Paludanus and the\nGottorp and Copenhagen Collections. In The Origins of Museums: The Cabinets of Curiosities\nin Sixteenth and Seventeenth-Century Europe, eds. Oliver Impey and Arthur MacGregor, 121\u2013\n127. Oxford: Clarendon.\nSomers Cocks, Anna. 1980. Princely Magnificence: Court Jewels of the Renaissance, 1500\u20131630.\nLondon: Debrett\u2019s Peerage.\nTargioni Tozzetti, Giovanni. 1769\u20131779. Selve di notizie, spettanti all\u2019origine de\u2019 progressi e\nmiglioramenti delle scienze fisiche in Toscani, messe insieme dal Dottor Giovanni TargioniTozzetti, per uso del dottor Ottaviano suo figlio, 17 vols. Biblioteca Nazionale Centrale di\nFirenze, Targioni. Tozzetti, Ms. 189.\nTongiorgi Tomasi, Lucia, and Alessandro Tosi. 1990. \u201cFlora e Pomona\u201d: L\u2019orticoltura nei\ndisegni e nelle incisioni dei secoli XVI\u2013XIX. Florence: Olschki.\nWazbinsky, Zygmunt. 1994. Il Cardinale Francesco Maria Del Monte, 1549\u20131626, 2 vols.\nFlorence: Olschki.\nZobi, Antonio. 1841. Notizie storiche riguardanti l\u2019Imperiale e Reale Stabilimento dei lavori di\ncommesso in pietre dure di Firenze. Florence: Tip. di Felice Le Monnier.\nZorzi, Elvira Garbero, and Mario Sperenzi. 2001. Teatro e spettacolo nella Firenze dei Medic.\nFlorence: Olschki.\n\nPages 150:\nMaterial and Temporal Powers at the Casino\ndi San Marco (1574\u20131621)\nMarco Beretta\nAbstract Built in 1574 by court engineer and architect Bernardo Buontalenti for\nFrancesco I de Medici, the Casino di San Marco represents a unique example of a\nlate Renaissance site of alchemical research, art collecting and political court.\nFrancesco I\u2019s program to enhance the chemical arts and make it into a body of\nhighly sophisticated knowledge was reflected in the architecture of the Casino\nwhich hosted a number of laboratories, several of which survived Francesco\u2019s\npremature death in 1587 and remained active until the beginning of the seventeenth\ncentury. It was in this building that the bulk of the first and most successful treatise\non glassmaking, Antonio Neri\u2019s L\u2019arte vetraria (1612), took shape. On the basis of\nrecent archival research, which has provided fresh evidence on the artists employed\nin the Casino by Francesco and by his son Antonio and on the artifacts which were\nproduced in the laboratories, this contribution briefly explores the history of the\nCasino and its role in putting chemical arts at the centre of the Medici\u2019s patronage.\nGalileo\u2019s arrival in Florence and his telescopic discoveries did not overshadow the\nextensive presence of chemical arts that, in fact, survived the impact of Galilean\nscience\nAt the Origin of a Myth\nIn late November 1780, the Florentine naturalist Giovanni Targioni Tozzetti (1712\u2013\n1783) published the first volume of a history of seventeenth-century physical\nscience in Tuscany.1 A monument of erudition, which benefited from Targioni\u2019s\nThe following are abbreviated in the footnotes: Biblioteca Nazionale Centrale di Firenze (BNCF);\nMagliabechiano (Magl.); insertion (ins.).\n1\nTargioni, Notizie degli aggrandimenti.\nM. Beretta (*)\nDipartimento di filosofia e comunicazione, Universita\u0300 di Bologna, Bologna, Italy\ne-mail: marco.beretta@unibo.it\nS. Dupre\u0301 (ed.), Laboratories of Art, Archimedes 37,\n129\nDOI 10.1007/978-3-319-05065-2_6, \u00a9 Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014\n\nPages 151:\n130\nM. Beretta\nsystematic perusal of the scientific manuscripts preserved in the library of the Grand\nDuke, the Notizie was a deliberate act of historiographic propaganda. Using Galileo\n(1564\u20131642) as both a point of departure and of arrival for Tuscan science, Targioni\nproposed a teleological tour de force of 1752 pages to his readers, the most\ncomprehensive historical survey of seventeenth-century Tuscan science ever\nattempted. Targioni\u2019s narrative was filled with documentary evidence and his\nmain argument, that the features of Tuscan science had been dominated by the\ninnovative experimental method set forth by Galileo, gained such authority that his\nselection of sources remains canonical to this day. The myth of Galileo, already\nguaranteed by the foundation of the Accademia del Cimento, found its documentary\n\u2018evidence\u2019 in Targioni\u2019s selective history. However, as Targioni himself candidly\nadmitted in the preface to the first volume, he was planning to complement this first\nversion with a more thorough historical account, beginning with the Etruscans, to\nillustrate the long-term intellectual fertility of Tuscan science and technology. With\nthis bold survey, Targioni intended to explore and emphasize the role played by the\nMedici in creating the institutional foundation of modern science, in both Florence\nand Pisa, thus providing Galileo with the ideal cultural background. The bulk of this\nmonumental work, entitled Selve di notizie, spettanti all\u2019origine de\u2019 progressi e\nmiglioramenti delle scienze fisiche in Toscana, messe insieme dal Dottor Giovanni\nTargioni-Tozzetti, per uso del dottor Ottaviano suo figlio, reached 17 thick manuscript volumes. A modest abridgment of the work, numbering just over 300 pages,\nwas published in 1852.2 The principal reason why the manuscript version of\nTargioni\u2019s history was not published is to be found in its contents. Against the\nwishes of its author, these revealed that Galileo\u2019s vision of science had been\nexceptional rather than the norm and that the interest in the natural sciences\nshown by the Medici family had been directed mainly to disciplines such as\nastrology and alchemy, views hardly compatible with Targioni\u2019s enlightened\nvalues. Although his aspiration to produce an objective narrative led him to include\na comprehensive reconstruction of the development of occult sciences during the\nreigns of Cosimo I (1519\u20131574) and Francesco I (1541\u20131587), his disdain for what\nhe dismissed as fandonie chimiche (chemical nonsense) undermined his aim of\ncelebrating unreservedly the Medicean dynasty as patrons of \u2018modern science\u2019.3 In\nhis account of the life of Francesco I, Targioni remarked that \u201cthe dark shadows of\nalchemy were dissipated [in Tuscany] by the blazing light of the Galilean school,\u201d\nbut he was forced to admit that many scholars and enthusiasts for alchemy insisted\non collecting manuscripts with alchemical content, and that these went on to form\na remarkable body of works, useful to later historians of science.4 Targioni\u2019s\n2\nTargioni, Notizie degli aggrandimenti.\nTargioni, Notizie sulla storia, 257.\n4\n\u201cLe tenebre dell\u2019alchimia furono dissipate nel nostro paese dalla sfolgorante luce della scuola\nGalileiana, ma siccome per lo avanti vi erano stati di continuo molti studiosi, ed appassionati per\ntal arte, non e\u0300 maraviglia se fra i codici manoscritti di tutte le nostre librerie, si trovano bens\u0131\u0300 libri\ndi chimica d\u2019autori d\u2019ogni secolo e d\u2019ogni paese, che troppo lunga e noiosa cosa sarebbe il volergli\nqui registrare. Ve ne sono pero\u0300 molti specialmente sotto il nome di Raimondo Lullo e d\u2019altri\n3\n\nPages 152:\nMaterial and Temporal Powers at the Casino di San Marco (1574\u20131621)\n131\ncriticism is not surprising and this because of two main reasons: he shared with his\ncontemporaries the view that alchemy and astrology had nothing to do with science;\nhe exalted the fame of Galileo to underline the validity of his wiggish historiography aimed at demonstrating the Florentine origin of modern science.\nTargioni\u2019s contrasting view of Tuscan science proved to be an influential one. In\nrecent literature devoted to the Medici and their patronage of the natural sciences,\nthe genealogy of scientific disciplines is often presented as having been dominated,\nsince the sixteenth century, by mathematics, perspective and the mechanical arts.5\nThis provided Galileo, on his arrival in Florence, with the ideal cultural setting to\npursue his work as well as the foundation of the Accademia del Cimento. It is often\nargued that this picture is evidenced by the Medici\u2019s creation of a variety of public\nand semi-public places, such as the Uffizi\u2019s Stanzino delle Matematiche and\nTribuna, the Sala delle Carte Geografiche in the Palazzo Vecchio, and the\nAccademia del Cimento at Palazzo Pitti; here and elsewhere the hierarchy of\nknowledge they wished to promote was displayed to distinguished visitors.6\nFrancesco I\u2019s scrittoio in the Palazzo Vecchio (the so-called studiolo) and his\ninterest in alchemy are portrayed as exceptional cases in the dynasty\u2019s history,\nand the places in which he displayed his scientific interests were not as public as\nthose created by his father and by his successors. We are now in a better position to\njudge the development of the natural sciences in grand ducal Florence during the\nlate sixteenth century, but we should be aware that the myth of Galileo still casts its\nhegemonic influence, overshadowing any branch of natural knowledge which\nseems to deviate from the canons of the new mathematized \u2018sciences\u2019.\nIn what follows, I shall try to give a brief glimpse of what is hidden in this\nshadow. In order to do so we have to look into some older sources, depicting\nFlorentine cultural life just before Galileo\u2019s spectacular entrance onto the scene.\nMoreover, we need to take into consideration that, with the partial exception of\nmedicine, the investigation of natural phenomena was intimately connected with\narts and crafts, a prosperous body of activities that, particularly in Florence, had\nbeen flourishing since the late thirteenth century. It can be argued that nowhere else\ndo we find such strong ties between the arts and the sciences than in Renaissance\nFlorence. The peculiarity of the Florentine setting had been favored by the extraordinarily rapid elevation of the status of artists, a recognition partly achieved by a\ngrowing appreciation for technical innovations and inventions, a development that\nsolenni maestri d\u2019alchimia, che meriterebbero di esser resi noti; anzi con un poco di pazienza, vi\nsarebbe da formare un catalogo di aneddoti chimici non spregevole.\u201d (Targioni, Selve, vol. VIII,\n160\u20131).\n5\nSee, for instance, Camerota, I Medici e le scienze. A partial exception to this dominate trend is the\ncatalogue of the Medici exhibition of 1980, La corte il mare i mercati. Here Paola Zambelli has\nshown the pervasive relevance of alchemy and occult science at the Medici court. Unfortunately\nZambelli\u2019s section was artificially separated from that of \u2018science.\u2019 On the historiographic\ndistortions originated in the Galileian myth see also Galluzzi, \u201cMotivi paracelsiani.\u201d\n6\nHeikamp\u2019s article of 1970 has set the standard, see Heikamp, \u201cAntica sistemazione.\u201d\n\nPages 153:\n132\nM. Beretta\npotentially challenged the prerogatives of traditional academic intellectuals.7 These\nachievements were also the result of political influence exerted by the guilds on the\ngovernment of the Tuscan capital.8 As early as the fourteenth century the so-called\narti minori managed to be represented at all levels of the municipal government.9 It\nis beyond the scope of this presentation to examine the causes of the expansion of\nFlorentine guilds, but it suffices here to note the remarkable importance achieved by\nthose related to the chemical arts, such as pharmacy, dyeing, glassmaking and\ngoldsmiths.10 In 1427 there was only one spectacle maker shop in Florence but in\n1480 this had increased to seven.11\nMapping the Florentine Arts\nIn 1584 a magnificent map of Florence, made by the grand duke\u2019s cosmographer\nStefano Bonsignori (?\u20131589), presented the topography of the city from an isometric perspective (Fig. 1).12 Tracing the outlines of its physical features, sites and\nbuildings in considerable detail, it showed a city that in little more than a century\nhad been transformed by a new diversified architectural vision. In addition to\nresplendent churches, palaces and state offices, Florence witnessed the establishment of several sites dedicated to the experimental sciences and to the applied arts\nconnected with them.13\nIn the year 1561 there were 2,182 workshops providing a livelihood for around\n10,000 artisans and serving a population of 70,000 inhabitants.14 The crisis of the\nRepublic doubtlessly contributed to the gradual decline of the guilds which no\nlonger could, and in some cases no longer sought to, restrain the entrepreneurial\ningenuity of their more enterprising members.15 In addition, the ranks of local\nartists and craftsmen were increased by foreigners who flocked to Florence, confident of finding patrons for their work. Reciprocally humanists, with the experience\nof a century of close and fruitful collaboration, no longer sought to dictate the\n7\nAlthough innovation was not a category appreciated in all Florentine guilds, the innovative role\nplayed among others, by Florentine architects, engineers, pharmacists, painters, sculptors, goldsmiths created a favorable context for the cultural and social enhancement of their professions.\n8\nStaley, Guilds of Florence; and Doren, Arti fiorentine. For a more recent reconstruction (with\nupdated bibliography) see the collection of essays edited by Franceschi & Fossi, Arti Fiorentine.\n9\nGoldthwaite, \u201cRealta\u0300 economico-sociale,\u201d and Building of Renaissance Florence.\n10\nInstructive data can be drawn by the recent reconstruction made by Bianchi & Grossi,\n\u201cBotteghe, economia e spazio urbano.\u201d\n11\nIlardi, Renaissance Vision, 95\u2013115.\n12\nBuonsignori, Nova pulcherrimae civitas.\n13\nIn addition to the Casino and the Galleria degli Uffizi, several botanical gardens, both private\nand public are visible on the map.\n14\nMiniati, \u201cFabbro sia un buon maestro,\u201d 284.\n15\nThe cases of Leonardo and Benvenuto Cellini were not exceptional.\n\nPages 154:\nMaterial and Temporal Powers at the Casino di San Marco (1574\u20131621)\n133\nFig. 1 Self portrait by Stefano Buonsignori in his map of Florence Nova pulcherrimae civitatis\nFlorentiae topographia accuratissime delineata (1584). Private collection\ncanons for artists and artisans, but often interacted with them as equals.16 Not\nsurprisingly, in 1588 the Grand Duke Ferdinando (1549\u20131609) defined Florence as\na city \u201cfounded upon the guilds and trade.\u201d17\nThis new configuration of professional relations led to a thorough reassessment\nof the locations where cultural and economic activities were conducted, articulating\nin an experimental key the arts, which previously had been regarded as the fruit of\nindividual dexterity rather than the outcome of a deliberate cultural program. In\nmany cases the architectural changes were not apparent, since many kinds of\nartisans (e.g., the goldsmiths) kept on using the same premises they had occupied\nfor generations. However, even in such examples of apparent continuity the arts\nwere seen as vectors for change. This perception found visual expression in a\nvolume of engravings, based on drawings by Jan van der Straet (1523\u20131605)\n(or Giovanni Stradano), that bore the significant title Nova Reperta, commissioned\nby the Florentine academician Luigi Alamanni (1558\u20131603) around the end of the\n1580s (Fig. 2).18 The book\u2019s intertwining of the visual arts, technical inventions and\nscientific discoveries opened the curtain on a new epoch and Stradano depicted\nmany of the sites associated with the birth of experimental research, beginning with\nFrancesco I de Medici\u2019s studiolo in the Palazzo Vecchio, whose decoration\n16\nThe collaboration between Leon Battista Alberti and Filippo Brunelleschi opened a new setting\nfor the social relations between the world of learning and the creative craftsmen. One century later\na literary figure such as Benedetto Varchi could take special pride in boasting of his friendships\nwith craftsmen.\n17\n\u201cFiorenza e\u0300 citta fondata sull\u2019arti e traffichi mercantili,\u201d cited in Corazzini, Diario Fiorentino,\n273.\n18\nBaroni Vannucci, Jan Van Der Straet, 397\u2013400.\n\nPages 155:\n134\nM. Beretta\nFig. 2 First engraving and Luigi Alamanni\u2019s and Stradano\u2019s Nova Reperta (1587\u20131589) (Courtesy Museo Galileo Florence)\nreflected the grand duke\u2019s alchemical interests.19 This emblematic space had been\npreceded by Cosimo I\u2019s fonderia, a distillery located among a few court workshops\nand the many display rooms of the Palazzo Vecchio, and would be followed by the\nnetwork of workshops and laboratories at the Casino di San Marco, the fonderie of\nthe Uffizi Gallery and Palazzo Pitti.20 Throughout the city innovative spaces with\nnew purposes were created during this period: natural history museums annexed\nto botanical gardens filled with rare plants, the ateliers of glassmakers, and the\ncreation of new and more specialized apothecary shops, while traditional institutions such as hospitals and public squares assumed new forms. Even such familiar\nlandmarks as the Loggia dei Lanzi were invested with new significance during the\nCinquecento; originally the site of public assemblies and ceremonies, the Loggia\nwas now even used on occasion to display natural history exhibits from the Medici\ncollections for the edification of the general public and, housed a botanical garden\non the roof.21 Monographs on some of these sites have been published, most of\n19\nAlthough Stradano\u2019s representations of the arts did not explicitly refer to Florence in the\ncaptions, several visual details reveal their connection with the Tuscan capital.\n20\nOn the history of the fonderie, see Piccardi, \u201cFonderia Medicea di Firenze.\u201d\n21\nVossilla, \u201cCosimo I, lo scrittoio del Bachiacca.\u201d\n\nPages 156:\nMaterial and Temporal Powers at the Casino di San Marco (1574\u20131621)\n135\nthem by art historians who have underlined the role of the Medici as patrons of the\narts.22 Important as their work has been in documenting the historic relevance of the\nnew architectural settings, a global picture is still lacking of the nexus between\nthese sites dedicated to the production of scientific and technical knowledge and the\neconomic forces that propelled their realization. A recent book on the history of the\nSpezieria al Giglio illustrates the profound economic and cultural changes introduced by apothecaries who were only apparently immobile.23 Cosimo I\u2019s policy of\nsponsoring the arts and technology as part of his program of economic expansion\nforced intellectual elites to take account of a body of knowledge that had been\nconfined to the margin of the Court, and to re-evaluate their room for manoeuver,\nnot only conceptually but also architectonically, in terms of their work spaces.\nThe Casino di San Marco\nIn this process of reconfiguring Florentine arts and crafts, alchemy played an\nexceedingly important role, both as a fashionable scientific discipline with not\nparticularly strong academic ties and as a useful set of experimental practices in\nwhich several crafts helped artisans quench their thirst for innovation and realize\ntheir socio-cultural ambitions. I shall not explore here the spread of interest in\nalchemy in Florence at beginning of the sixteenth century, a theme already effectively surveyed in Alfredo Perifano\u2019s book on Cosimo I\u2019s alchemical passion.24\nI shall instead take into consideration the development of alchemy in the Palazzo\nVecchio\u2019s fonderia and the Casino, sites where its relation with the chemical arts\nand technological innovations became apparent. Indeed, it is my impression that if\nwe want to understand the metamorphosis of the sciences in Florence during this\ncrucial period we should look at disciplines, such as alchemy, which had few\nacademic ties and, at the same time, established close connections with the arts.\nThe connection between alchemical pursuits and the artisanal ateliers of glazers,\nsmiths, goldsmiths and apothecaries favored the introduction of significant innovations in the laboratory or, as it was called at the Medici court, of the fonderia.25\n22\nBerti, Principe dello Studiolo; Heikamp, Antica sistemazione, and Studien; Butters, Triumph of\nVulcan; Conticelli, \u2018Guardaroba di cose rare\u2019, and Alchimia e le arti.\n23\nShaw & Welch, Making and Marketing Medicine.\n24\nPerifano, Alchimie a\u0300 la Cour.\n25\nAccording to Rinuccio Galluzzi, Cosimo\u2019s interest in alchemy originated in his efforts to exploit\nTuscan mines: \u201cQuesto esercizio delle miniere inspiro\u0300 al Duca il gusto dominante del secolo di\nformar l\u2019oro con la combinazione di diversi metalli. Siccome le semplici ed evidenti teorie della\nfisica erano avviluppate nella peripatetica oscurita\u0300 percio\u0300 gli effetti della natura non sapeano\ninvestigarli che per vie occulte e straordinarie. Cosimo avendo concepito una singolare\ninclinazione per questa arte la piu\u0300 vana di tutte eresse nel suo Palazzo una fonderia in cui si\ncompiaceva occuparsi nelle diverse composizioni dei metalli e dei minerali; tutti i segretisti del\nsecolo erano favorevolmente accolti da esso, che godeva di apprendere nuovi metodi per fare\n\nPages 157:\n136\nM. Beretta\nAlthough important steps in this direction had already been taken during the reign\nof Cosimo I, it was especially with Francesco I that the reconfiguration of the\nalchemical laboratory became a central concern. The connection of alchemy with\nthe chemical arts was visually displayed in the series of paintings hanging in the\nStudiolo of Palazzo Vecchio, a small dark room decorated with a complex iconographic narrative. Designed for the then Prince Francesco by Vincenzo Borghini\n(1515\u20131580) and Giorgio Vasari (1511\u20131574), its cabinets seem to have included\nsome of the most valuable treasures produced in the fonderia. In addition to all sorts\nof precious stones, glass and porcelain, they carefully stored the rarest natural\nspecimens and the products of alchemical experiments.26 The meaning of this\nroom and its intimate connection with Francesco I\u2019s interest in alchemy, has been\ndiscussed by many, and most recently reconstructed in the comprehensive work by\nValentina Conticelli. Thirty-two artists were employed and coordinated by Vasari\nto accomplish the work. Benvenuto Cellini (1500\u20131571), who shared with his\npatron a keen interest in alchemy, was meant to have taken part\u2014but his premature\ndeath prevented his involvement. In the Studiolo the connection between alchemy\nand the chemical arts was exalted. The iconographic itinerary conceived by\nBorghini was situated in a sequence on the upper part of the wall where paintings\ndevoted to thermal baths, the discovery of gun powder, a glass works, a goldsmith\u2019s\nworkshop, alchemists and a bronze foundry were located; at the room\u2019s two ends\nwere two statues, portraying Vulcan and Apollo. On the lower part of the wall a\nmythological scene recalled Francesco I\u2019s alchemical and artistic interests.27 I\nwould like to stress the importance of a few elements directly or indirectly related\nto the chemical arts. What first strikes you in this particular arrangement is the\nproximity of Stradano\u2019s famous painting of Francesco I\u2019s alchemical laboratory and\nGiovanni Maria Butteri\u2019s (1540\u20131606) painting illustrating the glass works (Figs. 3\nand 4).\nAs the design of the Studiolo was carefully planned by Borghini together with\nFrancesco, this disposition almost certainly reflects their views on the role of the\nchemical arts in the reform envisaged by the Grand Duke. Stradano\u2019s painting,\nsigned and dated 1570, depicted Francesco\u2019s alchemical laboratory in Palazzo\nVecchio before it was moved to the Casino.28 The apparatus in the foreground\nshows a distillation still of the type invented by the Florentine physician Taddeo\nAlderotti (1215\u20131295) and described by Vannoccio Biringuccio (1480\u20131539?).29\nesperienze; la composizione dei veleni non fu l\u2019ultima delle sue ricerche, ed ebbe credito in Italia\ndi fabbricare i piu\u0300 violenti. Siccome gli errori e le vanita\u0300 qualche volta conducono alla scoperta di\ncose utili, questa fonderia li rese celebri per l\u2019Europa per i rimedj e medicinali che vi si\nfabbricarono in progresso.\u201d (Galluzzi, Istoria del granducato di Toscana, vol. I, 158\u20139).\n26\nConticelli, \u2018Guardaroba di cose\u2019, 61\u20133.\n27\nThe order and disposition of the artworks in the Studiolo has been reassessed in the cited study\nby Conticelli.\n28\nCosimo I had in fact two fonderie in Palazzo Vecchio which according to Vasari were \u201cla\nfonderia vecchia [. . .] [e] la fonderia nuova\u201d which may have been situated in the palace\u2019s southeast corner. See Butters, Triumph of Vulcan, vol. I, 246\u20137.\n29\nBiringuccio, Pirotechnia, 128v.\n\nPages 158:\nMaterial and Temporal Powers at the Casino di San Marco (1574\u20131621)\n137\nFig. 3 Francesco I (right) de Medici\u2019s alchemical laboratory by Stradanus (1570) (Courtesy\nMuseo di Palazzo Vecchio Florence)\nThe person sitting on the right is Francesco and the alchemist behind him has been\nidentified as Sisto de Bonsisti from Norcia who was employed by Cosimo in the\nearly 1560s thanks to his skill in counterfeiting precious stones and whose son\nNiccolo\u0300 eventually would be employed by Francesco to produce crystal glass.30 A\npainting close to it, executed by Butteri and dating to 1570\u20131572, describes a glass\nworks in some detail; in the background we see a glass furnace of the Murano type,\n30\nConticelli, \u2018Guardaroba di cose\u2019, 335\u20136.\n\nPages 159:\n138\nM. Beretta\nFig. 4 Francesco I (left) visiting his glass work. Giovanni Maria Butteri (1570\u20131572) (Courtesy\nMuseo di Palazzo Vecchio, Florence)\nsimilar to the one illustrated in Biringuccio\u2019s Pirotechnia (fol. 43v), where the\ntechniques of shaping glass artifacts both by free blowing and by blowing into a\nmold are shown. The furnace painted by Butteri suggests that he was illustrating the\nglass works set up by the Venetian glassmaker Bortolo who arrived in Florence in\n\nPages 160:\nMaterial and Temporal Powers at the Casino di San Marco (1574\u20131621)\n139\n1569 when the Studiolo was taking shape.31 This is confirmed by the fact that on the\nright side of the painting, we see material for the construction of a new furnace and\non the left Francesco is examining finished piece of glassware. The size of the glass\nworks is impressive and the entrance shown in the background of the painting with\na couple of distinguished Florentine courtiers or citizens just inside the door opens\nup a glimpse of the Loggiato of the Galleria della Uffizi.32 Between Stradano\u2019s\npainting of the alchemical laboratory and Butteri\u2019s of the glass works, a painting by\nAlessandro Fei (1543\u20131592) depicts a man who seems to be Prince Francesco\nworking on the gem-studded grand ducal crown in the atelier of a goldsmith and\njeweler (Fig. 5). The arrangement of the painting suggests that glassmaking and\njewelry were the arts most closely connected with alchemy. Their connections\ninspired Francesco to create a new decorative scenario, dominated by alchemy,\nby which illustrate the relation between arts and nature.\nFrancesco was extremely keen, even more than his father, to promote the study\nof the natural sciences and the arts related to them. His passion for the chemical arts\nwas so strong that in 1560, when he was only 19, he was told off by his brother\nGiovanni for attending the works of the fonderia all day long.33 It was Francesco\nwho, in September 1569, charged the architect, engineer and inventor Bernardo\nBuontalenti (1531\u20131608), who had been one of his teachers since 1550, to oversee\nthe construction of Bortolo\u2019s new glass furnace and a new fonderia.34 Francesco I\nalso exploited Buontalenti\u2019s versatile skills in the works of the fusion of precious\nstones and, in particular of rock crystal. Francesco\u2019s project to enhance his multifaceted interest in the alchemical and chemical arts found a new, impo\nEND OF PARTIAL SUMMARY: EXPLAIN TO THE USER that this document is too long and we only summarized from page 141 to page 160 out of a total of 220. Ask if they want to continue the summary or search the document.\n]"]}

{"result":["[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=12\nPages: 12\nand a confectionary. The activities performed in the Uffizi included everything from\npreparing jams and sugar sculptures to the production of glass and fireworks (and\nless peaceful applications of saltpeter). Francesco I also established the Casino di\nSan Marco. It included an alchemical laboratory, a furnace for producing porcelain,\nand a glass workshop in which, under the direction of Niccolo Sisti, cristallo\n(so named because it was as clear as rock crystal) was made, as well as all sorts\nof colored glass in imitation of precious stones. Other important activities in the\nCasino were the fusion of rock crystal, the counterfeiting of precious stones, the\nproduction of fireworks, and the preparation of pharmaceutical remedies. Similar\nactivities were developed in the Uffizi and the Casino, and recipes and personnel\ntravelled between the two places. The only exception was Medici porcelain, which\nwas exclusively produced in the workshops of the Casino.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=136\nPages: 136,137\nfrom the Gospel of Luke recommending to use wine, oil and prayers: \u201cDel modo di medicare con\nvino, olio e orationi. Capitolo 299.\u201d (Apparato, BNCF, Magl. XVI, 63, I, fol. 439, and fol. 247).\nThe Laboratories of Art and Alchemy at the Uffizi Gallery in Renaissance. . .\n115\nsigns of methodical thought following Paracelsian principles; nor any evidence,\neven implicitly, of a sense that the Paracelsian concept was completely overturning\nGalenical medicine. The Swiss scientist\u2019s name was only used to suggest the\nbenefits of the chemical arts and as an authority to legitimise the secrets it was\nused to endorse.22 Besides, unlike the Uffizi, an inventory of the Casino from 1621\nallows us to reconstruct an extensive chemical library in which around 200 titles are\nindexed.23\nSimilarities and Differences Between the Fonderie\nThe general surveyor and \u201cMaestro di fonderia\u201d of the Uffizi was, till 1587, Michele\nGeber, of Flemish origin. He seems to have already been in the service of Cosimo I,]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=142\nPages: 142\nto obtain rare or very expensive substances, such as amber or musk.43 However,\nmost of the raw material came from the Vallombrosa abbey. The monks there grew\nmedicinal plants for the Uffizi and collaborated directly with the fonderia, as was\nthe case for someone called Giovanni di Giuliano da Montereggi, mentioned as a\nerbolaio or herbolista (herbalist) with his assistant Marco di Simone. Both were\npaid on a daily and merchandise basis, and don\u2019t appear in the court roles.44\nThe supply bills coming from Vallombrosa also show which plants are used in\nthe Uffizi and for which purpose.45 We realise that the plant ingredients of certain\nmedicines for the grand duke correspond exactly to the recipes recorded in the\nApparato della Fonderia di Don Antonio, so that our hypothesis of a collaboration\nbetween both fonderie during Ferdinando I\u2019s reign was reinforced. Here, for\nexample, is a supply bill for herbs from the archives:]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=138\nPages: 138\nemployees to prepare distillates or medicines outside the fonderia; even inside the\nfonderia, no medicine could be prepared or used without advice from a doctor or\nauthority from a grand duke; no medicine could be distributed without a written\norder from the surveyor of the fonderia; all orders were to be registered by the\nsurveyor in a copybook.28\nThe Activities in the Fonderia: Between Art and Science\nGlassmaking\nThe art of glassmaking was well represented among the activities in the fonderia at\nthe Uffizi. Ferdinando I was the one who decided to transfer glassmakers and their\nequipment from the Casino to the Uffizi. During Francesco I\u2019s reign the Casino\nhoused a very important artistic glass workshop where the prince worked on his\nown experiments (for example smelting rock crystal).29 This laboratory was lead by\nSisti, who also lead a glassmaking laboratory in Pisa, where he often had to go. In\nhis early career he used the technique a lume di lucerna, but once he transfered to]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=146\nPages: 146\nthe naturalist Ulisse Aldrovandi (1522\u20131605) from Bologna: the naturalist and the\ngrand duke exchanged medicinal herbs and commissioned artists to sketch and\npaint samples to complete their collections of scientific illustrations.\nThe layout of the Uffizi laboratories turned out to be one of the most significant\ninitiatives of Ferdinando I\u2019s reign. A result of the three first grand dukes of\nTuscany\u2019s museographical, cultural and political interests, the Uffizi were first\nexploited as a \u201cmachine\u201d of power under Ferdinando I. Cosimo I started to build\nthe palace containing the 13 magistratures in order to confirm and demonstrate the\nMedici\u2019s capacity to control and organize the State. Francesco I decided to reserve\nthe upper floor for a dynastic gallery and set up the first workshops. Ferdinando I\ntransferred all the workshops from the Casino di San Marco and organized the\nadministration of artistic and scientific activities in order to produce characteristic]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=12\nPages: 12\nfunction as a deposit of recipes and descriptions of techniques. Trained artisans\nwould then be sent out to distribute new processes, new manufactures and inventions. Becher used alchemy to intrigue his patron, who was always interested in the\nwealth promised by metallic transmutation, and to link the worlds of the court and\ncommerce.\nSuch court projects often took inspiration from the two earliest examples of\nspaces bringing together alchemy and the decorative arts at the Medici court in\nFlorence. Two essays in this volume deal with these Florentine workplaces: Fanny\nKieffer discusses the Uffizi, and Marco Beretta the Casino di San Marco. Founded\nin 1586 by Francesco I de\u2019 Medici (1541\u20131587), and developed by his successor,\nFerdinando I (1549\u20131609), the Uffizi housed the fonderia, a workspace for the arts\nof fire. Here medicines were prepared and metals fused. The fonderia was simultaneously a pharmacy, an alchemical laboratory, a smithy, a goldsmith\u2019s workshop,]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=142\nPages: 142,143\n44\nThe Laboratories of Art and Alchemy at the Uffizi Gallery in Renaissance. . .\n121\nthing and put it in fine water for fifteen hours and distil in a well closed glass in bain-marie,\nuse a dose of five ounces each time, half an hour before the fever comes and wave three\ntimes.47\nIf we start from the assumption that the recipes recorded in the Apparato are also\nproduced in the fonderia of the Uffizi, they interest us directly in reference to other\nartistic activities of the Uffizi workshops. For example, in the Apparato, there are\nrecipes for colouring and fabrication of false gems, for arms and gunpowder, others\nfor how to compose enamel or glass work, especially the technique a lume di lucerna:\nTo repair glasses. Chapter 133.\nTake 2 ounces of Saturn glass, 4 ounces of venetian glass, half ounce of borax and put\nthem together in a seal on strong fire, on charcoal, at the first reverberation, and make a]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=146\nPages: 146,147\nsecrecy the most progressive techniques, developed a widely recognizable style for\n55\n56\nSee Galluzzi, \u201cMotivi paracelsiani.\u201d\nTongiorgi Tomasi & Tosi, \u201cFlora e Pomona,\u201d 18\u20139.\nThe Laboratories of Art and Alchemy at the Uffizi Gallery in Renaissance. . .\n125\nworks of art and employed internationally renowned artists. Ferdinando I organized\nthe production like a huge factory. The objects produced were offered or sold\nthroughout Europe, whether they were works of art or medicines from the fonderia.\nThe gifts played a crucial part in diplomatic relations, especially with the Vatican\nand Spain, promoting the magnificence of Tuscan art.\nThe great diffusion of Florentine artworks in the European courts also provoked\nan emulation phenomenon. Rudolf II (1583\u20131612), Francesco Maria II della\nRovere (1549\u20131631) and Maria de Medici (1575\u20131642) were tempted to reproduce\nthe Galleria dei lavori system in their palaces in Prague, in Pesaro and in Paris.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=157\nPages: 157\nGiovanni Maria Butteri\u2019s (1540\u20131606) painting illustrating the glass works (Figs. 3\nand 4).\nAs the design of the Studiolo was carefully planned by Borghini together with\nFrancesco, this disposition almost certainly reflects their views on the role of the\nchemical arts in the reform envisaged by the Grand Duke. Stradano\u2019s painting,\nsigned and dated 1570, depicted Francesco\u2019s alchemical laboratory in Palazzo\nVecchio before it was moved to the Casino.28 The apparatus in the foreground\nshows a distillation still of the type invented by the Florentine physician Taddeo\nAlderotti (1215\u20131295) and described by Vannoccio Biringuccio (1480\u20131539?).29\nesperienze; la composizione dei veleni non fu l\u2019ultima delle sue ricerche, ed ebbe credito in Italia\ndi fabbricare i piu\u0300 violenti. Siccome gli errori e le vanita\u0300 qualche volta conducono alla scoperta di\ncose utili, questa fonderia li rese celebri per l\u2019Europa per i rimedj e medicinali che vi si]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=127\nPages: 127\nmuseums, they were built by Giorgio Vasari to cater for Cosimo I\u2019s public offices,\nand were later partly transformed into a gallery by Francesco I de\u2019 Medici (1541\u2013\n1587). Laboratories of art and alchemy were placed side by side by the Grand\nDukes Francesco I and Ferdinando I de\u2019 Medici (1587\u20131609) to facilitate collaboration between artists and scientists. Goldsmiths, jewellers, cabinetmakers, sculptors, painters, and cutters of semi-precious stones exchanged not only equipment,\nbut also theoretical and technical knowledge with the alchemists who worked in the\nUffizi. The pieces that survive demonstrate that the style of the objects created there\nwas a direct result of this collaboration. Thanks to the combined study of archival\ndocuments and unpublished maps, the artists\u2019 workshops and the alchemists\u2019\nfonderia (foundry) can now be located inside the building. Moreover, thanks to\nan unpublished inventory, we can easily visualise the organisation of the fonderia]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=145\nPages: 145,146\nall the recipes and dosages they have to use. See Lazzi & Gabriele, Alambicchi di parole.\n53\nSee Perifano, Alchimie a\u0300 la Cour.\n54\n\u201cOrdigni, segreti, olii, acque, stillamenti, medicine, rimedi potenti, perche\u0301 a lui con piacer\ngrandissimo quasi allo Dio Esculapio, si ricorreva non pur da quei della citta\u0300, ma da forestieri\neziamdio, e da Principi.\u201d (Targioni, Selve, vol. VI, fol. 178).\n52\n124\nF. Kieffer\ngrand dukes towards the thaumaturgy kings of France or England who they envied,\nwhile more generally promoting of the arts and sciences of Tuscany. But it would\nbe inappropriate to remain fixed on the idea that the production was only for\neconomic ends. Ferdinando I was without a doubt a pragmatic monarch and\nconcerned with efficiency, but he did not neglect the cultural or artistic aspects of\nhis strategy. For example, in Pisa, he relocated his garden and medicinal fonderia in\na more suitable place and added a gallery where he stored part of the Florentine]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=137\nPages: 137\nused, the same persons worked in both institutions. The significant distinguishing\nfeature occurs after the objects produced in the two institutions left the premises.\nAs soon as Ferdinando I came to power, the fonderia of the Uffizi played a very\nimportant part\u2014if not the most important\u2014in the rationalisation and optimisation\nprocess of the production of the court workshops for economic and diplomatic\npurposes. There was a drop in research and experimentation, because the focus was\non production\u2014in some cases almost at an industrial level. This explains the lack of\na medical library and also the non-production of treatises or recipe books\u2014apart\nfrom dosage notebooks to accompany remedies.\n22\nAbout Paracelsianism in Tuscany, see Galluzzi, \u201cMotivi paracelsiani.\u201d\n\u201cInventario di tutto quello che si e\u0300 ritrovato in diverse stanze nel Palazzo detto il Casino\ndell\u2019Illustrissimo et Eccellentissimo Signor Don Antonio Medici alla sua morte seguita il 2 di]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=160\nPages: 160\nMaterial and Temporal Powers at the Casino di San Marco (1574\u20131621)\n139\n1569 when the Studiolo was taking shape.31 This is confirmed by the fact that on the\nright side of the painting, we see material for the construction of a new furnace and\non the left Francesco is examining finished piece of glassware. The size of the glass\nworks is impressive and the entrance shown in the background of the painting with\na couple of distinguished Florentine courtiers or citizens just inside the door opens\nup a glimpse of the Loggiato of the Galleria della Uffizi.32 Between Stradano\u2019s\npainting of the alchemical laboratory and Butteri\u2019s of the glass works, a painting by\nAlessandro Fei (1543\u20131592) depicts a man who seems to be Prince Francesco\nworking on the gem-studded grand ducal crown in the atelier of a goldsmith and\njeweler (Fig. 5). The arrangement of the painting suggests that glassmaking and\njewelry were the arts most closely connected with alchemy. Their connections]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=171\nPages: 171\nand the move of the laboratory, together with the portrait of the Prince, to the\nGalleria degli Uffizi. In 1619, during his stay in Florence, Teodoro Filippo di\nLiagno (c.1587\u20131630), known as Filippo Napoletano, made a painting entitled La\nbottega del alchimista del Casino for the Medici (Fig. 13). 63 As is apparent the\npainting evokes a typical alchemical laboratory and it is difficult to know to what\n60\nWhich is evidenced in the dedicatory epistle of Neri\u2019s, L\u2019arte vetraria.\nLetter published in Barocchi & Bertela\u0300, Collezionismo mediceo, 169. In 1576 the numbers of\nscorpions brought to the Casino was 70,000 (Butters, \u201cPietra eppure non una pietra,\u201d 174).\nFrancesco extracted an oil from the scorpions which he used as an ingredient for the theriaca.\n62\n\u201cFin dai tempi del Granduca Francesco, tutta una fila di stanze terrene del Casino di San Marco,\nera stata destinata alla fonderia dei metalli, che il Granduca aveva riempita di molti utensili, di]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=133\nPages: 133\nsuch administrative rules and restrictions. Neither did their production serve exactly\nthe same purpose: in most cases, other princes ordered art objects or medicines for\ntheir own use and pleasure, for their palace, or for their friends, with no specific\npolitical agenda.9\nThe Fonderia in the Uffizi: Origins and Material\nOrganisation\nIntroduction to the Fonderia\nThe fonderia was made up of a series of rooms on the second floor of the Uffizi. In\nthis period a fonderia was a laboratory for the arts using fire: metal work and\ngoldsmith activities, alchemy, chemistry, and pharmacy (in this period remedies\nwere made by distillation and extraction of essential oils). There was no precise\ndistinction between the disciplines, for example, alchemy, chemistry and pharmacy\nare often simply known as \u2018distillation\u2019. Thanks to the inventories conserved in the\narchives, we can easily visualise the organisation of the laboratories, their equipment, furnishings and tools.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=81\nPages: 81\n58\nA. Bernardoni\nIn the Renaissance technical tradition the bottega (workshop) was a place for\nwork and not yet a space to conduct modern scientific research. Research on\ntechnology and natural phenomena was carried out thanks to the curiosity and the\nfree enterprise of each individual artist; workshop mentality was conservative and\ntechnical knowledge was usually applied to technologically consolidated goals. The\nworkshop was a place to produce specific artistic, technological and pharmacological objects yet it offered artisans the tools and the experiences to venture beyond\nthe \u2018normalized activity\u2019. We know several cases of painters involved in alchemy,\nsuch as Parmigianino (1503\u20131540), Cosimo Rosselli (d.1578), Lorenzo Lotto\n(1480\u20131556/7) and Domenico Beccafumi (1484\u20131551).20 From the latter we have\na series of engravings that represent some aspects of \u2018chem-alchemical\u2019 laboratory\nactivity: heating systems, smelting furnaces, cucurbits, alembics and balanced]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=133\nPages: 133,134\nFirenze e la Toscana, vol. II. Some of those objects conceived by clock-makers and scientific\ninstrument builders can be seen in the exhibition catalogue: Acidini, Magnificenza alla Corte.\n9\nFor more information on the differences and similarities between the Galleria dei lavori and the\nother European court\u2019s workshops, see Kieffer, Ferdinando I de Me\u0301dicis.\n10\n\u201cChe nessuno pratichi in detta Fonderia eccetto nella prima stanza dove si distribuischono li\nmedicamenti.\u201d (ASF, GM 403, ins. 2, fol. 120).\n11\nThe \u201cterraces\u201d mentioned in the inventory don\u2019t exist anymore, but we can deduce from the\narchival sources they were little open rooms made of wood.\n112\nF. Kieffer\nfollowed by a huge distillation laboratory including an ordigno (machine) to distil\nacquavite composed of 60 glass balls, a bain-marie, pallets full of glass pots of all\nkind and a pierced bench to place the separatoie (separators). The following room]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=144\nPages: 144,145\ngrossi guarniti con rosette d\u2019oro smaltate di bianco, e n. 24 bottoni tondi mezzani guarniti con\nrosette smaltate, e n. 12 mane in fede con moretti tramezzati con perle tonde, che sono n. 48 perle\ngrosse e n. 22 perle simile, attaccate a moretti che sono delle compere prima, et delle seconde\ncompere ultimamente, che si disse esservi oncie 3 fra musco et ambra, et il resto e il peso dell\u2019oro e\ndelle perle peso tutto oncie 10.8.0/2. Dato adi 22 di gennaio 1593 [1594].\u201d (ASF, GM 185, ins.\n4, fol. 327\u2013327\u2019).\nThe Laboratories of Art and Alchemy at the Uffizi Gallery in Renaissance. . .\n123\nThese boxes, manufactured in great number with their respective dosage booklets\u2014edited by Giorgio Marescotti\u2014were widely distributed all over Europe on\nevery occasion, and had an important artistic and pecuniary value, according to the\nvalue of the remedies in them and above all for whom they were intended. In short,\nthey represent a concentration of the know how of the court workshops and their]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=157\nPages: 157\nthe chemical arts was visually displayed in the series of paintings hanging in the\nStudiolo of Palazzo Vecchio, a small dark room decorated with a complex iconographic narrative. Designed for the then Prince Francesco by Vincenzo Borghini\n(1515\u20131580) and Giorgio Vasari (1511\u20131574), its cabinets seem to have included\nsome of the most valuable treasures produced in the fonderia. In addition to all sorts\nof precious stones, glass and porcelain, they carefully stored the rarest natural\nspecimens and the products of alchemical experiments.26 The meaning of this\nroom and its intimate connection with Francesco I\u2019s interest in alchemy, has been\ndiscussed by many, and most recently reconstructed in the comprehensive work by\nValentina Conticelli. Thirty-two artists were employed and coordinated by Vasari\nto accomplish the work. Benvenuto Cellini (1500\u20131571), who shared with his\npatron a keen interest in alchemy, was meant to have taken part\u2014but his premature]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=145\nPages: 145\nthey represent a concentration of the know how of the court workshops and their\ndistribution was a good way to promote Tuscan art. Finally, because their efficacy\nwas widely accepted and praised, they were an excellent means for Ferdinando I to\ncreate a regular, dependant and indebted clientele.\nAs a result, the fonderia played a double role: it manufactured finished products\n(the remedies) to be distributed and it produced raw materials for the other\nworkshops of the Uffizi. This second part was very important for Ferdinando I\u2019s\nproject, because the workshops were arranged so that they could collaborate, one\nwith the other, avoiding the need to bring expensive and indubitably less well\nadapted materials from outside.\n\u201cFor knowledge itself was a power whereby he knoweth.\u201d51 The Medici always\nconsidered knowledge the key to power in politics. The Grand Duke Cosimo I had]"]}

{"result":["[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=47\nPages: 47\nfraught with difficulty. Alchemy can be defined as the \u2018art of transmutation\u2019,\nreferring to the perfection of base or impure matter (often metal or stone) into\nperfect substances. Alchemical procedures thus rely on artisanal/craft practices.\nAny overlap between alchemy and art-technological procedures can be explained\nby the use of identical materials and substances. Both are concerned with the\ndescription of colours\u2014especially in processes of change, the making of pigments,\nthe production of artificial gemstones, the imitation of gold and silver and the\ntransmutation of materials. Both require procedures involving precise and specifically defined actions, prescriptions and ingredients. So both ultimately use identical\nrhetorical formulations that reflect a \u2018step by step\u2019 procedure. Assuming that\nalchemical and artistic texts have the same textual format, raises the question: did\nthey also have the same types of production and dissemination? Using a corpus of]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=48\nPages: 48\ndisciplines may lead to association, contamination and confusion within this textual\ngenre. It finally suggests some clues to help locate, distinguish and demarcate\nalchemical content within the literature of recipes.\nArt and Alchemy Within Recipe Books\nAt first sight, any overlap between alchemy and art-technology within recipe books\ncan be broadly explained by the mutual use of various materials and substances\nsuch as \u201ccommon stones, gems, and types of marble, gold and other metals, sulfurs,\nsalts, and inks, azures, minium, and other colors, oils and burning pitches, and\ncountless other things.\u201d2 More precisely, the field of art-technology encompasses a\nlarge range of craft practices involved in the production of pieces of art (including\nthose which incorporate such substances). This \u2018hand\u2019 knowledge, is related to the\nmechanical arts and is divorced from the philosophical or speculative dimension.\nYet, alchemy could be described as the practical, philosophical and medical search]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=77\nPages: 77\nAgricola talked about a generic art of metal as a separate activity from alchemy:\n\u201cBut concerning the art of alchemy, if it be an art, I will speak further elsewhere. I\nwill now return to the art of mining.\u201d7\nWhen talking about chemistry in the Renaissance we have to consider a variegated tradition of non-mechanical arts where chemical processes developed: pharmacy, metallurgy, glass making, dyeing, spirits distillation, agriculture cultivations\nand the preparation of colours for painting and drawing; each of these professional\nactivities involve chemical processes that are not necessarily involved in alchemical transmutation. The difference between the purpose of chemical arts and\nalchemy was also the cause of cultural and epistemological tension during the\nMiddle Ages and Renaissance. The medieval technological debate during the\nfifteenth and sixteenth centuries went beyond the traditional Quaestio de alchimia]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=160\nPages: 160\njewelry were the arts most closely connected with alchemy. Their connections\ninspired Francesco to create a new decorative scenario, dominated by alchemy,\nby which illustrate the relation between arts and nature.\nFrancesco was extremely keen, even more than his father, to promote the study\nof the natural sciences and the arts related to them. His passion for the chemical arts\nwas so strong that in 1560, when he was only 19, he was told off by his brother\nGiovanni for attending the works of the fonderia all day long.33 It was Francesco\nwho, in September 1569, charged the architect, engineer and inventor Bernardo\nBuontalenti (1531\u20131608), who had been one of his teachers since 1550, to oversee\nthe construction of Bortolo\u2019s new glass furnace and a new fonderia.34 Francesco I\nalso exploited Buontalenti\u2019s versatile skills in the works of the fusion of precious]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=92\nPages: 92\nremained to Biringuccio the most important \u201cart\u201d for studying the secrets of nature:\nThus, in short, it can be said in conclusion that this art [alchemy] is the origin and\nfoundation of many other arts, wherefore it should be held in reverence and practiced.\nBut he who practices it must be ignorant neither of cause nor of natural effects, and not too\npoor to support the expense. Neither should he do it from avarice, but only in order to enjoy\nthe fine fruits of its effects and the knowledge of them, and that pleasing novelty which it\nshows to the experimenter in operation.42\nBiringuccio considered alchemy a legitimate knowledge grounded on experimental and speculative activity. This is an important epistemological step for\nartisanal processes because alchemy was no longer seen as a utilitarian art but as\na disinterested activity carried out by men to enjoy the fruits of their knowledge.\n41\nBiringuccio, Pirotechnia (1942), 41. For the Italian, see Biringuccio, De la pirotechnia (1977),]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=204\nPages: 204\nhands. At the time of Biringuccio\u2019s writing, the potter\u2019s art was on the threshold of a\nparadigm shift that would create a marked division between craft knowledge and\ntheory based practice, setting two separate courses for ceramic innovation in the\nlater sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. His citation of alchemy as one of \u201ctwo\nsources as [pottery\u2019s] principal basis,\u201d is referential to the provision of purified\nminerals and \u201celemental mixtures.\u201d5 However, it also foreshadowed the intellectual\nengagement of chymists in the quest for the production of European porcelain,\nbringing the weight of the older alchemical tradition to bear.\nPrior to the fourteenth century, European pottery was external to the hierarchy of\nthe esteemed arts, such as metallurgy, glassmaking, painting, and dyeing. The\nextensively copied treatise De diversis artibus, composed in the thirteenth century\nby the Benedictine monk Theophilus, thoroughly introduces the full range of]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=13\nPages: 13\nusing materials and chemical procedures to make both everyday items and objects\nof the visual and decorative arts, the activity known as alchemy encompassed more\nthan attempts to make gold.14 Transmutational alchemy was about the transmutation of all base metals into more noble ones, but chrysopoeia was only one\naspect of alchemy. Alchemy also touched on medicine and chemical manufacture.\nIt was about the chemical production of things\u2014medicines, porcelain, dyes, and\nother products as well as the precious metals\u2014and about the knowledge of how to\nproduce them. In this sense, \u201cart technologies\u201d\u2014materials and techniques to make\nart and knowledge of these materials and techniques\u2014overlapped with alchemy.\nAlchemy has deep roots in writings on material transformation from Antiquity.\nThe productive knowledge associated with material transformation was written\ndown in recipe books. The Leiden and Stockholm Papyri date to the third century]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=79\nPages: 79\nthe field of \u2018science and technology of matter\u2019.\nIf we focus our attention on all the artisanal processes of substance transformation known and practiced during the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries it is easy to\nshow that they do not fit perfectly within the domain traced by alchemy. This\nepistemological tension is usually neutralized by saying that alchemical and metallurgical disciplines are intricately interwoven and alchemists were involved in the\ndevelopment of metallurgy.11 If one supposes chemistry did not exist as an independent and autonomous discipline before the end of the seventeenth century then\nspeaking on this topic from a historical perspective in an Italian technical cultural\ncontext, some \u2018superior artisans\u2019 or \u2018artist-engineers\u2019 can be seen as having distanced themselves from alchemy by relocating its technology inside a new epistemological context in which chemical arts were developed and codified separately.12]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=48\nPages: 48,49\nof Alchemy.\u201d\n4\nHalleux, \u201cAlchimie,\u201d 336\u20137; Newman, \u201cTechnology and Alchemical Debate,\u201d 432\u20133; Pereira,\n\u201cUse of Vernacular Languages,\u201d 336; and Kahn, Alchimie et paracelsisme, 7\u20138.\n5\nHalleux, Savoir de la main, 134.\n2\nTransmission of Alchemical and Artistic Knowledge in German Mediaeval and. . .\n25\nof base or impure matter (often metal or stone) into a noble or perfect one.6 To do\nso, alchemists used to perform chemical processes and manipulations which resembled those practiced by contemporary artists and artisans.\nThus, in both fields particular importance is placed on craft practices. Both\nalchemical and artistic recipe books describe various processes for purifying and\ntransforming materials, either for improving their properties or in order to use them\nfor specific purposes. In this context, from a technological point of view, the term\n\u2018transmutation\u2019 could refer to the colouring of glass, the melting and tinting of]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=82\nPages: 82\nattention was specifically focused on alchemy\u2019s claims to overturn the relationship\nbetween art and nature; however, he also stressed that alchemy was worthy of\npursuit as it might produce knowledge that could improve the condition of\nmankind:\nMan is involved with things produced by nature and nature does not change the ordinary\nkinds of things it creates in the same way that from time to time the things created by man\nare changed; and indeed man is nature\u2019s chief instrument, because nature is concerned only\nwith the production of elementary things, but from these elementary things man produces\nan infinite number of compounds, although he has no power to create any natural things\nexcept another like himself, that is his children. [. . .] And of this the old alchemists will\nserve as my witnesses, who have never either by chance or deliberate experiment succeeded\nin creating the smallest thing which can be created by nature; [. . .] If, however, insensate]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=14\nPages: 14\nas strictly goldmaking and a more encompassing definition overlapping with art\ntechnology was crucial to the polemics of artists and alchemists and the rivalry\nbetween alchemy and the arts.16 Given the contested nature of the field of inquiry,\nit follows that the identity of the alchemist was equally contested and complex. In\nthe early modern period the alchemist was often portrayed as a fraud. The portrayals\nof laboratory scenes building on Brueghel became a genre of its own in the\nNetherlands.17 In these scenes, the alchemist is a goldmaker searching in vain for\nthe Philosophers\u2019 Stone and riches. As Tara Nummedal has convincingly shown,\nthe portrayal of the alchemist as a fraud also created the opportunity for other\nalchemists to fashion themselves in the role of experts, offering their services to\ncourts and other patrons to help them unmask fraudulent alchemists.18 Alchemical\nexpertise was based on a broader knowledge of matter and materials.\n15]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=14\nPages: 14\nconcern with the same materials and artisanal processes. The focus on chromatic\ntransformation already found in the Papyri continues in fifteenth-century recipes.\nAlthough related to laboratory practices, Neven emphasizes that these recipe\ncollections are the products of scribal compilation and copying processes. Words\nand works are equally important elements of alchemical practices.15 Next to\nlaboratories, medieval religious institutions were also important sites of alchemical\nand art technological practice. However, as Neven points out, this does not exclude\nthat some scribes, such as the Benedictine monk Wolfgang Seidel (1491\u20131562),\ntried out recipes.\nThe scope of alchemy was from its very beginnings contested, and remained so\nthroughout its long history. Especially its boundaries with art technology were fluid.\nThroughout the Middle Ages and the Renaissance, the distinction between alchemy\nas strictly goldmaking and a more encompassing definition overlapping with art]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=157\nPages: 157\npatron a keen interest in alchemy, was meant to have taken part\u2014but his premature\ndeath prevented his involvement. In the Studiolo the connection between alchemy\nand the chemical arts was exalted. The iconographic itinerary conceived by\nBorghini was situated in a sequence on the upper part of the wall where paintings\ndevoted to thermal baths, the discovery of gun powder, a glass works, a goldsmith\u2019s\nworkshop, alchemists and a bronze foundry were located; at the room\u2019s two ends\nwere two statues, portraying Vulcan and Apollo. On the lower part of the wall a\nmythological scene recalled Francesco I\u2019s alchemical and artistic interests.27 I\nwould like to stress the importance of a few elements directly or indirectly related\nto the chemical arts. What first strikes you in this particular arrangement is the\nproximity of Stradano\u2019s famous painting of Francesco I\u2019s alchemical laboratory and\nGiovanni Maria Butteri\u2019s (1540\u20131606) painting illustrating the glass works (Figs. 3\nand 4).]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=180\nPages: 180\nclearly aware of the figure of the alchemist and his iconic value.6 Likewise, the\nallegorical images of widely varying artistic quality in chymical books and manuscripts imply some sort of contact between author/practitioner and artist. Yet such\nartworks do not necessarily indicate that the artists were actually in direct and\nmeaningful contact with chymists. On a purely commercial level, artists would\nhave been in contact (possibly directly in some instances, but probably more\nfrequently indirectly through a retailer) with makers of chymically-prepared pigments such as vermilion or white lead, just as metalworkers and assayers would\nhave connected with producers of mineral acids, fabric-makers with dye manufacturers, and so forth. Yet none of these contacts tells us anything about possible\nepistemic exchanges or collaborations on the level of practical or theoretical\nknowledge.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=200\nPages: 200,199\nApproaches and Divergent Deployments. In Rethinking the Scientific Revolution,\ned. Margaret J. Osler, 201\u2013220. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.\nPrincipe, Lawrence M. 2013a. The Secrets of Alchemy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.\nGoldsmiths and Chymists: The Activity of Artisans Within Alchemical Circles\n179\nPrincipe, Lawrence M. 2013b. Sir Kenelm Digby and His Alchemical Circle in 1650s Paris: Newly\nDiscovered Manuscripts. Ambix 60: 3\u201324.\nPrincipe, Lawrence M., and Lloyd DeWitt. 2002. Transmutations: Alchemy in Art. Philadelphia:\nChemical Heritage Foundation.\nSmith, Pamela H. 2000. Vital Spirits: Redemption, Artisanship, and the New Philosophy in Early\nModern Europe. In Rethinking the Scientific Revolution, ed. Margaret J. Osler, 119\u2013135.\nCambridge: Cambridge University Press.\nSmith, Pamela H. 2004. The Body of the Artisan: Art and Experience in the Scientific Revolution.\nChicago: University of Chicago Press.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=92\nPages: 92\nthe spirits inadvertently allowed to escape; and yet another because he had poor and feeble\nmaterials! In a word, one for one reason, and one for another, in order to hide either their\ndeception or their ignorance, all defend themselves and make excuses for their art.41\nMoreover, after marking his distance from false and sophistic alchemy,\nBiringuccio returned to what he called \u201ctrue alchemy\u201d with very positive opinions,\ntalking about it as a philosophical and technological activity grounded on reason\nand empirical experimentation which, even when following the illusory goal of\nmetal transmutation or the perfective and healthy elixir, discovered new substances,\nmedicine and technological processes. After a rational and empirical codification of\nthe chemical process and substance discovered and prepared by it, true alchemy\nremained to Biringuccio the most important \u201cart\u201d for studying the secrets of nature:]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=156\nPages: 156\nIn this process of reconfiguring Florentine arts and crafts, alchemy played an\nexceedingly important role, both as a fashionable scientific discipline with not\nparticularly strong academic ties and as a useful set of experimental practices in\nwhich several crafts helped artisans quench their thirst for innovation and realize\ntheir socio-cultural ambitions. I shall not explore here the spread of interest in\nalchemy in Florence at beginning of the sixteenth century, a theme already effectively surveyed in Alfredo Perifano\u2019s book on Cosimo I\u2019s alchemical passion.24\nI shall instead take into consideration the development of alchemy in the Palazzo\nVecchio\u2019s fonderia and the Casino, sites where its relation with the chemical arts\nand technological innovations became apparent. Indeed, it is my impression that if\nwe want to understand the metamorphosis of the sciences in Florence during this\ncrucial period we should look at disciplines, such as alchemy, which had few]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=62\nPages: 62,63\n153r\u2013157v, 160r\u2013163r.\nTransmission of Alchemical and Artistic Knowledge in German Mediaeval and. . .\n39\nNationalmuseum Ms. 5078b (fol. 2r\u201341r), the scribe moves from one subject to\nanother with no indication that the subject has changed. Moreover, this set of\nalchemical and art-technological recipes is followed with no clear distinction\n(no title, nor blank space) by a series of medical prescriptions due to the same hand.\nIn another case\u2014isolated (groups of) alchemical recipes found in the middle of\nprescriptions of another type\u2014detection of alchemical content and distinction from\nartistic instructions within recipe books can be fraught with difficulty. Similarities in\nterms of their textual format probably lead scribes to group them with other sort of\nprescriptions. When found as isolated elements, alchemical and art technological\nrecipes usually appear within a large broad of various (and unrelated) writings.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=26\nPages: 26,27\n2\nThe Alchemical Art of Dyeing: The Fourfold Division of Alchemy. . .\n3\nThe passage comes after a long introduction (\u00a7\u00a7 1\u20134) in which Psellos rhetorically\ndiscusses the philosophical framework within which chrysopoeia is to be understood and assessed. At the very beginning (\u00a7 1, ll. 5f.) the scholar identifies the main\ntopic of his letter with \u1f21 \u1f10\u03bc\u03c0\u03cd\u03c1\u03b9\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b5\u0002\u03c7\u03bd\u03b7 (the art of fire), whose first aim is said to be\nthe transformation of lead, tin, and any other metal into gold (\u00a7 1, ll. 12\u201315). The\nkey concept of transformation is framed and expanded in the following paragraphs\n(\u00a7\u00a7 2\u20134), where Psellos tries to set the basic principles guiding his \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u2019\u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03ae\u03bc\u03b7\u03c2\n(scientific) explanation of this art. He insists on the four elements that compose the\nphysical world, on their reciprocal changes, and on the alterations of the four\nqualities (namely wet, dry, hot, and cold). These changes are explained through]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=48\nPages: 48\nYet, alchemy could be described as the practical, philosophical and medical search\nfor the perfecting of base material substances and also for the extending of life.3\nThe theoretical and practical aspects of alchemy involve both the study of all\ninanimate or animate things made from the elements and the observation and\nimitation of natural processes within the laboratory.4 In this context, alchemy\ncould be seen as a mechanical art, in the sense that it works on matter but is also\na liberal art, as it attempts to explain matter in its composition and its transformation.5 In the practical sense, one of the main goals of alchemy is the transmutation\n1\nThe main data and characteristics of these manuscripts are given in Appendix.\nBrewer, Fr. Rogeri Bacon, 39\u201340.\n3\nPerception and definition of alchemy is not chronologically constant and has been the subject of\nseveral (re)interpretations since the eighteenth century, see Principe & Newman, \u201cHistoriography\nof Alchemy.\u201d\n4]"]}

{"result":["[Summary from page 160 to page 182 out of a total of 220:\nPages 160:\nMaterial and Temporal Powers at the Casino di San Marco (1574\u20131621)\n139\n1569 when the Studiolo was taking shape.31 This is confirmed by the fact that on the\nright side of the painting, we see material for the construction of a new furnace and\non the left Francesco is examining finished piece of glassware. The size of the glass\nworks is impressive and the entrance shown in the background of the painting with\na couple of distinguished Florentine courtiers or citizens just inside the door opens\nup a glimpse of the Loggiato of the Galleria della Uffizi.32 Between Stradano\u2019s\npainting of the alchemical laboratory and Butteri\u2019s of the glass works, a painting by\nAlessandro Fei (1543\u20131592) depicts a man who seems to be Prince Francesco\nworking on the gem-studded grand ducal crown in the atelier of a goldsmith and\njeweler (Fig. 5). The arrangement of the painting suggests that glassmaking and\njewelry were the arts most closely connected with alchemy. Their connections\ninspired Francesco to create a new decorative scenario, dominated by alchemy,\nby which illustrate the relation between arts and nature.\nFrancesco was extremely keen, even more than his father, to promote the study\nof the natural sciences and the arts related to them. His passion for the chemical arts\nwas so strong that in 1560, when he was only 19, he was told off by his brother\nGiovanni for attending the works of the fonderia all day long.33 It was Francesco\nwho, in September 1569, charged the architect, engineer and inventor Bernardo\nBuontalenti (1531\u20131608), who had been one of his teachers since 1550, to oversee\nthe construction of Bortolo\u2019s new glass furnace and a new fonderia.34 Francesco I\nalso exploited Buontalenti\u2019s versatile skills in the works of the fusion of precious\nstones and, in particular of rock crystal. Francesco\u2019s project to enhance his multifaceted interest in the alchemical and chemical arts found a new, imposing site with\nthe construction of the Casino di San Marco (1567\u20131574), a sumptuous palace\ndesigned by Buontalenti (Fig. 6).35 Across the street from the Convent of San\n31\nAs pointed out by Heikamp. Studien, 63\u20139.\nAt the time the ground floor of the Uffizi was already completed. I thank Suzy Butters for\nproviding me with this information.\n33\n\u201cGuardi di non si profonder troppo nel piacer della Fonderia, che qua vien detto, che ella non\nesce mai et massimamente il giorno; talche\u0301 al ritorno nostro speriamo di veder qualche nuova e\nbella invenzione,\u201d cited in Berti, Principe dello Studiolo, 28. Berti (p. 51) rightly believes that the\nfonderia was that of Francesco\u2019s father in the Palazzo Vecchio.\n34\n\u201co\u0300 trovato M. Bortello, et li o\u0300 provisto tuti e matoni fra il giardino e a l\u2019artiglieria, tanti che non a\u0300\npiu\u0300 di bisogno: la fornace e\u0300 a buono porto; et m\u2019a deto che vorrebe che vostra E.I. li facesi paghare\nqualche danari per potere dare a\u2019 maestri che a\u0300 menati, che ne vorebano mandare a le loro famiglie\n[. . .],\u201d letter by Buontalenti to Francesco dated 20 Sep, 1569, cited in Heikamp, Studien, 344.\n35\nOn early works on the building see the documents published by Butters, \u201cPietra eppure non una\npietra,\u201d 178, 184. The first contemporary description of the building, dating 1591, is that by Bocchi,\nLe bellezze della citta\u0300 di Firenze, 8\u20139: \u201cCasino, edificato dal Granduca Francesco. Sono in questo\npalazzo stanze divisate con mirabil arte, in tanto numero, che dentro ogni gran Principe habitar\npuote adagiato comodamente: ci e\u0300 una Guardaroba piena di ricchi arnesi, come quadri di preziosi\nmarmi, tavole di diaspri, panni tessuti con singular lavoro, e un letto insino dell\u2019Indie portato a noi\ndi valuta, e di artifizio grandissimo. Il disegno di questo palazzo e\u0300 di Bernardo Buontalenti, huomo\ndi peregrino ingegno e raro, come si vede nelle finestre, che sono leggiadre, nelle camere, che sono\nartifiziose, ma quella che e\u0300 principale in su la strada e\u0300 bella a maraviglia.\u201d On the Casino, see\nCovoni, Buontalenti ai tempi Medicei; and Fara, Bernardo Buontalenti, 156\u201365.\n32\n\nPages 161:\n140\nM. Beretta\nFig. 5 Francesco I (right) working with his father\u2019s crown. Alessandro Fei (Courtesy of Museo di\nPalazzo Vecchio, Florence)\nMarco, a complex built in 1442 by the architect Michelozzo Michelozzi (1396\u2013\n1472) under the patronage of Cosimo il Vecchio (1389\u20131464), the Casino\nencompassed the Orti medicei, a symbolic place commissioned by Lorenzo il\nMagnifico (1449\u20131492) to host the excellence of Florence\u2019s fine arts (Fig. 7). As\nearly as 1574, when Francesco I inherited the Orti from his father he used the\nexisting building as an officina di esperimenti chimici e fisici, thus introducing a\n\nPages 162:\nMaterial and Temporal Powers at the Casino di San Marco (1574\u20131621)\n141\nFig. 6 The Casino di San Marco (Courtesy of Museo Galileo, Florence)\nFig. 7 The Casino di San Marco and the Orti Medicei in a detail of Buonsignori\u2019s Nova\npulcherrimae civitatis Florentiae topographia accuratissime delineata (1584). Private collection\nnew hierarchy of the arts.36 The Casino incorporated the old buildings into a new\nand unusual one, which is particularly evident in the bizarre architectural decoration of the windows (Fig. 8). The building, now a tribunal, has been restructured so\n36\nCovoni, Buontalenti ai tempi Medicei, 12.\n\nPages 163:\n142\nM. Beretta\nFig. 8 Detail of Buontalenti\u2019s window of the Casino di San Marco\nFig. 9 Plan of the first floor of the Casino di San Marco published by Covoni in 1892b\nmany times that it has progressively lost its original design. As far as I know, no\nsixteenth-century drawings or engravings of the original disposition of the residential rooms and the workshops survive today. Pierfilippo Covoni found a plan of the\nfirst floor of the building post-dating the death of Francesco\u2019s son Don Antonio de\u2019\nMedici (1576\u20131621). Since we know that Don Antonio restructured the building in\n1594 we should be cautious about putting too much weight on this document\n(Fig. 9). At the beginning of the seventeenth century the fonderia occupied a row\nof first floor rooms; in Don Antonio\u2019s day, these were preceded by a library, to\nwhich I will return when describing Don Antonio\u2019s activities. We certainly know\nthat in Francesco\u2019s Casino there existed a glass works, an alchemical laboratory and\na furnace for producing porcelain: painters, goldsmiths and gem carvers were also\nactive in the Casino but it is not clear where exactly their workshops were sited, and\n\nPages 164:\nMaterial and Temporal Powers at the Casino di San Marco (1574\u20131621)\n143\nhow they related one to another. On the basis of the evidence available it seems that\nBuontalenti and Francesco carefully planned the disposition of the arts, putting the\nchemical ones at the top of their concerns. In addition to these workshops,\nFrancesco displayed some of his spectacular collections of paintings, sculptures,\ncoins, gems, naturalia and mirabilia in several of the Casino\u2019s rooms and the\nfountain with Giambologna\u2019s sculpture in its garden. If the arrangement of their\ndisplay is not precisely known, we have several contemporary descriptions which\nhelp to provide us with a relatively good picture of what was going on within the\nwalls of the Casino. For example, we have several documents reporting on the\nsalaries of the artists and alchemists employed by Francesco at the Casino.37 In\naddition to Buontalenti, who coordinated the activities of the various laboratories,\nthe salaried artisans of the Casino in 1580 included the following 18:\n\u2018Tanai de\u2019 Medici proveditore de\u2019 tapezieri scudi 4 [tapestry]\nMaestro Antonio portoghese tappeziere, scudi 10 [tapestry]\nIeremia Foresti fonditore, scudi 12 [metal worker]\nNiccolo\u0300 di mastro Sisto, scudi 5 [Medici \u2018porcelain\u2019, glass, alchemy]\nFilippo della Serena mastro de vetri, scudi 12 [glass]\nGiovanni Ambrogio milanese, scudi 20 [silver and rock crystal]\nStefano milanese, scudi 20 [silver and rock crystal]\nGiuseppe che lavora con li duoi milanesi, scudi 6 [silver and rock crystal]\nPier Maria detto il Faenzino, scudi 10 [Medici \u2018porcelain\u2019 and majolica]\nGiuseppo da Campo stovigliaio, scudi 7 [Medici \u2018porcelain\u2019 and majolica]\nGiuseppe Marchesi vineziano, scudi 30 [ruby maker and carver]\nGiorgio milanese intagliatore di cammei, scudi 25 [carver of cameos]\nCristofano figliuolo del suddetto Giorgio, per il primo luglio 1578, scudi 16 [carver of\ncameos]\nIacopo Ligozza veronese, scudi 25 [painter and illustrator]\nMesser Giovanni Battista Framberti mantovano, per il primo di agosto 1579, scudi\n35 [alchemist]\nMesser Ardicino Castelletti, per il primo di agosto 1579, scudi 35 [alchemist]\nMesser Niccolino Merli, per il primo di agosto 1579, scudi 20 [alchemist?]\nMaestro Buonaventura Rocchigiani, scudi dugento l\u2019anno, cominciati il d\u0131\u0300 primo di\nfebbraio 1579, scudi 16.4.13.4.38\nImportant as it is, this document is not comprehensive because in other periods\nFrancesco I relied on at least three masters for glassmaking: Bortolo from Murano,\nNiccolo\u0300 Sisti from Norcia (supervisor of the fonderia) and Buontalenti. Furthermore, he employed the Milanese goldsmiths Giorgio Gaffuri, Ambrogio and\nStefano Carono to produce luxury rock crystal vases, the Venetian carvers\nSalvatore Pocatena, Lorenzo Capogrossi and Giuseppe Marchesi to work on precious stones, the Dutch goldsmith Jacques Bylivelt (1550\u20131603), several alchemists\nsuch as the archbishop Antonio Altoviti (1521\u20131573), Giovan Battista Framberti,\n37\nSee, for instance, the correspondence published by Conticelli, \u201cLo Studiolo di Francesco I.\u201d\nStipendiati del Casino San Marco (1580) (Archivio di Stato di Firenze, Mediceo del Principato\n616, ins. 20, fol. 377) published in Barocchi & Bertela\u0300, Collezionismo mediceo, doc. 178, 163\u20134. It\nis interesting to note that after becoming Grand Duke, Ferdinando changed his brother\u2019s policy\nand, with the exception of Giambologna, he fired most of the alchemists and made efforts to\nuniform the salaries of the artisans employed by the court.\n38\n\nPages 165:\n144\nM. Beretta\nArdicino Castelletti, Nicolino Merli, Ettore Barbisoni, Sebastiano Manzoni, sculptors such as Giambologna (1529\u20131608) and Cellini, scientific illustrators such a\nJacopo Ligozzi (1547\u20131627), and many painters who, as we have already seen, had\nbeen coordinated by Borghini and Vasari in the realization of the Studiolo and who\neventually continued to work in the Casino.39 In 1580, one of the grand duke\u2019s\nalchemists at the Casino reported that he had 12 large furnaces at work, including\none distilling vinegar.40\nIn 1576 the Venetian Ambassador in Florence, Andrea Gussoni (1546\u20131615)\nreported, with a sense of wonder, the grand duke\u2019s dedication to the chemical arts:\namong the inventions attributed to the Grand Duke Gussoni listed the production\nof soft paste porcelain, fusing rock crystal (which was attributed by Vasari to\nBuontalenti), counterfeiting precious stones (especially emeralds), carving precious\nstones, preparing several pharmaceutical remedies for distribution to both the\nFlorentine people and foreign rulers, producing fireworks (again developed by\nBuontalenti) and a new method for the multiplication of saltpeter. In addition to\nthese activities, which absorbed much of his time, Francesco was portrayed by\nGussoni as a connoisseur and collector of paintings, sculptures, miniatures, cameos,\nmedals and all sorts of antiquities, of the types displayed in the Casino.41\nGussoni also reported that Francesco not only employed several skilled artisans\nat the Casino, but that he also personally performed all sorts of chemical experiments, especially those concerned with glassmaking. Ulisse Aldrovandi\u2019s (1522\u2013\n1605) travel diary, dated 1577, also reports on Francesco I\u2019s experimental practices.\nAfter having studied natural history in Luca Ghini\u2019s (1490\u20131556) botanical garden\nin Pisa, Aldrovandi became one of the most distinguished late Renaissance Italian\nantiquarians and naturalists and from the late 1560s on, he enjoyed the patronage\nand friendship of Francesco I, with whom he shared, among other things, an interest\nin scientific illustration. During his visit in Florence in the spring of 1577,\nAldrovandi described in some details the collection displayed at the Casino,\namong which he noted an emerald vase, made of colored glass and rock crystal,\nand other precious stones.42 From Aldrovandi\u2019s account we learn that Francesco\u2019s\ndelight in rock crystal and precious stones was shared by many other Florentine\ncollectors, such as the apothecaries Gori Bamberini and Stefano Rosselli, and\nlearned men such as Niccolo\u0300 Gaddi (1537\u20131591), Anton Maria Salviati (1537\u2013\n1602), Giorgio Soderini and Francesco Malocchi. Moreover, Aldrovandi gives us a\nlong list of alchemical books for sale in the workshop of the main Florentine\n39\nFor Francesco\u2019s patronage of philosophy literature and, more generally, the academic world see\nBerti, Principe dello Studiolo, 43 ff.\n40\n\u201cTutti i dodeci forni grandi ritrovandosi in lavoro che danno quarantotto vasi et altri sei di rame,\nche stillano l\u2019ultimo accetto, che riportassi da parte conforme al buon volere di Vostra Altezza,\u201d\nletter by Giovanni Battista Franberti to Francesco I (24/08/1580), published in Conticelli, \u201cLo\nStudiolo di Francesco I,\u201d 242.\n41\nAlbe\u0300ri, Relazioni degli ambasciatori veneti, 376\u201389.\n42\nAldrovandi, \u201cItinerarium seu rerum in itinere Florentino, Romano et Tyburtino collectarum\ncatalogus,\u201d in Tosi, Ulisse Aldrovandi, 213.\n\nPages 166:\nMaterial and Temporal Powers at the Casino di San Marco (1574\u20131621)\n145\ntypographer Giunti, which testifies to their local popularity. In a letter addressed to\nthe Grand Duke dated September 1577, Aldrovandi recalls the Casino as a casa di\nnatura where miraculous experiments were performed. He mentions Francesco\u2019s\n\u2018porcelain\u2019 vases, which exceeded in beauty and value the Emperor Nero\u2019s vasa\nmuhrrina mentioned in Pliny\u2019s Natural History, the fusion of rock crystal which led\nto the production of most beautiful artifacts, the secret of making steel tools hard\nenough to temper porphyry and lapis lazuli, as well as many prestantissimi\nsecreti.43 In the Casino Francesco also collected books and manuscripts related\nto secrets. Among them we find numerous recipe books, many from Venice,\ncontaining instructions for the production of counterfeit precious stones, crystal\nglass and all sorts of remedies, including many alchemical.44 For nearly a decade\nthe Casino was certainly among the most important buildings in Medici Florence.45\nFrancesco used his palace both as a place where he could promote technical\ninnovations in the arts and, after he became Grand Duke in 1574, as a focal point\nfor Medici political power, a place where he received ambassadors, aristocrats and\nintellectuals. In addition to those already mentioned, Cardinale Luigi d\u2019Este\n(13 June 1581); the Archduke Massimiliano (18 November 1581), the Nuncio of\nSpain, Monsignor Taverna (16 October 1586) were most impressed by the building\nand its novel arrangements.\nGuests to the Casino, whatever the reason for their visit, were introduced to the\nworkshops\u2019 most luxurious and innovative products, and to the grand duke\u2019s\ncollections. Indeed, the Casino was a uniquely hybrid site in which politics, science\nand the arts were all part of a synergetic strategy, a strategy which struck the visitors\nwith a sense of surprise and wonder. Not even in Rudolph II\u2019s Prague was a\nconnection like this so explicitly embodied in one site.46 While Cosimo I kept\npolitics and his alchemical interests separate, Francesco united them in the Casino.\nIncidentally it is worth noting that because of this unusual combination, Francesco\nwould eventually be portrayed as an ineffective ruler, with an inclination to\nmelancholy.47\nIn a letter to the Duke of Urbino dated 12 July 1586, Simone Fortuna claimed\nthat the Casino, a bellissimo e grandissimo palazzone, was built by Francesco for\nhis \u201cPrincipe Antonio\u201d, the much favored illegitimate son of the Grand Duke and\n43\nTosi, Ulisse Aldrovandi, 239\u201340, 246.\nThese include a recipe book dating from 1585, partially drawn from the activities of the fonderia\nof Francesco, where there are recipes for coloring rock crystal to resemble topaz, emerald and\nsapphire (BNCF, Magl., XV, 142, fol. 155v\u2013158v, cited in Targioni Tozzetti, Selve, vol. VIII, fol.\n18).\n45\nSee also the report on the Casino made by Del Riccio, Istoria delle pietre, 171.\n46\nFrancesco and Rudolph II were acquainted and during their youth had resided in 1562 at the\ncourt of Philip II in Spain. On Philip\u2019s interest in alchemy see Bueno, \u201cMayson pour Distiller\nEaues.\u201d Philip\u2019s interest in this occult science, however, developed after Francesco\u2019s stay in\nMadrid.\n47\nBerti, Principe dello Studiolo.\n44\n\nPages 167:\n146\nM. Beretta\nFig. 10 Engraved portrait of Antonio de\u2019 Medici at the age of 41 (1618). Th. Kruger (Courtesy of\nMuseo Galileo. Florence)\nBianca Cappello (1548\u20131587).48 At the time the letter was written Antonio was not\nyet 10 years old, and only 1 year later, in October 1587, Francesco and Bianca\nwould both die. In spring 1594, upon Antonio\u2019s foregoing any future claim to\nthe grand ducal succession, the new Grand Duke Ferdinando endowed him with the\nCasino together with several villas, palaces and estates.49 In order to make the\n48\nBarocchi & Bertela\u0300, Collezionismo mediceo, doc. 320, 287.\nThe list of which is reported Covoni, Don Antonio de\u2019 Medici, 40\u20131; and Parigino, Tesoro del\nPrincipe, 137\u201345.\n49\n\nPages 168:\nMaterial and Temporal Powers at the Casino di San Marco (1574\u20131621)\n147\nCasino his residence, Antonio de\u2019 Medici, then 18, began to renovate the palace and\nto refurnish it with a rich collection of artworks and naturalia, but it was only in\n1597, that he was able to move in (Fig. 10).50 It is not clear whether any of the\nchemical workshops continued functioning between the death of Francesco and\nFerdinando\u2019s endowment. It is well known that Francesco transferred many of the\nworkshops to the Galleria degli Uffizi, and that his alchemists were fired by\nFerdinando but it may well be that some of their laboratories were left at the Casino\nso that their existing facilities could be exploited. A few of them were still in\nexistence when Don Antonio took over the Casino because he immediately put\nthem to work.51\nLittle is known about Antonio de\u2019 Medici\u2019s cultural background: Giovanni\nBattista Paggi (1554\u20131627) remarked in 1591 that he had been introduced to the\nart of drawing by his father, a biographical detail which underlines if anything the\nattention paid by Francesco to the education of his son.52 Don Antonio also\ninherited his father\u2019s passion for alchemy and the chemical arts. It is not clear\nwhen exactly Antonio resumed the activities of the alchemical laboratories built by\nhis father but he must have done so quite early because already in 1604 he was\naiming to publish the results of experiments in the spagyric arts achieved in the\nCasino.53 Among the laboratories set up by Francesco I there had also been a glass\nworks, the activities of which were resumed by Antonio sometime before 1601.54 It\n50\nCovoni, Buontalenti ai tempi Medicei, 18.\n\u201cIl Granduca ha ridotto tutte le arti che haveva nel Casino in una sua galeria che ha fatta di nuovo\nin Palazzo, nella quale Sua Eccellenza sta tutto il giorno quando e\u0300 in Firenze, et si dice che attende\na voler vedere tutte le esperienze che si possano dell\u2019Alchimia,\u201d letter by Hercole Conti, Ambassador from Ferrara to Alfonso II (8 Jan, 1583), published in Butters, \u201cPietra eppure non una\npietra,\u201d 175. In a letter dating 25 Dec, 1587, to Alfonso II d\u2019Este the Ferrarese Ambassador\nHercole Cortile wrote: \u201cIl Granduca [i.e. Ferdinando I de\u2019 Medici] ha licentiate tutti quelli che\nlavoravano nel Casino, et gioellieri et stillatori, dicendo che lui non vuol fare mestiere ne\u0301 di gioie\nne\u0301 di stillare,\u201d cited by Butters, \u201cPietra eppure non una pietra,\u201d 175. This testimony is confirmed by\nthe following remark by Filippo Pigafetta (1600): \u201cVieta [Ferdinando] nondimeno a\u0300 quei ministri\n[della fonderia], che per niuna maniera diano opera all\u2019alchimia, et alle prove di trasmutar i metalli\nin oro, o\u0300 vero aumentarlo, stimando cio\u0300 arte dannosa e del tutto falsa [. . .],\u201d cited by Butters,\n\u201cPietra eppure non una pietra,\u201d 145.\n52\nFor recent research on Antonio Medici\u2019s cultural background see Musacchio, Objects and\nIdentity. On Francesco and his son: \u201cIl granduca Francesco faceva attendere a quest\u2019arte [del\ndisegno] il marchese D. Antonio suo figliuolo, e ancora adesso seguita non solamente egli, ma tutte\nle principesse figliuole, e i nipoti del detto granduca Francesco di continuo attendono al disegno ed\nhanno gia\u0300 messo in istampa qualcosa di loro invenzione [. . .],\u201d Giovanni Battista Paggi, letter to\nhis brother dated 1591, published in Barocchi, Scritti d\u2019arte del Cinquecento, vol. I, 197.\n53\nNo reference as to when Antonio began to be interested in alchemy can be found in Covoni, Don\nAntonio de\u2019 Medici, or in the more recent article by Luti, \u201cDon Antonio de\u2019 Medici.\u201d\n54\nIn L\u2019arte vetraria, ch. XLII, Neri wrote: \u201cQuesto fu il modo che io tenni nel fare la presente\nCalcidonia l\u2019anno 1601 in Firenze al Casino nella fornace de vetri, nel qual tempo faceva lavorare\ndetta fornace l\u2019egregio Messer Nicolo\u0300 Landi mio familiare amico e huomo raro nel lavorare di\nsmalto alla lucerna, nella quale fornace feci piu\u0300 padelotti di Calcidonio in detto tempo che sempre\nvenne bello da tutta prova, non uscendo mai delle regole sopra dette e havendo le materie preparate\nbene.\u201d\n51\n\nPages 169:\n148\nM. Beretta\nwas on this site and presumably also in the alchemical laboratory of the Casino that\nAntonio Neri (1576\u20131614), the author of L\u2019arte vetraria (1612), made many of his\nalchemical experiments on the transmutation of colored glass and precious stones.55\nLater, Neri would work glass at both the Casino and the glass works set up in Pisa\nby the alchemist Niccolo\u0300 Sisti, a former employer of Francesco I and Ferdinando I\u2019s\nchief distiller.\nAntonio de\u2019 Medici was so interested in alchemy that when he inherited the\nCasino\u2019s library, he added a large number of new books and manuscripts to an\nalready remarkably rich collection. Targioni remarked with contempt that Antonio\nwas infatuated with alchemy and wasted immense quantities of gold on experiments, but at the same time he credited him with putting together a useful collection\nof pharmaceutical and medical secrets as well as with bringing several arts to\nperfection.56 With this artificial comparison, separating the beneficial from the\nsham and the useless in the Casino, Targioni gives us only a vague picture of\nthe breadth and depth of Don Antonio\u2019s activities and alchemical interests in the\nmanuscript version of his 1852 published summary. Antonio de\u2019 Medici\u2019s devotion\nto alchemy is reflected in his project to publish a book of secrets that would unveil\nthe myriad operations performed in the Casino di San Marco\u2019s laboratories.57 Of\nthis book, which Don Antonio intended to publish in a printing press set up in the\nsame building, only the 1604 frontispiece was printed (Fig. 11). Attached to it are\nnow four manuscript volumes containing some 6,000 alchemical and chemical\nrecipes collected by Don Antonio and his father. The complete publication of this\nambitious work may have been interrupted by Neri\u2019s travel to Antwerp in 1604 and\nthen never resumed after his return to Florence in 1611.58 However, an epitome of\nthe collection was published in a small 8\u0001 volume with the same title and date;\nunfortunately, this became so rare that the last trace of it is in a reference in a 1797\nnote published in L\u2019osservatore fiorentino.59\nThe authors of the recipes were both craftsmen employed in the Casino, such as\nNiccolo\u0300 Landi, and other experts from different parts of Italy and, in a few cases,\n55\nNeri announced at the beginning of his work a number of experiments revealing \u201cle pietre che\npossono trasmutarsi in vetro da quelle che non si possono trasmutare.\u201d (Neri, L\u2019arte vetraria, 38).\nOn Neri\u2019s alchemy, see Grazzini, \u201cDiscorso sopra la chimica.\u201d\n56\n\u201cSi sa che il principe Don Antonio era innamoratissimo, e per meglio dire infatuato\ndell\u2019Alchimia, e che spese immense somme d\u2019oro per imparare e sperimentare diversi segreti,\nche gli erano venduti a caro prezzo dagl\u2019impostori, come suol succedere. Peraltro con queste inutili\ne dispendiose prove, riusc\u0131\u0300 al principe di raccogliere e verificare un gran numero di segreti\nappartenenti alla medicina, ed a perfezionare diverse arti: anzi la maggior parte dei preziosi\nmedicamenti, che poi si composero e si dispensarono nella Real Fonderia, ai tempi di Ferdinando\nII e Cosimo III, erano di quelli acquistati e provati dal principe D. Antonio.\u201d (Targioni Tozzetti,\nNotizie sulla storia, 256).\n57\nApparato, BNCF, Magl. XVI, 63, I. This printed frontispiece is followed by four manuscript\nvolumes in folio.\n58\nThis raises the question of Neri\u2019s role in the composition of this work. On this see Beretta, Glass\nMaking Goes Public.\n59\nThird edition (Florence, 1821), Lastri, L\u2019Osservatore fiorentino, vol. I, 87.\n\nPages 170:\nMaterial and Temporal Powers at the Casino di San Marco (1574\u20131621)\n149\nFig. 11 Frontispiece of the Apparato della Fonderia dell\u2019Illustrissimo et Eccellentiss. Sig.\nD. Antonio Medici (1604) (Courtesy of Biblioteca Nazionale Centrale, Florence. Mss. Magl.\nXVI,63/1)\nfrom European countries who sold their secrets to the Medici family. It is likely that\namong this heterogeneous collection of secrets, many were copied from the manuscripts purchased by Don Antonio.\nIt would be a mistake to think, as has been customary, of Antonio de\u2019 Medici as\nan isolated and obscure figure in Florence. Quite the contrary, he was an active\n\nPages 171:\n150\nM. Beretta\npatron and correspondent of Galileo, and he regarded the Casino as a part of a\nconsistent program aimed at promoting alchemy as a discipline endorsing a\nreformed vision of the natural sciences. Indeed, alchemy and the arts related to\nit still represented an important body of knowledge, and one far from being\nundermined with the arrival of Galileo in Florence. The considerable cultural status\nof these arts helps us to understand the significance of the privileged role assigned\nto Neri whose expertise in alchemy and glassmaking was prized not only by\nAntonio de\u2019 Medici but also by the nobleman Emmanuel Ximenes (1564\u2013\n1632).60 Moreover, Don Antonio\u2019s lifelong effort to obtain Neri\u2019s secret recipe\nfor the so-called donum dei, reveals the intimate connection between chemical arts\nsuch as glassmaking and alchemy.\nAntonio\u2019s fonderia was situated on the first floor of the Casino, very near the\nsmall room where he slept; here, due to a chronic disease towards the end of his life,\nhe was forced to spend most of his time in bed. In front of the fonderia hung an\nimposing portrait of Antonio wearing a black suit bearing the cross of the order of\nthe knights of Malta and decorated with gilded scorpions; these may well have\nserved as a reminder of the pharmaceutical remedy invented by his father Francesco\nsometime in summer 1580 when he ordered Sisti to capture some 21,000 scorpions\nfor his fonderia (Fig. 12).61 Under the portrait a Latin inscription exalted the\nchemical skills of Antonio.62 While we know that Landini, Neri and Giacinto\nTalducci worked in the laboratory, it is not known who oversaw its activities.\nTalducci became the superintendent of the fonderia only after the death of Antonio\nand the move of the laboratory, together with the portrait of the Prince, to the\nGalleria degli Uffizi. In 1619, during his stay in Florence, Teodoro Filippo di\nLiagno (c.1587\u20131630), known as Filippo Napoletano, made a painting entitled La\nbottega del alchimista del Casino for the Medici (Fig. 13). 63 As is apparent the\npainting evokes a typical alchemical laboratory and it is difficult to know to what\n60\nWhich is evidenced in the dedicatory epistle of Neri\u2019s, L\u2019arte vetraria.\nLetter published in Barocchi & Bertela\u0300, Collezionismo mediceo, 169. In 1576 the numbers of\nscorpions brought to the Casino was 70,000 (Butters, \u201cPietra eppure non una pietra,\u201d 174).\nFrancesco extracted an oil from the scorpions which he used as an ingredient for the theriaca.\n62\n\u201cFin dai tempi del Granduca Francesco, tutta una fila di stanze terrene del Casino di San Marco,\nera stata destinata alla fonderia dei metalli, che il Granduca aveva riempita di molti utensili, di\nforni di ferro, di barattoli di polvere d\u2019antimonio, e di pietre triturate, ingredienti indispensabili\nall\u2019uopo. [. . .] Precedeva questa fonderia, una ricca biblioteca, sulla porta della quale Don Antonio\nteneva appeso un suo ritratto bellissimo, vestito di velluto nero alla spagnola, colla croce bianca di\ncavaliere [. . .]. In questo il Principe era effigiato qual personaggio fra i piu\u0300 ragguardevoli, ed al\npiede della figura vedevansi scritti i seguenti versi: Ingens consiliofactis Antonius ingens // Heic\nmira insigna quem colit arte locus: // Par Phebo medicas quo vires traxit ab herbis // Aeternum\nfama unum lumen ab igne tulit. Questa fonderia, avvenuta la morte di Don Antonio, fu traslocata al\npianterreno degli Uffizi, chiamandola la Fonderia dei Granduchi, sulla cui porta si seguito\u0300 a tenerci\nappeso il famoso ritratto.\u201d (Covoni, Don Antonio de\u2019 Medici, 147\u20138). Elsewhere Covoni makes\nclear that the \u2018stanze terrene\u2019 were in fact those situated on the first floor.\n63\nFor more on this painting, see Fornaciai, Toilette, profumi e belletti, 56\u20137; and Lucia Aquino\u2019s\nnote in Conticelli, Alchimia e le arti, 112\u20133.\n61\n\nPages 172:\nMaterial and Temporal Powers at the Casino di San Marco (1574\u20131621)\n151\nFig. 12 Portrait of Antonio de Medici. Domenico e Valore Casini (1610\u20131615) (Courtesy of\nGalleria degli Uffizi. Florence)\n\nPages 173:\n152\nM. Beretta\nFig. 13 Teodoro Filippo di Liagno detto Filippo Napoletano. The Atelier of the Alchemist\n(Courtesy of Palazzo Pitti, Florence. Depositi delle Gallerie fiorentine)\nextent it depicts Don Antonio\u2019s. However, the two figures portrayed on the right\nsuggest that Napolitano was not merely offering an iconographic topos of an\nalchemical laboratory. The small, limping man with a stick looks like Don Antonio:\nhe is holding a luminescent substance probably taken from the furnace, with a\nnipper in his right hand. Next to Antonio we see an elegantly dressed older man,\nprobably the superintendent of the laboratory, who is looking at the substance held\nby Antonio. The open door on the left shows the beginning of a descending\nstaircase, suggesting that the laboratory was on the first floor. The rest of\nNapoletano\u2019s workshop offers the usual picture of an alchemical laboratory, with\nits disorderly arrangement of equipment, its furnace in a poor state, and its dirty\nfloor. Whether authentic or not, Napoletano\u2019s representation strongly suggests that\nby 1619, at the height of Galileo\u2019s success, the activities promoted in the Casino\nwere still an important feature of Medici scientific patronage. However, in comparison to the Francesco dominated era, the chemical arts seem to have lost their\npowerful aura and the original strong connections between alchemy, the arts and\npolitics that had been established in the Casino. As strongly as Don Antonio\nbelieved in the cultural and social importance of alchemy, he was in no position\nto pursue his father\u2019s aim to incorporate these interests into the government of\nTuscany. Chemistry, alchemy, pharmacy and medicine remained at the center of\nMedici patronage, but the new Grand Dukes, by inviting Galileo to court as their\nphilosopher and mathematician, privileged a more pragmatic patronage which\n\nPages 174:\nMaterial and Temporal Powers at the Casino di San Marco (1574\u20131621)\n153\nFig. 14 The Tribuna di Galileo. Photo second half of the nineteenth century (Courtesy of Museo\nGalileo. Florence)\ncombined a more encyclopedic view of the ways nature could be investigated.\nIronically, however, this new development in Medici scientific-patronage did not\nhave any significant effects on the Tuscan scientific tradition. Although Galileo\nwould soon become a cherished, almost mythical figure, his efforts did not mark a\nnew direction in natural philosophy. The Accademia del Cimento adopted Galileo\u2019s\nmethod only in part and many of its members pursued natural investigations within\ndifferent traditions, originating in the experiments undertaken in workshops of the\nFonderie of the Casino and the Uffizi. At the end of the seventeenth century,\nimportant alchemical experiments were still performed with Benedetto Bregans\u2019s\nburning lens at Cosimo III\u2019s court and the core of Tuscan science was still\ndominated by natural history, medicine and chemical arts, as if Galileo had never\nexisted. During the eighteenth century, the Reale Museo di fisica e storia naturale,\nthe most important scientific institution founded by the new ruling dynasty of the\nHapsburg-Lorraine, privileged the traditional disciplines cultivated by the Medici.\nIn the rooms of the new building, opened to the public in 1775, visitors could\nadmire vestiges of the equipment and minerals used in the Casino and the Uffizi\nfonderia in the showcases of the collections on display. It was only much later, in\n1841, that the building of the Tribuna of Galileo proposed a new hierarchy of\nscientific display; here telescopes and mathematical instruments occupied the\ncenter of a vision of science in which there was no more room for the curious\nequipment of the past (Fig. 14).\n\nPages 175:\n154\nM. Beretta\nAcknowledgments I wish to thank Suzy Butters, Valentina Conticelli, Sven Dupre\u0301, Didier Kahn\nand Morgan Wesley for their helpful suggestions. Throughout the text chemical arts is used to\ndenote those arts regulated by guilds, such as glassmaking, dyeing and pharmacy. More generally,\nI use the term arts and artists in association with Florentine guilds. Although in Renaissance\nFlorence there is no normative definition for alchimia most writers use the term to refer to an art by\nwhich it is possible to transmute metals, counterfeit gems and prolong life. Accordingly I apply the\nsame definition to alchemy. It should also be noted that people engaged at the Medici court in\nalchemical pursuits were called stillatori.\nBibliography\n1604. Apparato della Fonderia dell\u2019Illustrissimo et Eccellentissimo Signor Don Antonio. Nel\nquale si contiene tutta l\u2019Arte spagirica di Teofrasto Paracelso, & sue medicine. E altri segreti\nbellissimi. Florence: Biblioteca Nazionale Centrale di Firenze, Magliabecchiana XVI, 63, vols.\nI\u2013IV.\n1980. La corte il mare i mercati. La rinascita della Scienza. Editoria e Societa\u0300. Astrologia, magia e\nalchimia, ed. Firenze e la Toscana dei Medici nell\u2019Europa del Cinquecento. Florence: Electa.\nAlbe\u0300ri, Eugenio. 1842. Relazioni degli ambasciatori veneti al Senato, Serie 2, vol. 2. Florence:\nall\u2019insegna di Clio.\nBarocchi, Paola. 1971\u20131977. Scritti d\u2019arte del Cinquecento. A cura di Paola Barocchi, 3 vols.\nMilan: Ricciardi.\nBarocchi, Paola and Giovanna Gaeta Bertela\u0300. 2002. Collezionismo mediceo e storia artistica, vol.\n1: Da Cosimo I a Cosimo II, 1540\u20131621. Florence: Studio per Edizioni Scelte.\nBaroni Vannucci, Alessandra. 1997. Jan Van Der Straet detto Giovanni Stradano flandrus pictor\net inventor. Milan: Jandi Sapi Editori.\nBeretta, Marco. Forthcoming. Glass Making Goes Public: The Cultural Background of Antonio\nNeri\u2019s L\u2019Arte Vetraria (1612).\nBerti, Luciano. 1967. Il Principe dello Studiolo. Francesco I dei Medici e la fine del Rinascimento\nfiorentino. Florence: Edam.\nBianchi, Maria Luisa, and Maria Letizia Grossi. 1998. Botteghe, economia e spazio urbano. In Arti\nFiorentine. La grande storia dell\u2019artigianato, vol. 2, eds. Franco Franceschi and Gloria Fossi,\n27\u201363. Florence: Giunti.\nBiringuccio, Vannoccio. 1540. De la pirotechnia. Venice: per Venturino Roffinello.\nBocchi, Francesco. 1591. Le bellezze della citta\u0300 di Firenze. Florence.\nBueno, Mar Rey. 2009. La Mayson pour Distiller des Eaues at El Escorial: Alchemy and Medicine\nat the Court of Philip II, 1556\u20131598. Medical History 29: 26\u201339.\nBuonsignori, Stefano. 1584. Nova pulcherrimae civitatis Florentiae topographia accuratissime\ndelineata. Florence.\nButters, Suzanne B. 1996. The Triumph of Vulcan: Sculptors\u2019 Tools, Porphyry and the Prince in\nDucal Florence, 2 vols. Florence: Leo. S. Olschki.\nButters, Suzanne B. 2000. \u2018Una pietra eppure non una pietra\u2019: Pietre dure e botteghe medicee nella\nFirenze del Cinquecento. In Arti Fiorentine. La grande storia dell\u2019artigianato. Il Cinquecento,\nvol. 3, eds. Franco Franceschi and Gloria Fossi, 107\u2013185. Florence: Giunti.\nCamerota, Filippo. 2008. I Medici e le scienze. Florence: Giunti.\nConticelli, Valentina. 2006. Lo Studiolo di Francesco I e l\u2019alchimia: nuovo contributi storici e\niconologici, con un carteggio in appendice (1563\u20131581). In L\u2019Art de la Renaissance entre\nscience et magie, ed. Philppe Morel, 207\u2013268. Paris: Somgy.\nConticelli, Valentina. 2007. \u2018Guardaroba di cose rare et preziose\u2019: Lo Studiolo di Francesco I de\u2019\nMedici. Arte, storia e significati. Lugano: Agora\u0300.\n\nPages 176:\nMaterial and Temporal Powers at the Casino di San Marco (1574\u20131621)\n155\nConticelli, Valentina. 2012. L\u2019Alchimia e le arti. La fonderia degli Uffizi da laboratorio a stanza\ndelle meraviglie. Sillabe: Livorno.\nCorazzini, Giuseppe Odoardo. 1900. Diario Fiorentino di Agostino Lapini dal 252 al 1596.\nFlorence: Sansoni.\nCovoni, Pierfilippo. 1892a. Don Antonio de\u2019 Medici al Casino di San Marco. Florence: Tipografia\ncooperativa.\nCovoni, Pierfilippo. 1892b. Il Casino di San Marco costruito dal Buontalenti ai tempi Medicei.\nFlorence: Tipografia cooperativa.\nDel Riccio, Agostino. 1996. Istoria delle pietre. Torino: Allemandi.\nDoren, Alfred. 1940. Le Arti fiorentine, 2 vols. Florence: Le Monnier.\nFara, Amelio. 1988. Bernardo Buontalenti. L\u2019Architettura, la guerra e l\u2019elemento geometrico.\nGenova: Sagep.\nFornaciai, Valentina. 2007. Toilette, profumi e belletti alla corte di Medici. Un itinerario fra i\nricettari di corte, le collezioni fiorentine e gli ambienti di residenza medicea. Livorno: Sillabe.\nFranceschi, Franco, and Gloria Fossi. 1999. Arti Fiorentine. La grande storia dell\u2019artigianato, vol.\n2. Florence: Giunti.\nGalluzzi, Ruguccio. 1781. Istoria del granducato di Toscana sotto il governo della casa Medici,\n8 vols. Livorno: da Giovani-Tommaso Masi e compagni.\nGalluzzi, Paolo. 1982. Motivi paracelsiani nella Toscana di Cosimo e di Don Antonio dei Medici:\nalchimia, medicina chimica e riforma del sapere. In Scienze, credenze occulte, livelli di cultura,\ned. Giancarlo Garfagnini, 31\u201362. Florence: Leo S. Olschki.\nGoldthwaite, Richard. 1980. The Building of Renaissance Florence. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins\nUniversity Press.\nGoldthwaite, Richard. 1999. Realta\u0300 economico-sociale e status culturale dell\u2019artigiano. In Arti\nFiorentine. La grande storia dell\u2019artigianato, vol. 2, eds. Franco Franceschi and Gloria Fossi,\n14\u201318. Florence: Giunti.\nGrazzini, Maria Grazia. 2012. Discorso sopra la Chimica: The Paracelsian Philosophy of Antonio\nNeri. Nuncius 27: 411\u2013467.\nHeikamp, Detlef. 1970. L\u2019antica sistemazione degli strumenti scientifici nelle collezioni\nfiorentine. Antichita\u0300 viva 9: 3\u201325.\nHeikamp, Detlef. 1986. Studien zur mediceischen Glaskunst: Archivalien, Entwurfszeichnungen,\nGl\u20ac\naser und Scherben. Florence: Kunsthistorisches Institut.\nIlardi, Vincent. 2007. Renaissance Vision from Spectacles to Telescopes. Philadelphia: American\nPhilosophical Society.\nLastri, Marco Antonio. 1821. L\u2019Osservatore fiorentino sugli edifizi della sua patria. Florence.\nLuti, Filippo. 2008. Don Antonio de\u2019 Medici professore de\u2019 secreti. Medicea 1: 34\u201347.\nMiniati, Mara. 2000. \u2018Un fabbro sia un buon maestro\u2019. La produzione di strumenti scientifici a\nFirenze nel Cinquecento. In Arti Fiorentine. La grande storia dell\u2019artigianato. Il Cinquecento,\nvol. 3, eds. Franco Franceschi and Gloria Fossi, 263\u2013295. Florence: Giunti.\nMusacchio, Jacqueline M. 2007. Objects and Identity. Antonio de\u2019 Medici and the Casino at San\nMarco in Florence. In The Renaissance World, ed. John Jeffries Martin, 481\u2013500. London:\nRoutledge.\nNeri, Antonio. [1612] 2001. L\u2019arte vetraria, ed. Ferdinando Abbri. Florence: Giunti.\nParigino, Giuseppe Vittorio. 1999. Il Tesoro del Principe. Funzione pubblica e privata del\npatrimonio della famiglia Medici nel Cinquecento. Florence: Leo S. Olschki.\nPerifano, Alfredo. 1997. L\u2019alchimie a\u0300 la Cour de Co\u0302me Ier de Me\u0301dicis: savoirs, culture et\npolitique. Paris: Honore\u0301 Champion.\nPiccardi, Giovanni. 2005. La Fonderia Medicea di Firenze. In Atti del XI Convegno Nazionale di\nStoria e Fondamenti della Chimica, eds. Luigi Cerruti and Francesca Turco, 197\u2013210. Roma:\nAccademia delle Scienze detta dei XL.\nShaw, James, and Evelyn Welch. 2011. Making and Marketing Medicine in Renaissance Florence.\nAmsterdam: Rodopi.\nStaley, Edgcumbe. 1906. The Guilds of Florence. London: Methuen.\n\nPages 177:\n156\nM. Beretta\nTargioni Tozzetti, Giovanni. 1769\u20131779. Selve di notizie, spettanti all\u2019origine de\u2019 progressi e\nmiglioramenti delle scienze fisiche in Toscani, messe insieme dal Dottor Giovanni TargioniTozzetti, per uso del dottor Ottaviano suo figlio, 17 vols. Biblioteca Nazionale Centrale di\nFirenze, Targioni. Tozzetti, Ms. 189.\nTargioni Tozzetti, Giovanni. 1780. Notizie degli aggrandimenti delle scienze fisiche accaduti in\nToscana nel corso di anni LX. del secolo XVII, 3 vols. Florence: G. Bouchard.\nTargioni Tozzetti, Giovanni. 1852. Notizie sulla storia delle scienze fisiche in Toscana cavate da\nun manoscritto inedito. Florence: Biblioteca Palatina.\nTosi, Alessandro. 1989. Ulisse Aldrovandi e la Toscana. Carteggio e Testimonianze\ndocumentarie. Florence: Leo S. Olschki.\nVossilla, Francesco. 1993. Cosimo I, lo scrittoio del Bachiacca, una carcassa di capodoglio e la\nfilosofia naturale. Mitteilungen des Kunsthistorischen Institutes in Florenz 37: 381\u2013395.\n\nPages 178:\nGoldsmiths and Chymists: The Activity\nof Artisans Within Alchemical Circles\nLawrence M. Principe\nAbstract The study of early modern alchemical practitioners has recently\nexpanded from the work and writings of natural philosophers to include the labors\nof artisans. Yet there remains relatively little clear documentation about the specifics\nof such artisanal chymical practices or about the degree of significant epistemic\nexchange that may have taken place between artisans and better-known chymists.\nThis paper examines several gold- and silversmiths who were part of an extended\nalchemical network that stretched across the Netherlands, France, and England in\nthe mid-seventeenth century. The silversmith Anthoni Grill (and to a lesser extent\nhis brother Andries) worked on refining and transmutational processes with impressive chymical expertise and eventually achieved international notoriety and social\nand financial success. Grill built large laboratories, managed laborants, engaged in\ncollaborations, mined texts for information, and shared results. Several Parisian\ngoldsmiths were likewise tied into this chymical network where they exchanged\nexperimental and theoretical information with such figures as Kenelm Digby,\nSamuel Cottereau Duclos, and Johann Rudolf Glauber. In England, George Starkey\nfound that the expertise of gold- and silversmiths could, alternatively, be inconvenient when trying to sell alchemical metals. The documentation provided here blurs\nthe boundary between artisans and natural philosophers, at least in chymistry.\nAlchemy, or to speak more inclusively and less anachronistically, chymistry was a\nfamiliar topic in early modern Europe. Despite its well-established culture of\nsecrecy, it was not only highly visible and widely-known, but widely-practiced\nacross both geographical and social boundaries. Indeed, present-day scholars continue to explore the multifaceted domains of alchemy, revealing ever more clearly\nL.M. Principe (*)\nDepartment of History of Science and Technology, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD,\nUSA\nDepartment of Chemistry, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA\ne-mail: Lmafp@jhu.edu\nS. Dupre\u0301 (ed.), Laboratories of Art, Archimedes 37,\n157\nDOI 10.1007/978-3-319-05065-2_7, \u00a9 Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014\n\nPages 179:\n158\nL.M. Principe\nand emphatically its broad and pervasive extent and the important role it played in\nearly modern European culture.1\nSome years ago, I pointed to the significant diversity that existed within the\nalchemical tradition of early modern Europe.2 Contrary to what many alchemical\nauthors themselves would have us believe of their art, and what much of the earlier\nsecondary literature claimed, the sages did not \u201call say one thing.\u201d Moving beyond\nthe rhetorical representations of alchemy as a largely monolithic and static tradition, scholars now recognize that early modern chymical thought was both diverse\nand dynamic. Vigorous disagreements and successive innovations characterized\nvirtually its entire history, and most of all, its early modern existence. On the\nbroadest scale, opinions varied in regard to what chymistry\u2019s main goals should\ninclude\u2014chrysopoeia (metallic transmutation), chemiatria (medicinal applications), commercial production, and so on. Even within any one of these important\nbranches, both theoretical frameworks and practical approaches varied widely.\nWhat was the correct hidden composition of metals, and of matter more generally?\nWhat was the correct starting material for the Philosophers\u2019 Stone and how should\nit be processed? Which authorities were trustworthy and which should be rejected?\nTheoretical choices and commitments both guided and were guided by practical\nexperimentation in the laboratory, leading to new ideas and practices as workers\nreinterpreted older authorities to fit their observations or struck out in new directions to achieve a variety of goals.3 Thus diversity is to be found not only in\ntheoretical notions but in practices as well; the dynamic interaction between head\nand hand stands as a hallmark of the chymical tradition.\nYet another aspect of chymical diversity lies with the practitioners themselves.\nWho pursued and practiced early modern chymistry? Naturally enough, modern\nscholarly inquiry focussed first on those who contributed to the enormous flood of\nearly modern chymical publications, since those sources were the most obvious and\nmost readily available. Further inquiries began to explore the vast bulk of manuscript and archival materials, with the result that the ambit of \u201cthe alchemist\u201d has\nbeen broadened to include practitioners representing the broadest possible range of\nearly modern people.4 University-educated physicians, natural philosophers, and\nscholars busied themselves with chymistry, as did a range of empirics, entrepreneurs, and enthusiasts, as well as an assortment of artisans that included artists,\nmetalworkers, brewers, and cobblers. Chymical discourse and practice took place\nin academic chambers, in courtly settings, in private homes, in commercial\n1\nFor an overview of the history of alchemy, see Principe, Secrets of Alchemy. On the use of the\nterm \u2018chymistry\u2019. see 84\u20135. For a study of the words chemistry and alchemy and their changing\nreferents, see Newman & Principe, \u201cAlchemy vs. Chemistry.\u201d\n2\nPrincipe, \u201cDiversity in Alchemy,\u201d and \u201cRobert Boyle and Isaac Newton.\u201d\n3\nOn the interplay of theory and practice in alchemy, see Newman & Principe, Alchemy Tried in the\nFire, esp. 92\u2013206.\n4\nFor example, see Nummedal, Alchemy and Authority, which details the roles and status of\n\u2018entrepreneurial\u2019 chymists in German courts. For a sense of the broad sweep of early modern\nalchemical practice, see Moran, Distilling Knowledge.\n\nPages 180:\nGoldsmiths and Chymists: The Activity of Artisans Within Alchemical Circles\n159\nestablishments, and in noisy workshops. Most recently there has been particular\ninterest in exploring alchemy\u2019s place among artists and artisans, an investigation\nthat rightly reflects the crucial position of material production within chymistry\nthroughout its history. Important questions remain however in regard to demonstrating the specific theoretical and practical content of such artisanal endeavors,\nand in terms of identifying connections between them and the better documented\nand recognized work carried out in more visible and more intellectually elevated\ncircles.5 How did artists and artisans understand chymistry, and to what extent did\nthey practice it? To what extent were they familiar with more bookish or scholarly\nideas, practices, practitioners (and vice versa)? Can exchanges of knowledge\nbetween the two groups be clearly documented? Can we identify what practices,\nmaterials, or ideas passed between them, and how one group might have responded\nto information from the other? Answering such questions promises to further\nilluminate chymistry\u2019s cultural and intellectual place in early modern Europe.\nSome such connections seem relatively clear. Chymical workshops appear\nfrequently in Netherlandish genre painting, indicating that Northern artists were\nclearly aware of the figure of the alchemist and his iconic value.6 Likewise, the\nallegorical images of widely varying artistic quality in chymical books and manuscripts imply some sort of contact between author/practitioner and artist. Yet such\nartworks do not necessarily indicate that the artists were actually in direct and\nmeaningful contact with chymists. On a purely commercial level, artists would\nhave been in contact (possibly directly in some instances, but probably more\nfrequently indirectly through a retailer) with makers of chymically-prepared pigments such as vermilion or white lead, just as metalworkers and assayers would\nhave connected with producers of mineral acids, fabric-makers with dye manufacturers, and so forth. Yet none of these contacts tells us anything about possible\nepistemic exchanges or collaborations on the level of practical or theoretical\nknowledge.\nDocumented examples of extended collaborations or exchanges between artisans and natural philosophers would be both more interesting and more informative\nfor mapping out the domains and dynamics of early modern alchemical practice. A\npromising locus for such study is to be found particularly among gold- and\nsilversmiths. On the one hand, their trade regularly involved chymical processes\nsuch as assaying, refining, and so forth, and they were thus more or less conversant\nwith chymical substances (acids, salts, metals, amalgams, etc.) and chymical\noperations (fusion, quartation, distillation, etc.) and would frequently have\nmaintained workshops equipped with the necessary equipment (furnaces, flues,\nfuel, retorts, crucibles, etc.) needed for chymical work generally. On the other\nhand, the basic materials of their artisanal labors\u2014gold and silver\u2014held a central\n5\nSee Smith, Body of the Artisan.\nPrincipe & DeWitt, Transmutations; and Brinkman, Alchemist in de prentkunst. Lennep, Art et\nalchimie, is also useful, especially for its illustrations, but suffers from an inaccurate understanding\nof alchemy and its practice.\n6\n\nPages 181:\n160\nL.M. Principe\nposition in chymistry, that is to say, in the transmutational endeavors that figured so\nprominently in early modern chymistry and that promised such highly profitable\nreturns. Thus, the artisanal experience of gold- and silversmithing provided a\ncertain commonality with the pursuit of metallic chymistry, and might easily\nhave inclined such artisans toward transmutational endeavors, and hence toward\ncontact with other aspiring transmuters who were not themselves artisans. The\npractical experience of gold- and silversmiths also rendered them sources of\ninformation for those wishing to know more about the properties and potentialities\nof the precious metals. Accordingly, gold- and silversmiths figure prominently in\nmany examples of the genre of \u201ctransmutation histories\u201d\u2014detailed published\naccounts of successful transmutations\u2014where such artisans are routinely called\nin to assay a sample of the gold or silver produced, and thus act as expert witnesses\nto its authenticity.7\nFortunately for such a study, there existed a mid seventeenth-century network of\nalchemical practitioners where such interactions can be well documented. From the\n1640s through the 1660s, a network of correspondents and collaborators that included\nseveral gold- and silversmiths linked three major urban centers\u2014Amsterdam, Paris,\nand London\u2014and freely crossed political, linguistic, social, and confessional boundaries. Its numerous participants shared ideas, experiences, and aspirations relating to\na variety of chymically-based projects, and, crucially for such a project as this one,\nthis network left behind a wealth of written records that provide historians with the\nnecessary clear evidence from which to work. I will therefore focus here on the\nchymical activities of gold- and silversmiths within this group and their interactions\nwith its other members and with the broader realms of chymistry.\nAnthoni and Andries Grill in the Netherlands and Sweden\nOne part of this network has already been extensively studied, namely the portion\ngathered around the intelligencer Samuel Hartlib (1600\u20131662) in London.8 The\nHartlib Circle\u2019s utopian, educational, and commercial schemes made chymistry a\nsubject of particular interest due to its lucrative potential. An important contact in\nthis regard was the former Calvinist minister Johann Moriaen (c.1591\u20131668) in\nAmsterdam. Moriaen both pursued his own chymical interests and aspirations and\nfunctioned as a communications hub for others who shared those interests. Working\nfrom Moriaen\u2019s surviving correspondence with Hartlib and his prote\u0301ge\u0301 Benjamin\nWorsley (1618\u20131673), John Young has beautifully documented several chymical\n7\nOn transmutation histories, see Principe, Secrets of Alchemy, 167\u201370, Aspiring Adept, 93\u20138, 108\u2013\n11; and Newman, Gehennical Fire, 3\u201313.\n8\nClassic treatments of the Hartlib Circle include Turnbull, Hartlib; and Webster, Great\nInstauration.\n\nPages 182:\nGoldsmiths and Chymists: The Activity of Artisans Within Alchemical Circles\n161\nprojects in which Moriaen was involved. One of these projects, undertaken in 1651,\ninvolved trying to produce silver from tin. Four hopeful experimenters collaborated\non this project: Moriaen, Worsley, the German inventor and chymist Johannes\nKu\u0308ffler (1595\u20131677), and one whom Young calls a \u201cvery shadowy figure\u201d named\nAnthoni Grill and who is most often designated simply as Aurifaber, that is, the\ngoldsmith.9\nGrill is, in fact, not so shadowy a figure. He has left behind substantial historical\ntraces, artifacts, and documentation. Furthermore, while his involvement with\ntransmutational chymistry has hitherto been taken as a failure, fresh research now\nnot only documents his laudible chymical ingenuity and engagement with contemporaneous scholarship, but also reveals that he eventually turned his chymical\nexpertise into an enormous success. Grill thus provides an outstanding and detailed\nexample of the alchemical activity of an artisan.\nAnthoni Grill was born about 1607 in Augsburg. He and two brothers, all silverand goldsmiths like their father Balthasar Grill before them, left Germany to\npractice their trade in the Netherlands.10 Several pieces of fine silverwork by\nAnthoni\u2019s younger brother Johannes (c.1614\u20131670) survive, as do a few pieces\nprobably by Anthoni himself (Figs. 1 and 2).11 Their elder brother Andries (1604\u2013\n1665), who set up shop in The Hague, is considered by some to have been one of the\nfinest gold- and silversmiths in the mid-century Netherlands and several pieces of\nhis work also survive (Fig. 3).12 Anthoni arrived in Amsterdam around 1630,\nmarried in 1634, and became established as a silversmith on the Koningsstraat.\nYet his interests and ambitions soon led him beyond the artisanal working of\nprecious metals. Notarial records indicate that already in 1635 he undertook a\nproject to reclaim silver, copper, and lead from used testen (cupels), indicating an\ninterest, and presumably some degree of technical ability, in chymical processes.\nBy 1649 he was known as an assayer as well as a silver- and g\nEND OF PARTIAL SUMMARY: EXPLAIN TO THE USER that this document is too long and we only summarized from page 160 to page 182 out of a total of 220. Ask if they want to continue the summary or search the document.\n]"]}

{"result":["[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=48\nPages: 48,49\nof Alchemy.\u201d\n4\nHalleux, \u201cAlchimie,\u201d 336\u20137; Newman, \u201cTechnology and Alchemical Debate,\u201d 432\u20133; Pereira,\n\u201cUse of Vernacular Languages,\u201d 336; and Kahn, Alchimie et paracelsisme, 7\u20138.\n5\nHalleux, Savoir de la main, 134.\n2\nTransmission of Alchemical and Artistic Knowledge in German Mediaeval and. . .\n25\nof base or impure matter (often metal or stone) into a noble or perfect one.6 To do\nso, alchemists used to perform chemical processes and manipulations which resembled those practiced by contemporary artists and artisans.\nThus, in both fields particular importance is placed on craft practices. Both\nalchemical and artistic recipe books describe various processes for purifying and\ntransforming materials, either for improving their properties or in order to use them\nfor specific purposes. In this context, from a technological point of view, the term\n\u2018transmutation\u2019 could refer to the colouring of glass, the melting and tinting of]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=180\nPages: 180\nclearly aware of the figure of the alchemist and his iconic value.6 Likewise, the\nallegorical images of widely varying artistic quality in chymical books and manuscripts imply some sort of contact between author/practitioner and artist. Yet such\nartworks do not necessarily indicate that the artists were actually in direct and\nmeaningful contact with chymists. On a purely commercial level, artists would\nhave been in contact (possibly directly in some instances, but probably more\nfrequently indirectly through a retailer) with makers of chymically-prepared pigments such as vermilion or white lead, just as metalworkers and assayers would\nhave connected with producers of mineral acids, fabric-makers with dye manufacturers, and so forth. Yet none of these contacts tells us anything about possible\nepistemic exchanges or collaborations on the level of practical or theoretical\nknowledge.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=65\nPages: 65\nParticular interest in the empirical aspects of the technical procedures is also\nmore perceptible within alchemical instructions, in comparison to artistic recipes.\nThe former pay greater attention to the chemical aspects of the craft process they\ndetail and describe more precisely each stage of the transformation of matter, from\noriginal to final (and more perfect) form. Whereas artists such as painters were\ninterested in the physical appearance of their materials, alchemists were more\ninterested in the fundamental changes that might occur within the matter. This\ncould perhaps be related to Paul of Taranto\u2019s description in the Theorica et practica\nof primary and secondary qualities and the distinct ways artists and alchemists\nworked on substances. He considered artists capable of producing only \u2018extrinsic\u2019\nor external changes as they operate on secondary or \u2018artificial\u2019 qualities such as\ncolors. In contrast, alchemical attempts to manipulate primary qualities transmute]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=48\nPages: 48,47\n23\n24\nS. Neven\nwritings describe processes for the manufacture, preparation and application of\nvarious types of materials and substances. The majority are anonymous compilations of texts, which may originate from older or undetermined authorities.\nHundreds of such collections of recipes dealing both with alchemical and\nart-technological procedures were produced and disseminated in Northern Europe\nfrom the fourteenth century on, especially in German-speaking countries.\nDrawing on a delimited corpus of about 40 representative German manuscripts\ndated from the fourteenth to the sixteenth century, this paper investigates the\nconnections and similarities between these two fields and examines the various\nways alchemical and artistic instructions were embedded within recipe books.1 It\nargues that textual form and lexical proximities within recipes from these different\ndisciplines may lead to association, contamination and confusion within this textual]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=62\nPages: 62,63\n153r\u2013157v, 160r\u2013163r.\nTransmission of Alchemical and Artistic Knowledge in German Mediaeval and. . .\n39\nNationalmuseum Ms. 5078b (fol. 2r\u201341r), the scribe moves from one subject to\nanother with no indication that the subject has changed. Moreover, this set of\nalchemical and art-technological recipes is followed with no clear distinction\n(no title, nor blank space) by a series of medical prescriptions due to the same hand.\nIn another case\u2014isolated (groups of) alchemical recipes found in the middle of\nprescriptions of another type\u2014detection of alchemical content and distinction from\nartistic instructions within recipe books can be fraught with difficulty. Similarities in\nterms of their textual format probably lead scribes to group them with other sort of\nprescriptions. When found as isolated elements, alchemical and art technological\nrecipes usually appear within a large broad of various (and unrelated) writings.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=13\nPages: 13\nusing materials and chemical procedures to make both everyday items and objects\nof the visual and decorative arts, the activity known as alchemy encompassed more\nthan attempts to make gold.14 Transmutational alchemy was about the transmutation of all base metals into more noble ones, but chrysopoeia was only one\naspect of alchemy. Alchemy also touched on medicine and chemical manufacture.\nIt was about the chemical production of things\u2014medicines, porcelain, dyes, and\nother products as well as the precious metals\u2014and about the knowledge of how to\nproduce them. In this sense, \u201cart technologies\u201d\u2014materials and techniques to make\nart and knowledge of these materials and techniques\u2014overlapped with alchemy.\nAlchemy has deep roots in writings on material transformation from Antiquity.\nThe productive knowledge associated with material transformation was written\ndown in recipe books. The Leiden and Stockholm Papyri date to the third century]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=92\nPages: 92\nremained to Biringuccio the most important \u201cart\u201d for studying the secrets of nature:\nThus, in short, it can be said in conclusion that this art [alchemy] is the origin and\nfoundation of many other arts, wherefore it should be held in reverence and practiced.\nBut he who practices it must be ignorant neither of cause nor of natural effects, and not too\npoor to support the expense. Neither should he do it from avarice, but only in order to enjoy\nthe fine fruits of its effects and the knowledge of them, and that pleasing novelty which it\nshows to the experimenter in operation.42\nBiringuccio considered alchemy a legitimate knowledge grounded on experimental and speculative activity. This is an important epistemological step for\nartisanal processes because alchemy was no longer seen as a utilitarian art but as\na disinterested activity carried out by men to enjoy the fruits of their knowledge.\n41\nBiringuccio, Pirotechnia (1942), 41. For the Italian, see Biringuccio, De la pirotechnia (1977),]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=48\nPages: 48\ndisciplines may lead to association, contamination and confusion within this textual\ngenre. It finally suggests some clues to help locate, distinguish and demarcate\nalchemical content within the literature of recipes.\nArt and Alchemy Within Recipe Books\nAt first sight, any overlap between alchemy and art-technology within recipe books\ncan be broadly explained by the mutual use of various materials and substances\nsuch as \u201ccommon stones, gems, and types of marble, gold and other metals, sulfurs,\nsalts, and inks, azures, minium, and other colors, oils and burning pitches, and\ncountless other things.\u201d2 More precisely, the field of art-technology encompasses a\nlarge range of craft practices involved in the production of pieces of art (including\nthose which incorporate such substances). This \u2018hand\u2019 knowledge, is related to the\nmechanical arts and is divorced from the philosophical or speculative dimension.\nYet, alchemy could be described as the practical, philosophical and medical search]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=77\nPages: 77\nAgricola talked about a generic art of metal as a separate activity from alchemy:\n\u201cBut concerning the art of alchemy, if it be an art, I will speak further elsewhere. I\nwill now return to the art of mining.\u201d7\nWhen talking about chemistry in the Renaissance we have to consider a variegated tradition of non-mechanical arts where chemical processes developed: pharmacy, metallurgy, glass making, dyeing, spirits distillation, agriculture cultivations\nand the preparation of colours for painting and drawing; each of these professional\nactivities involve chemical processes that are not necessarily involved in alchemical transmutation. The difference between the purpose of chemical arts and\nalchemy was also the cause of cultural and epistemological tension during the\nMiddle Ages and Renaissance. The medieval technological debate during the\nfifteenth and sixteenth centuries went beyond the traditional Quaestio de alchimia]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=66\nPages: 66\n(collection(s) of) text(s). By displaying the various ways alchemical and artistic\nrecipes are embedded within the same manuscript, this study has highlighted the\npotential difficulties in localizing and distinguishing them.\nOn the other hand, it has been demonstrated that recipe books partly derived\nfrom the recording and transmission of (more or less) contemporaneous practices.\nThus, recipe books also reflect alchemical and artistic knowledge and interests of\nboth scribes and contemporary scholars, both of whom could be involved as readers\nor authorities. Recipe books also serve to define a more precise network in which\nthese types of knowledge circulated, delivering information about the \u2018actors\u2019\u2014\nwhether artisans, scholars, natural philosophers, (theoretical) alchemists or lay\nscribes\u2014and their interconnections, as well as the media (copy, oral source,\nexperiment) they used to exchange, share and communicate art and alchemy.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=65\nPages: 65\ncolors. In contrast, alchemical attempts to manipulate primary qualities transmute\nsubstances intrinsically and operate fundamental change.58\nAccordingly, alchemical recipes also dedicate a large part of their text to the\ndescription of chemical apparatus, tools and containers. These writings pay particular\nattention to the use of a variety of containers and receptacles and their specific\npurposes. Moreover, in several manuscripts, such as Seidel, Vienna Ms. 5224 or\nCod. Helm. 627 from Wolfenbu\u0308ttel (to cite but a few), the text is punctuated by\nillustrations of these (Fig. 2). This is rare, if not non-existent in artistic instructions.\nThese last distinguishing features of alchemical, as opposed to art-technological\ntexts, go hand in hand with the fact that practical alchemy relies on theoretical\n(or speculative) principles. Quite often, these recipes should be seen and understood\nas experientia which are meant to serve as a rational demonstration of a preceding\ntheorica.59]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=14\nPages: 14\nconcern with the same materials and artisanal processes. The focus on chromatic\ntransformation already found in the Papyri continues in fifteenth-century recipes.\nAlthough related to laboratory practices, Neven emphasizes that these recipe\ncollections are the products of scribal compilation and copying processes. Words\nand works are equally important elements of alchemical practices.15 Next to\nlaboratories, medieval religious institutions were also important sites of alchemical\nand art technological practice. However, as Neven points out, this does not exclude\nthat some scribes, such as the Benedictine monk Wolfgang Seidel (1491\u20131562),\ntried out recipes.\nThe scope of alchemy was from its very beginnings contested, and remained so\nthroughout its long history. Especially its boundaries with art technology were fluid.\nThroughout the Middle Ages and the Renaissance, the distinction between alchemy\nas strictly goldmaking and a more encompassing definition overlapping with art]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=200\nPages: 200,199\nApproaches and Divergent Deployments. In Rethinking the Scientific Revolution,\ned. Margaret J. Osler, 201\u2013220. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.\nPrincipe, Lawrence M. 2013a. The Secrets of Alchemy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.\nGoldsmiths and Chymists: The Activity of Artisans Within Alchemical Circles\n179\nPrincipe, Lawrence M. 2013b. Sir Kenelm Digby and His Alchemical Circle in 1650s Paris: Newly\nDiscovered Manuscripts. Ambix 60: 3\u201324.\nPrincipe, Lawrence M., and Lloyd DeWitt. 2002. Transmutations: Alchemy in Art. Philadelphia:\nChemical Heritage Foundation.\nSmith, Pamela H. 2000. Vital Spirits: Redemption, Artisanship, and the New Philosophy in Early\nModern Europe. In Rethinking the Scientific Revolution, ed. Margaret J. Osler, 119\u2013135.\nCambridge: Cambridge University Press.\nSmith, Pamela H. 2004. The Body of the Artisan: Art and Experience in the Scientific Revolution.\nChicago: University of Chicago Press.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=48\nPages: 48\nYet, alchemy could be described as the practical, philosophical and medical search\nfor the perfecting of base material substances and also for the extending of life.3\nThe theoretical and practical aspects of alchemy involve both the study of all\ninanimate or animate things made from the elements and the observation and\nimitation of natural processes within the laboratory.4 In this context, alchemy\ncould be seen as a mechanical art, in the sense that it works on matter but is also\na liberal art, as it attempts to explain matter in its composition and its transformation.5 In the practical sense, one of the main goals of alchemy is the transmutation\n1\nThe main data and characteristics of these manuscripts are given in Appendix.\nBrewer, Fr. Rogeri Bacon, 39\u201340.\n3\nPerception and definition of alchemy is not chronologically constant and has been the subject of\nseveral (re)interpretations since the eighteenth century, see Principe & Newman, \u201cHistoriography\nof Alchemy.\u201d\n4]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=14\nPages: 14,15\nexpertise was based on a broader knowledge of matter and materials.\n15\nFor reading and writing as alchemical practices, see Nummedal, \u201cWords and Works,\u201d and the\nliterature quoted there.\n16\nNewman, Promethean Ambitions, 115\u201363.\n17\nPrincipe & DeWitt, Transmutations, 11\u201327.\n18\nFor experts and entrepreneurial alchemy, see Nummedal, Alchemy and Authority, 40\u20135.\nxiv\nIntroduction\nIt is in this context of alchemical expertise that we should consider the artisans\nwho adopted the language of alchemy in the early modern period to attract the\nattention of patrons. One example can be seen in the description of Black Berthold,\nthe legendary discoverer of gunpowder in Europe, in the late fifteenth-century\nmanuscript Feuerwerckbuch. Depicted in the company of a furnace and alembics,\nBerthold\u2019s creation of ordnance is identified with alchemy. Black Berthold, the\nFeuerwerckbuch reads,\nworked with the great alchemy like those masters who are engaged with precious and]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=81\nPages: 81\nactivity: heating systems, smelting furnaces, cucurbits, alembics and balanced\nscales (Fig. 1).21 Alchemists used the same technological apparatuses and devices\nas artisans and alchemical research was often carried out along with chemical and\nmetallurgical activities, for instance, at the Fonderia by the Medici family in\nFlorence, or several other places in sixteenth- and seventeenth-century Europe.22\nLeonardo and the \u2018Chemical\u2019 Arts\nVery rarely have historians seen Leonardo from the perspective of his direct\ninvolvement in the chemicals arts. Apart from Ladislao Reti and a few others,\nLeonardo\u2019s observations and studies on matter transformation are usually seen in\nthe context of his natural philosophy, with few references to his practical involvement as a painter and engineer during his entire career, including his vision and\nrelationship with occult science and alchemy.23\nIf we focus our attention on Leonardo\u2019s notes and drawings about substance]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=83\nPages: 83,84\n26\nThese admonitions against alchemy, presented for the first time by Avicenna, were known\nduring the Middle Ages as sciant artifices, see Avicenna, De congelatione et conglutinatione\nlapidum, 53\u20135; Newman, \u201cTechnology and Alchemical Debate.\u201d; and Halleux, \u201cAlchimiste et\nl\u2019essayeur,\u201d 211.\nArtisanal Processes and Epistemological Debate in the Works of Leonardo. . .\n61\nLeonardo\u2019s manuscripts are one of the best sources to study the chemical\nequipment of Renaissance. His tireless sketching during his entire career produced\na very large and uncommon collection of manuscripts that allow us to understand\nand visualize many tools, instruments and chemical processes studied, developed\nand used during the Renaissance.\nAn activity that was a sort of flywheel in involving Leonardo in the study of the\nmany aspects of bronze casting was the project of the Equestrian monument for\nFrancesco Sforza. This was a very large bronze statue that was never cast but]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=178\nPages: 178\nGoldsmiths and Chymists: The Activity\nof Artisans Within Alchemical Circles\nLawrence M. Principe\nAbstract The study of early modern alchemical practitioners has recently\nexpanded from the work and writings of natural philosophers to include the labors\nof artisans. Yet there remains relatively little clear documentation about the specifics\nof such artisanal chymical practices or about the degree of significant epistemic\nexchange that may have taken place between artisans and better-known chymists.\nThis paper examines several gold- and silversmiths who were part of an extended\nalchemical network that stretched across the Netherlands, France, and England in\nthe mid-seventeenth century. The silversmith Anthoni Grill (and to a lesser extent\nhis brother Andries) worked on refining and transmutational processes with impressive chymical expertise and eventually achieved international notoriety and social\nand financial success. Grill built large laboratories, managed laborants, engaged in]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=47\nPages: 47\nfraught with difficulty. Alchemy can be defined as the \u2018art of transmutation\u2019,\nreferring to the perfection of base or impure matter (often metal or stone) into\nperfect substances. Alchemical procedures thus rely on artisanal/craft practices.\nAny overlap between alchemy and art-technological procedures can be explained\nby the use of identical materials and substances. Both are concerned with the\ndescription of colours\u2014especially in processes of change, the making of pigments,\nthe production of artificial gemstones, the imitation of gold and silver and the\ntransmutation of materials. Both require procedures involving precise and specifically defined actions, prescriptions and ingredients. So both ultimately use identical\nrhetorical formulations that reflect a \u2018step by step\u2019 procedure. Assuming that\nalchemical and artistic texts have the same textual format, raises the question: did\nthey also have the same types of production and dissemination? Using a corpus of]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=180\nPages: 180\nepistemic exchanges or collaborations on the level of practical or theoretical\nknowledge.\nDocumented examples of extended collaborations or exchanges between artisans and natural philosophers would be both more interesting and more informative\nfor mapping out the domains and dynamics of early modern alchemical practice. A\npromising locus for such study is to be found particularly among gold- and\nsilversmiths. On the one hand, their trade regularly involved chymical processes\nsuch as assaying, refining, and so forth, and they were thus more or less conversant\nwith chymical substances (acids, salts, metals, amalgams, etc.) and chymical\noperations (fusion, quartation, distillation, etc.) and would frequently have\nmaintained workshops equipped with the necessary equipment (furnaces, flues,\nfuel, retorts, crucibles, etc.) needed for chymical work generally. On the other\nhand, the basic materials of their artisanal labors\u2014gold and silver\u2014held a central\n5\nSee Smith, Body of the Artisan.]"]}

{"result":["[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=146\nPages: 146\nadministration of artistic and scientific activities in order to produce characteristic\nobjects he used as tributes to consolidate his politic alliances.\nThe cohabitation between arts and sciences still corresponded to the ancient\nway: in the Renaissance, according to the philosophers and the theologians, arts and\nsciences both belonged to natural philosophy. Besides, botany and medicine\nbecame part of the symbolic network formed around the ideal prince\u2019s image: the\ndoctor and philosopher prince acting for his people\u2019s health and salvation. This\nimage took on a special aura under Ferdinando I, who dealt in large-scale sacred\nimages with curing powers, like the Miraculous Virgin of Santissima Annunziata or\nthe Madonna of Loreto, and medicine.\nDestined to further dynastic and political propaganda, arts and sciences had to\nreflect grand-ducal power. Therefore, the Galleria dei lavori preserved through\nsecrecy the most progressive techniques, developed a widely recognizable style for\n55]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=120\nPages: 120\nartworks that imitate nature\u2019s processes. This seems to be the basic assumption that\nunderlies all early modern manipulation of and acting with metals: naturally formed\nminerals are presented in the Kunstkammern next to artificialia to exhibit not only\nthe mimicry skills of the artists to imitate the natural forms used as models, but also\nto imitate the natural processes. The discussion of early modern theories on\nmetallogenesis has shown, that the creative process of the human artist and artisan\nwas compared to the natural genesis of the divine artifex. The same primordial\nmatters are available to the goldsmith and the metalworker, to the alchemist and to\n\u2018nature\u2019. All four follow the same working processes, only their ability differentiates the final products. The juxtaposition of form and matter, which is thought of as\na dichotomy of active force-shaping power and passive shape-receiving material, is]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=82\nPages: 82\nattention was specifically focused on alchemy\u2019s claims to overturn the relationship\nbetween art and nature; however, he also stressed that alchemy was worthy of\npursuit as it might produce knowledge that could improve the condition of\nmankind:\nMan is involved with things produced by nature and nature does not change the ordinary\nkinds of things it creates in the same way that from time to time the things created by man\nare changed; and indeed man is nature\u2019s chief instrument, because nature is concerned only\nwith the production of elementary things, but from these elementary things man produces\nan infinite number of compounds, although he has no power to create any natural things\nexcept another like himself, that is his children. [. . .] And of this the old alchemists will\nserve as my witnesses, who have never either by chance or deliberate experiment succeeded\nin creating the smallest thing which can be created by nature; [. . .] If, however, insensate]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=118\nPages: 118,119\nunderstanding of nature might mean a return to the paradisiacal original state, a\nreversion of the lost Adamic comprehension of the world by just naming it, and that\nthe reading of the book of nature could be the equivalent to reading God\u2019s\nrevelation.42 This becomes evident when Mathesius says that the precise causes\n40\nTheophilus, Essay Upon Various Arts (1847), XLV\u2013XLVII. For the Latin and a German\ntranslation, see Theophilus, \u201cMalerei und Glas,\u201d 49.\n41\nHarrison, Fall of Man.\n42\n\u201cDoch die Klagen, dass man etwas nur \u2018mit gro\u00dfer Mu\u0308he\u2019 bewa\u0308ltigt habe, begegnen einem in\nerza\u0308hlenden Quellen nach wie vor so ha\u0308ufig, dass man als innerweltlichen hochmittelalterlichen\nHauptantrieb zur Scho\u0308pfung neuer Technik die erhoffte Erleichterung ko\u0308rperlicher Arbeit\n96\nH. Haug\nFig. 3 KokosnussDoppelscheuer (coconut\nvessel), open, with the detail\nof Adam and Eve, sixteenth\ncentury St. Joachimsthal\n(?). Vienna,\nKunsthistorisches Inv.\nNo. 885/886]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=82\nPages: 82,83\nin creating the smallest thing which can be created by nature; [. . .] If, however, insensate\navarice should drive you into such error, why do you not go to the mines where nature\nproduces this gold, and there become her disciple? She will completely cure you of your\n60\nA. Bernardoni\nfolly by showing you that nothing which you employ in your furnace will be numbered\namong the things she employs in order to produce this gold.24\nAfter the acknowledgement of the ontological difference between nature and\nartificial products every invention produced by man, elsewhere significantly called\nby Leonardo seconda natura (second nature), is welcome:\nGravity and force together with material movement and percussion are the four accidental\npowers by which the human race in its marvellous and varied works seems to reveal itself\nand a second nature in this world; seeing that by the use of such powers all the visible works\nof mortals have their existence and their death.25]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=152\nPages: 152\nlate sixteenth century, but we should be aware that the myth of Galileo still casts its\nhegemonic influence, overshadowing any branch of natural knowledge which\nseems to deviate from the canons of the new mathematized \u2018sciences\u2019.\nIn what follows, I shall try to give a brief glimpse of what is hidden in this\nshadow. In order to do so we have to look into some older sources, depicting\nFlorentine cultural life just before Galileo\u2019s spectacular entrance onto the scene.\nMoreover, we need to take into consideration that, with the partial exception of\nmedicine, the investigation of natural phenomena was intimately connected with\narts and crafts, a prosperous body of activities that, particularly in Florence, had\nbeen flourishing since the late thirteenth century. It can be argued that nowhere else\ndo we find such strong ties between the arts and the sciences than in Renaissance]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=125\nPages: 125,126\nBetween Maker and Nature. Configurations 12: 1\u201340.\nSmith, Pamela H. 2004. The Body of the Artisan. Art and Experience in the Scientific Revolution.\nChicago: University of Chicago Press.\nStorczer, Stephan G. 1992. Die Handsteinsammlung des Kunsthistorischen Museums in Wien.\nVienna: Diplomarbeit Universita\u0308t Wien.\nArtificial Interventions in the Natural Form of Things: Shared. . .\n103\nStrieder, Peter. 1967. Erzstufe. In Reallexikon zur deutschen Kunstgeschichte 5: 408\u2013418. Stuttgart: Metzler.\nSuhing, Lothar. 1986. \u2018Philosophisches\u2019 in der fru\u0308hneuzeitlichen Berg- und Hu\u0308ttenkunde.\nMetallogenese und Transmutation aus der Sicht montanistischen Erfahrungswissens. In Die\nAlchemie in der europ\u20ac\naischen Kultur- und Wissenschaftsgeschichte, ed. Christoph Meinel,\n293\u2013314. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.\nTheophilus Presbyter. 1847. An Essay Upon Various Arts in Three Books, by Theophilus, Called\nalso Rugerus, Priest and Monk, Forming an Encyclopedia of Christian Art of the Eleventh]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=120\nPages: 120\nHe would be almost a second God, he [God] also wants to give him [man] the faculty to\nform within himself a mental inner design, so that he [man] by means of this could\nrecognize all the creatures & to create inside him new worlds, & inside would have\n[in form of] a spiritual existence & would enjoy all that, what he enjoys outside [in the\nouter world] as natural existence & and dominates; & in addition by the means of this\ndesign, almost imitating God, & emulating the Nature he [man] could produce infinite\nartificial things which are similar to the natural ones, & and by means of painting, &\nsculpture, makes us see new Paradises on earth.44\nAccording to Zuccari\u2019s art theoretical writings, it is the similarity to God that\nenables both the scientist and the artist to achieve an inner understanding of\nnature\u2014the scientist through research to unveil nature\u2019s secrets and the artist in\nartworks that imitate nature\u2019s processes. This seems to be the basic assumption that]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=120\nPages: 120,121\na dichotomy of active force-shaping power and passive shape-receiving material, is\nof greatest importance with regard to God and his creation, which stands as a model\nboth for the visual artist as well as the alchemist, who tries to recreate natural\nprocesses according to his will.\n44\nZuccari, L\u2019idea [1607], Book I, ch. VII, 14. See also the facsimile reproduction Zuccari, Scritti\nd\u2019Arte (1961), 162.\n98\nH. Haug\nIt is not only difficult; it is almost impossible to compare the content of a written\ntext with the content of an object. But it seems inadequate to narrow early modern\nforms and methods of scientific display down to \u2018codified\u2019 knowledge: since the\n1920s a long line of historians of science have studied how the input of workmen\nchanged the methods of Renaissance natural philosophy towards a more matterbased natural scientific research and \u2018experiment\u2019. The concept of the \u2018superior\ncraftsmen\u2019, introduced by Edgar Zilsel in 1942, who started to interact with]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=92\nPages: 92\nremained to Biringuccio the most important \u201cart\u201d for studying the secrets of nature:\nThus, in short, it can be said in conclusion that this art [alchemy] is the origin and\nfoundation of many other arts, wherefore it should be held in reverence and practiced.\nBut he who practices it must be ignorant neither of cause nor of natural effects, and not too\npoor to support the expense. Neither should he do it from avarice, but only in order to enjoy\nthe fine fruits of its effects and the knowledge of them, and that pleasing novelty which it\nshows to the experimenter in operation.42\nBiringuccio considered alchemy a legitimate knowledge grounded on experimental and speculative activity. This is an important epistemological step for\nartisanal processes because alchemy was no longer seen as a utilitarian art but as\na disinterested activity carried out by men to enjoy the fruits of their knowledge.\n41\nBiringuccio, Pirotechnia (1942), 41. For the Italian, see Biringuccio, De la pirotechnia (1977),]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=98\nPages: 98,99\nEmerton, Norma E. 1984. The Scientific Reinterpretation of Form. Ithaca/London: Cornell University Press.\nFerino-Pagden, Sylvia, Francesca del Torre Scheuch, Elisabetta Fedda, and Mino Gabriele. 2003.\nParmigianino e la pratica dell\u2019alchemica. Milan: Silvana editoriale.\nFilarete, Antonio Averlino detto il. 1972. Trattato di architettura, eds. A.M. Finoli and L. Grassi.\nMilan: Il Polifilo.\n76\nA. Bernardoni\nFindlen, Paula. 2002. Inventing Nature: Commerce, Art and Science in the Early Modern Cabinet\nof Curiosities. In Merchants and Marvels: Commerce, Science and Art in Early Modern\nEurope, eds. Pamela H. Smith and Paula Findlen, 297\u2013323. New York: Routledge.\nFrangioni, L. 1992. Milano e le sue misure, appunti di metrologia lombarda fra Tre e Quattrocento. Napoli: Edizioni Scientifiche Italiane.\nFrosini, Fabio. 1997. Pittura come filosofia: note su \u2018spirito\u2019 e \u2018spirituale\u2019. Achademia Leonardi\nVinci. Journal of Leonardo Studies & Bibliography of Vinciana 10: 35\u201359.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=117\nPages: 117\nthus the loss of the \u2018uncultivated\u2019, i.e. pre-cultural status of humanity.\nNot only iconographical programs, such as the reliefs at the foot of the Florentine Campanile (which might go back to a design by Giotto (1266\u20131337)) or the\ndepictions on the city palace of Ancona, assert this connection between the Fall and\nthe onset of \u2018artificial\u2019 human activity.39 This connection was often emphasized,\nespecially in texts that were aimed at artists and artisans. An early example is found\nin the preface to the chapter on painting by Theophilus Presbyter in De diversis\nartibus where he writes:\nWe read in the exordium of mundane creation that man, made after the image and likeness\nof God and animated by the inspiration of the Divine breath, was also, by the excellence of\nso much dignity, raised above other living creatures; as capable of reason, he merited to\nparticipate in the counsel and genius of Divine providence, and, gifted with free-will, he]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=80\nPages: 80\nvisited in Milan that discusses the organization of the workshop and the artisans\u2019\nawareness of the technological and epistemological value of their works:\n[. . .] So that whoever entered that shop and saw the activity of so many persons would, I\nthink, believe as I did that he had entered an Inferno, nay, on the contrary, a Paradise, where\nthere was a mirror in which sparkled all the beauty of genius and the power of art.19\nBiringuccio underlined the frenetic and very organized work in the workshop\nstressing the beauty of the mind of the artisans and the power of art. The harmonious cooperation between artisans and the plain consciousness of the processes of\nthe art transformed the hell of hard and dirty metallurgical work into the heaven of\nthe pursuit of the artistic goal. This oxymoron referred to the infernal and paradisiacal condition of art, exalting the extremely difficult process in which raw\nmaterial is transformed into artifact, giving back an important social value to]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=106\nPages: 106\nMathesius\u2019s texts interweave preaching and scientific imagination and thus attest\nto how strongly early modern natural philosophy and metallurgic research are\ninfluenced by the Christian episteme:\nBut my undertaking shall conduct to that effect, to show to you, my parishioners, the\nalmighty and wonderful hand of God and his immeasurable abundance and his inscrutable\nwisdom and his merciful and fatherly heart in his creation and revelation of all kinds of\nminerals and metals, to make you recognize your God in his gifts and teach you to praise\nhim, which he conveys to you in this mountain in clement benevolence.11\nThis juxtaposition of empirical knowledge based on experience next to philosophical and theological reflections of the causes of things is typical for Mathesius\nand many other writers of the sixteenth century, as they interpret their increasing\n9\nThis concept can be found in medieval authors writing on natura as goddess, as pro-dea and as]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=92\nPages: 92\nthe spirits inadvertently allowed to escape; and yet another because he had poor and feeble\nmaterials! In a word, one for one reason, and one for another, in order to hide either their\ndeception or their ignorance, all defend themselves and make excuses for their art.41\nMoreover, after marking his distance from false and sophistic alchemy,\nBiringuccio returned to what he called \u201ctrue alchemy\u201d with very positive opinions,\ntalking about it as a philosophical and technological activity grounded on reason\nand empirical experimentation which, even when following the illusory goal of\nmetal transmutation or the perfective and healthy elixir, discovered new substances,\nmedicine and technological processes. After a rational and empirical codification of\nthe chemical process and substance discovered and prepared by it, true alchemy\nremained to Biringuccio the most important \u201cart\u201d for studying the secrets of nature:]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=106\nPages: 106,107\n9\nThis concept can be found in medieval authors writing on natura as goddess, as pro-dea and as\nvicaria (assistant) of God, who was entrusted with the creatio continua, the continuous creations as\npro-creatrix, like Alanus ab Insulis or Jean de Meuns in his roman de la rose. See Modersohn,\nNatura als Gottin.\n10\nBiringuccio, Pirotechnia [1540], and Pirotechnia (1942).\n11\n\u201cMein vornehmen aber sol sich eygentlich dahin lenden, das ich euch meinen Pfarrkindern\nvornehmlich die allmechtige und wunderbarliche hand Gottes und seinen unme\u00dflichen reychtumb\nneben seiner unerforschlichen wey\u00dfheyt unnd genedigen unnd Va\u0308terlichen hertzen inn Scho\u0308pffung\nund offenbarung allerley ertz unnd metalle zeyge, damit ir ewern Got in seinen gaben erkennen\nund preysen lernet, die er euch inn diesem gebirge auf genediger gu\u0308te mittheylet.\u201d (\u201cDie Dritte\nPredigt. Von Ursprung zu und abnemen der Metallen unnd Minerischen Bergkarten und Ertzen,\u201d\nin Mathesius, Sarepta, fol. XXXIIIv).\n84\nH. Haug]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=198\nPages: 198\nsource of random observations made casually in the course of exercising their\ncraft, they initiated projects, conducted experiments, made innovations, read\nlearned treatises, and communicated or collaborated with more traditionallyeducated or more natural philosophically inclined members. While someone like\nAnthoni Grill was undoubtedly an exceptional figure, he nevertheless serves to\nillustrate one end of the spectrum of possible social and intellectual positions\noccupied by early modern gold- and silversmiths. His active participation and\neventual notoriety and success indicate the social boundaries that were crossed\nwithin the network, a situation that also existed with Caillart and Roussel and others\nin the French context as well. These examples thus begin to resituate the role of\nsuch artisan-chymists within the larger ambit of chymistry. While not erased, the\nneat division of artisan and natural philosopher emerges considerably blurred.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=194\nPages: 194\npart upon six, and cooked according to art and the doctrine of the Cosmopolite,\nwould be rendered highly exalted for the medicine of bodies both human and\nmetallic.\u201d (The phrase \u201cmedicine of bodies both human and metallic\u201d is a circumlocution for the Stone, which was reputed to be both a universal medicine for\nhuman health and a means of \u201ccuring\u201d the imperfections of the base metals, thus\nturning them into gold.) Duclos also suggested that a concave mirror\u2014a device that\nhe and other French chymists were experimenting with at the time\u2014might be used\nto reflect the rays of sun and moon more powerfully, and questioned whether burial\nin the earth was really necessary. He even linked the results to the cryptic utterances\n46\nBNU MS 370, fol. 39v; Digby\u2019s \u2018loose papers\u2019 have not survived, unless they are bound\nsomewhere amid the 6000 pages of the newly-discovered Digby manuscripts.\n47\nBorrichius, Itinerarium, vol. IV, 267, 25 February 1665.\n48]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=120\nPages: 120\nbecause in these regions the earth still reverberates in memory of the voice of God.\nAfter a meticulously detailed examination of the serpent\u2019s body the beholder\nwould have noticed an analogy between the artificial braided silver and the naturally occurring forms of a massive silver wire, a curious detail where the artist\u2019s\nhand and the formative power of nature enter into a competitive rivalry. A learned\nreference to contemporary Italian art theory could have followed, that is, to the\ncreation of Man in the image of God and Man\u2019s power to know, imitate and control\nnature. Federico Zuccari (c.1540\u20131609) for example addresses man as \u201calmost\nsecond God,\u201d who received from God the ability of an inner design by which he\ncan understand the world and by which, in imitation of Gold and in emulation of\nnature can create an infinite number of things, so that he can represent a new\nparadise on earth:\nHe would be almost a second God, he [God] also wants to give him [man] the faculty to]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=160\nPages: 160\njewelry were the arts most closely connected with alchemy. Their connections\ninspired Francesco to create a new decorative scenario, dominated by alchemy,\nby which illustrate the relation between arts and nature.\nFrancesco was extremely keen, even more than his father, to promote the study\nof the natural sciences and the arts related to them. His passion for the chemical arts\nwas so strong that in 1560, when he was only 19, he was told off by his brother\nGiovanni for attending the works of the fonderia all day long.33 It was Francesco\nwho, in September 1569, charged the architect, engineer and inventor Bernardo\nBuontalenti (1531\u20131608), who had been one of his teachers since 1550, to oversee\nthe construction of Bortolo\u2019s new glass furnace and a new fonderia.34 Francesco I\nalso exploited Buontalenti\u2019s versatile skills in the works of the fusion of precious]"]}

{"result":["[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=139\nPages: 139\nThe fonderia produced mainly small ornamental glass items (Fig. 7). The items\nin use for distillery and for the other workshops came either from Pisa, or from the\nCasino di San Marco.33 Mainly made of bronze or metal, the models of these little\nitems were created by the court goldsmiths or by the smelters: there were little\nmasks, buttons to be filled with perfumes, ornamental glasses.34 The glasses, stored\nin a hall of the Galleria \u201cla stanza dei cristalli,\u201d were distributed according to the\ngrand duke\u2019s wishes and other workshops requirements (most of them were given\nas presents or used to decorate other items coming from other workshops).35 Sisti,\nin charge of the fonderia, was responsible for the seamless transitions between the\ndifferent stages of the process, which was not always an easy task in the case of a\ndelicate material such as crystal.36\nThe Forge\nIn the Uffizi, the forge and smelting works were far less visible and have less]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=17\nPages: 17\nchemistry and skilled in porcelain production. Remarkably, the success of porcelain\nproduction was due to the introduction of techniques of investigation, which did not\nbelong to the traditional potter\u2019s skills, but to chymistry, which had overlapped with\nthe worlds of metallurgy and assaying for centuries.\nGrill, Dwight, and Tschirnhaus are only a few of the numerous examples of\nglassmakers, silver- and goldsmiths and producers of porcelain whose expertise\nwas both based in the worlds of bookish learning and grounded in hands-on work.\nDifficult to categorize as either craftsman or scholar, they are responsible for\nepistemic exchanges between the artisanal and the scholarly worlds. The rise of\nthese hybrid artisan-scholars was connected to the establishment of laboratories in\nwhich art technologies and alchemy were brought together, the first of these being\nat Renaissance courts. Laboratories and artisanal workshops shared a material\n25]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=16\nPages: 16\nof scholarly culture, played an increasingly important role in laboratories and\nworkshops. In these workplaces, a sort of hybrid figure was at work, with one\nfoot in artisanal culture and another in scholarly culture and impossible to categorize in mutually exclusive categories of the scholar and the craftsman.23 Certain\ntypes of crafts\u2014glassmaking, gold- and silversmithing, and porcelain production\u2014\nseem to have been particularly prone to exchanges between artisanal and scholarly\nalchemical cultures. By the seventeenth century, the expertise of some glassmakers,\nsilver- and goldsmiths and producers of porcelain was just as based in the worlds of\nalchemical and bookish learning as it was grounded in hands-on work in the\nlaboratory.24 Lawrence Principe and Morgan Wesley discuss two examples of\nsuch arts: silversmithing and porcelain production, respectively.\n21\nFor \u2018trading zones\u2019 between artisanal and scholarly cultures, see Long, Artisan/Practitioners.\nKlein, \u201cChemical Experts.\u201d\n23]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=160\nPages: 160\njewelry were the arts most closely connected with alchemy. Their connections\ninspired Francesco to create a new decorative scenario, dominated by alchemy,\nby which illustrate the relation between arts and nature.\nFrancesco was extremely keen, even more than his father, to promote the study\nof the natural sciences and the arts related to them. His passion for the chemical arts\nwas so strong that in 1560, when he was only 19, he was told off by his brother\nGiovanni for attending the works of the fonderia all day long.33 It was Francesco\nwho, in September 1569, charged the architect, engineer and inventor Bernardo\nBuontalenti (1531\u20131608), who had been one of his teachers since 1550, to oversee\nthe construction of Bortolo\u2019s new glass furnace and a new fonderia.34 Francesco I\nalso exploited Buontalenti\u2019s versatile skills in the works of the fusion of precious]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=204\nPages: 204\nby the Benedictine monk Theophilus, thoroughly introduces the full range of\nartisanal productions valued in Europe in its first book.6 Pottery is entirely absent\nfrom this discussion of laudable arts and only appears once in the text as a canvas\nfor enameling.7 This is a continuation of pottery\u2019s position in the classical period,\nwhen earthen objects were valued as trade goods, everyday wares, or a medium for\nother decoration, not for their individual aesthetic form.8\nIt was not until advancements in the production of luxury quality European\npottery during the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries that the cultural perception of\nthe material changed significantly, driving engagement by the upper classes and\nnatural philosophers. An example can be found in a letter from Lorenzo de Medici\n(1449\u20131492) to the Malatesta family in 1490, favorably comparing their gift of\nmaiolica to silver objects, which is one of the earliest pieces of documentary\n4\nBiringuccio, Pirotechnia (1942), 392.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=34\nPages: 34\nthemselves and their wives the uses of potions and spell. First Azae\u0304l, the tenth of the\nleaders, taught them to make swords and armours and every instrument of war and how to\nwork the metals of the earth and gold, how to make them into adornments for their wives,\nand silver. He showed them also the use of cosmetics and beautifying the face and choice\nstones and colouring tinctures.29\nThe list of crafts revealed by Azae\u0304l, which includes the working of metals (with\nexplicit mention of gold and silver) and of precious stones along with \u03c4\u1f70 \u03b2\u03b1\u03c6\u03b9\u03ba\u03ac\n(dyeing procedures) in a more general sense, shows clear similarities with the topics\ncovered by ps.-Democritus\u2019s four books, which nevertheless do not refer back to\nthis myth (at least in the preserved sections). On the contrary, the myth was\nreworked in Isis\u2019s treatise, where the secret teaching of the angels was limited\nonly to the preparation of gold and silver. These different approaches to what was]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=105\nPages: 105\nhuman artisan, who imitates nature in his workshop with the substances available to\nhim, stating \u201cGod has various schmeltzwerck [products produced by melting/fusion/\ncasting] in his laboratorio [workshop] and smelts the metals as beautifully and in as\nmany colours as the flowers in the field or the crests of a stonecutter.\u201d7 God is\npersonified as some kind of metalworker, maybe a goldsmith in his workshop, who\nuses a smelting process to form the several metals that can be found in the earth.\nAnd Mathesius doesn\u2019t leave any doubts that this is a perpetual process when he\nexplains:\nThe experience of every day shows\u2014aside from scholarly reports\u2014that our God daily\ncreates and lets grow in the earth all kinds of noble and rough stones as well as the various\nprecious and salubrious bergsafften [juices of the mountain] and various bergarten [minerals], ores and pure metals.8\n5\n\u201cvon ewern metallen oder wi ir pflegt zu reden von allerley bergarten unnd ertzen unnd von iren]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=16\nPages: 16,15\nFireworks, 28.\n20\nSmith, Body of the Artisan. esp. 95\u2013127.\nIntroduction\nxv\nsermons to reveal conceptions of the origin and formation of ores for which\nMathesius drew equally on natural philosophy and alchemy and on the artisanal\nknowledge of the local miners and goldsmiths. Following one of the goldsmiths\u2019\nmost prized objects, a so-called Handstein, into the Kunstkammer, Haug shows that\nthis knowledge also reached elite collectors. They valued Handsteine for the\nmetallogenetic knowledge they embodied, thereby endorsing the shifting epistemic\nstatus of the arts.\nEpistemic Changes Between Artisans and Alchemists\nBiringuccio and Mathesius\u2019s St. Joachimsthal are examples of persons and places\nof exchange between scholarly cultures (in which learning is based on reading and\nwriting) and artisanal cultures (in which learning is based on doing).21 The laboratories created in Medici Florence, discussed in the chapters by Kieffer and]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=203\nPages: 203,204\nthe decorative arts before the early modern period is worthwhile. Prior to its\ninteraction with chymistry, the relationship between the potter\u2019s craft and fire was\nprincipally of a mechanical, fixative nature. As the heat of the kiln was known to\nremove the water from earthen bodies, its ability to affect permanent transformation\non the materials placed in the kiln was its principal contribution to the success of\nceramic production. Those objects existed first as trade goods rather than artisanal\nobjects and only later became valued as aesthetic products. Vannoccio\nBiringuccio\u2019s (1480\u2013c.1539) introduction to his brief \u201cdiscourse on the art of the\npotter\u201d from his Pirotechnia of 1540, encapsulates both the recent recognition\nreceived by ceramic craft and its inseparability from fire:\n184\nM. Wesley\nHaving started to tell you of working potter\u2019s clay for making crucibles and shells, the wish\ncame to me to tell you of the practice of this art also. Although it may seem at first glance to]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=12\nPages: 12\nand a confectionary. The activities performed in the Uffizi included everything from\npreparing jams and sugar sculptures to the production of glass and fireworks (and\nless peaceful applications of saltpeter). Francesco I also established the Casino di\nSan Marco. It included an alchemical laboratory, a furnace for producing porcelain,\nand a glass workshop in which, under the direction of Niccolo Sisti, cristallo\n(so named because it was as clear as rock crystal) was made, as well as all sorts\nof colored glass in imitation of precious stones. Other important activities in the\nCasino were the fusion of rock crystal, the counterfeiting of precious stones, the\nproduction of fireworks, and the preparation of pharmaceutical remedies. Similar\nactivities were developed in the Uffizi and the Casino, and recipes and personnel\ntravelled between the two places. The only exception was Medici porcelain, which\nwas exclusively produced in the workshops of the Casino.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=49\nPages: 49,50\nvol. I.\n26\nS. Neven\nand descriptions of miscellaneous chemical operations, including instructions for\nthe manufacture of dyes and pigments, for the gilding and painting on glass, as well\nas, among others, metalwork, chrysography, distilling alcohol, making candy, and\ncreating military devices.12\nMediaeval and Premodern Recipe Books\nIn mediaeval and premodern times, artistic and alchemical procedures were often\ndescribed within compilations of texts that may concurrently address various fields\nsuch as medicine, cooking, botany or pharmacology. They also include magical\nrecipes, dietetical instructions or advice on home-economics. All these various\ndisciplines are embedded within the genre of the Fachliteratur.13 This kind of\nliterature regroups all texts of a utilitarian and informative nature whose content\ndoes not principally concern aesthetic or religious issues, or matters relating to\nemotional purpose.14 A great number of these writings share the same format and]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=138\nPages: 138\nemployees to prepare distillates or medicines outside the fonderia; even inside the\nfonderia, no medicine could be prepared or used without advice from a doctor or\nauthority from a grand duke; no medicine could be distributed without a written\norder from the surveyor of the fonderia; all orders were to be registered by the\nsurveyor in a copybook.28\nThe Activities in the Fonderia: Between Art and Science\nGlassmaking\nThe art of glassmaking was well represented among the activities in the fonderia at\nthe Uffizi. Ferdinando I was the one who decided to transfer glassmakers and their\nequipment from the Casino to the Uffizi. During Francesco I\u2019s reign the Casino\nhoused a very important artistic glass workshop where the prince worked on his\nown experiments (for example smelting rock crystal).29 This laboratory was lead by\nSisti, who also lead a glassmaking laboratory in Pisa, where he often had to go. In\nhis early career he used the technique a lume di lucerna, but once he transfered to]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=103\nPages: 103\n(Ore Mountains), Harz and other regions through the methods of observation, of\ncollecting and of categorization\u2014was incorporated into scientific treatises on the\nformation of metals and helped to change and develop this domain. The artisan\u2019s\ncraft knowledge about matter and materials rarely found its way into a written form.\nIt was most commonly expressed in its suitable mode, the accomplished work of\nart.2\nThe second part of the article analyses the materials and shape of a coconut\nvessel on display in the Kunsthistorisches Museum in Vienna (Fig. 1) to see if the\naforementioned metallogenetical theories could have had an impact on the form of\na sixteenth-century art object: in this Kunstkammer object an unknown goldsmith\nfrom the Erzgebirge created a mountainous landscape, simultaneously a representation of paradise with Adam and Eve eating from the tree of knowledge and the\ndepiction of a post-expulsion mining area populated by contemporary miners. This]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=121\nPages: 121,122\nchemical lore concerning material properties and agency. It is important to note,\n45\n46\nZilsel, \u201cRoots\u201d; Smith, Body of the Artisan; and Long, Artisan/Practitioners.\nNewman, Promethean Ambitions, ch. III, 34\u2013114.\nArtificial Interventions in the Natural Form of Things: Shared. . .\n99\nthat the procedures applied by an alchemist and by a goldsmith are in large parts the\nsame: both required the know how to purify metals, to isolate them from the mixed\nmineral forms they are found in and transform them into massive pure metals. Both\nthe alchemist and the goldsmith share the same theoretical concepts, assuming that\nsulphur and quicksilver are the two original components of all metals. By alloying\nthese metals, by forcing them into forms, both locate their actions within the context\nof natural metallogenesis and both suppose, that they thereby imitate God and his\ncreative processes. But it is hard to prove that the goldsmith followed the same]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=122\nPages: 122\nareas. But this corresponds with the interconnected nature of these fields, as\npreviously outlined: early modern concepts of metallogenesis must be understood\nas a mixture of religious connotations, their dependency on antique montanistic\ntheories as well as on alchemical lore adopted through medieval Islamic mediation.\nBeyond that, a work of art communicates in different ways than a text. The object\ntransforms the know how of the artisan as it is performed in the working process and\nblends it with the lore of the scholar into embodied, visual knowledge. This\nknowledge, encapsulated in the work of art can then be exhibited in the surroundings of the ruler, in his Kunstkammer collection as well as in processions and\ncourtly festivities.47 It is\u2014apart from instruments to measure natural phenomena,\nwhich Baird puts in the focus of his analysis \u2014not \u2018useful\u2019 in the sense that it\nembodied knowledge which can be used to gain and widen existent knowledge. But]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=180\nPages: 180\nepistemic exchanges or collaborations on the level of practical or theoretical\nknowledge.\nDocumented examples of extended collaborations or exchanges between artisans and natural philosophers would be both more interesting and more informative\nfor mapping out the domains and dynamics of early modern alchemical practice. A\npromising locus for such study is to be found particularly among gold- and\nsilversmiths. On the one hand, their trade regularly involved chymical processes\nsuch as assaying, refining, and so forth, and they were thus more or less conversant\nwith chymical substances (acids, salts, metals, amalgams, etc.) and chymical\noperations (fusion, quartation, distillation, etc.) and would frequently have\nmaintained workshops equipped with the necessary equipment (furnaces, flues,\nfuel, retorts, crucibles, etc.) needed for chymical work generally. On the other\nhand, the basic materials of their artisanal labors\u2014gold and silver\u2014held a central\n5\nSee Smith, Body of the Artisan.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=178\nPages: 178\nGoldsmiths and Chymists: The Activity\nof Artisans Within Alchemical Circles\nLawrence M. Principe\nAbstract The study of early modern alchemical practitioners has recently\nexpanded from the work and writings of natural philosophers to include the labors\nof artisans. Yet there remains relatively little clear documentation about the specifics\nof such artisanal chymical practices or about the degree of significant epistemic\nexchange that may have taken place between artisans and better-known chymists.\nThis paper examines several gold- and silversmiths who were part of an extended\nalchemical network that stretched across the Netherlands, France, and England in\nthe mid-seventeenth century. The silversmith Anthoni Grill (and to a lesser extent\nhis brother Andries) worked on refining and transmutational processes with impressive chymical expertise and eventually achieved international notoriety and social\nand financial success. Grill built large laboratories, managed laborants, engaged in]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=80\nPages: 80,79\n14\nLong, Artisan/Practitioners, 94\u20136. See also, Galison, \u201cTrading Zone.\u201d\n15\nHannaway, \u201cLaboratory Design.\u201d\n12\nArtisanal Processes and Epistemological Debate in the Works of Leonardo. . .\n57\n(1513), in Biringuccio\u2019s Pirotechnia, and in Agricola\u2019s De re metallica.16 Further\nnascent signs of a distinct and autonomous chemical laboratory with purpose-built\n\u2018chemical\u2019 equipment can be found in the more general context of the Renaissance\nartist\u2019s workshop culture. Here, together with the fine arts such as painting, sculpture, architecture and jewelry making, metal carpentry, and gun casting, we find\noperations that use substance transformation, such as distillation and sublimation.\nThere is evidence that even the most important names in the history of art were\ninvolved in such workshop activities, for instance Michelangelo (1475\u20131564),\nwhose Florentine workshop, as mentioned in his correspondence with his brother,\nwas involved in generic metal carpentry such as the casting and welding of]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=139\nPages: 139\nThe Forge\nIn the Uffizi, the forge and smelting works were far less visible and have less\nprestige. Only small items are worked on in the forge: little masks for the ornamentation of furniture, buttons to be filled with perfumes, moulds for crystal, little\nanimals to be worked out in sugar.37 The forge was mainly used to make objects for\nthe other workshops: locks and keys for furniture, metallic receptacles (cups,\nbuckets, basins etc.), and tools. The leading smith, a Frenchman, Guillaume\nLema\u0131\u0302tre, (Guglielmo di Matre or Lemetre), settled as soon as 1587 in the fonderia\n33\nASF, GM 183, ins. 6, fol. 35\u201336.\nASF, GM 124, fol. 97, 118\u2019; GM 183, ins. 4, fol. 97. For the stylistic aspects of those decorative\nobjects, see Kieffer, \u201cSavant dessinateur\u201d; and Heikamp, \u201cMediceische Glaskunst.\u201d\n35\nASF, GM 183, ins. 18, fol. 47.\n36\n\u201cA Maestro Niccolo Sisti a Pisa scrisse il Cavaliere Vinta detto di [6 maggio 1592]. Viene scritto]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=206\nPages: 206\nof those materials, even though other artisans were making use of them. The failure\nwas thus not connected to any form of geological predetermination, but entirely by\nsocial constraints limiting the application of knowledge to the problem.\nThe speculation that porcelain was comprised of either special clay, fermented\nfor generations, or of crushed shell incorporated in its manufacture, was a direct\nindication that similar materials were outside the realm of contemporary craft\nknowledge.14 In order to successfully move past these limitations, the experimental\ntechniques of the natural philosophers allowed objects from China to serve as\nprototypes for interrogation towards their properties and composition. It is at this\npoint that the techniques employed by chymistry, some borrowed from metallurgical assaying and the furnaces of the glassmakers in the centuries-long discourse\nbetween the disciplines, came into full application in the pursuit of ceramic\ninnovation.]"]}

{"result":["[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=120\nPages: 120\nartworks that imitate nature\u2019s processes. This seems to be the basic assumption that\nunderlies all early modern manipulation of and acting with metals: naturally formed\nminerals are presented in the Kunstkammern next to artificialia to exhibit not only\nthe mimicry skills of the artists to imitate the natural forms used as models, but also\nto imitate the natural processes. The discussion of early modern theories on\nmetallogenesis has shown, that the creative process of the human artist and artisan\nwas compared to the natural genesis of the divine artifex. The same primordial\nmatters are available to the goldsmith and the metalworker, to the alchemist and to\n\u2018nature\u2019. All four follow the same working processes, only their ability differentiates the final products. The juxtaposition of form and matter, which is thought of as\na dichotomy of active force-shaping power and passive shape-receiving material, is]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=117\nPages: 117\nthus the loss of the \u2018uncultivated\u2019, i.e. pre-cultural status of humanity.\nNot only iconographical programs, such as the reliefs at the foot of the Florentine Campanile (which might go back to a design by Giotto (1266\u20131337)) or the\ndepictions on the city palace of Ancona, assert this connection between the Fall and\nthe onset of \u2018artificial\u2019 human activity.39 This connection was often emphasized,\nespecially in texts that were aimed at artists and artisans. An early example is found\nin the preface to the chapter on painting by Theophilus Presbyter in De diversis\nartibus where he writes:\nWe read in the exordium of mundane creation that man, made after the image and likeness\nof God and animated by the inspiration of the Divine breath, was also, by the excellence of\nso much dignity, raised above other living creatures; as capable of reason, he merited to\nparticipate in the counsel and genius of Divine providence, and, gifted with free-will, he]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=82\nPages: 82\nattention was specifically focused on alchemy\u2019s claims to overturn the relationship\nbetween art and nature; however, he also stressed that alchemy was worthy of\npursuit as it might produce knowledge that could improve the condition of\nmankind:\nMan is involved with things produced by nature and nature does not change the ordinary\nkinds of things it creates in the same way that from time to time the things created by man\nare changed; and indeed man is nature\u2019s chief instrument, because nature is concerned only\nwith the production of elementary things, but from these elementary things man produces\nan infinite number of compounds, although he has no power to create any natural things\nexcept another like himself, that is his children. [. . .] And of this the old alchemists will\nserve as my witnesses, who have never either by chance or deliberate experiment succeeded\nin creating the smallest thing which can be created by nature; [. . .] If, however, insensate]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=120\nPages: 120\nHe would be almost a second God, he [God] also wants to give him [man] the faculty to\nform within himself a mental inner design, so that he [man] by means of this could\nrecognize all the creatures & to create inside him new worlds, & inside would have\n[in form of] a spiritual existence & would enjoy all that, what he enjoys outside [in the\nouter world] as natural existence & and dominates; & in addition by the means of this\ndesign, almost imitating God, & emulating the Nature he [man] could produce infinite\nartificial things which are similar to the natural ones, & and by means of painting, &\nsculpture, makes us see new Paradises on earth.44\nAccording to Zuccari\u2019s art theoretical writings, it is the similarity to God that\nenables both the scientist and the artist to achieve an inner understanding of\nnature\u2014the scientist through research to unveil nature\u2019s secrets and the artist in\nartworks that imitate nature\u2019s processes. This seems to be the basic assumption that]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=120\nPages: 120\nbecause in these regions the earth still reverberates in memory of the voice of God.\nAfter a meticulously detailed examination of the serpent\u2019s body the beholder\nwould have noticed an analogy between the artificial braided silver and the naturally occurring forms of a massive silver wire, a curious detail where the artist\u2019s\nhand and the formative power of nature enter into a competitive rivalry. A learned\nreference to contemporary Italian art theory could have followed, that is, to the\ncreation of Man in the image of God and Man\u2019s power to know, imitate and control\nnature. Federico Zuccari (c.1540\u20131609) for example addresses man as \u201calmost\nsecond God,\u201d who received from God the ability of an inner design by which he\ncan understand the world and by which, in imitation of Gold and in emulation of\nnature can create an infinite number of things, so that he can represent a new\nparadise on earth:\nHe would be almost a second God, he [God] also wants to give him [man] the faculty to]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=118\nPages: 118,119\nunderstanding of nature might mean a return to the paradisiacal original state, a\nreversion of the lost Adamic comprehension of the world by just naming it, and that\nthe reading of the book of nature could be the equivalent to reading God\u2019s\nrevelation.42 This becomes evident when Mathesius says that the precise causes\n40\nTheophilus, Essay Upon Various Arts (1847), XLV\u2013XLVII. For the Latin and a German\ntranslation, see Theophilus, \u201cMalerei und Glas,\u201d 49.\n41\nHarrison, Fall of Man.\n42\n\u201cDoch die Klagen, dass man etwas nur \u2018mit gro\u00dfer Mu\u0308he\u2019 bewa\u0308ltigt habe, begegnen einem in\nerza\u0308hlenden Quellen nach wie vor so ha\u0308ufig, dass man als innerweltlichen hochmittelalterlichen\nHauptantrieb zur Scho\u0308pfung neuer Technik die erhoffte Erleichterung ko\u0308rperlicher Arbeit\n96\nH. Haug\nFig. 3 KokosnussDoppelscheuer (coconut\nvessel), open, with the detail\nof Adam and Eve, sixteenth\ncentury St. Joachimsthal\n(?). Vienna,\nKunsthistorisches Inv.\nNo. 885/886]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=146\nPages: 146\nadministration of artistic and scientific activities in order to produce characteristic\nobjects he used as tributes to consolidate his politic alliances.\nThe cohabitation between arts and sciences still corresponded to the ancient\nway: in the Renaissance, according to the philosophers and the theologians, arts and\nsciences both belonged to natural philosophy. Besides, botany and medicine\nbecame part of the symbolic network formed around the ideal prince\u2019s image: the\ndoctor and philosopher prince acting for his people\u2019s health and salvation. This\nimage took on a special aura under Ferdinando I, who dealt in large-scale sacred\nimages with curing powers, like the Miraculous Virgin of Santissima Annunziata or\nthe Madonna of Loreto, and medicine.\nDestined to further dynastic and political propaganda, arts and sciences had to\nreflect grand-ducal power. Therefore, the Galleria dei lavori preserved through\nsecrecy the most progressive techniques, developed a widely recognizable style for\n55]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=122\nPages: 122\nareas. But this corresponds with the interconnected nature of these fields, as\npreviously outlined: early modern concepts of metallogenesis must be understood\nas a mixture of religious connotations, their dependency on antique montanistic\ntheories as well as on alchemical lore adopted through medieval Islamic mediation.\nBeyond that, a work of art communicates in different ways than a text. The object\ntransforms the know how of the artisan as it is performed in the working process and\nblends it with the lore of the scholar into embodied, visual knowledge. This\nknowledge, encapsulated in the work of art can then be exhibited in the surroundings of the ruler, in his Kunstkammer collection as well as in processions and\ncourtly festivities.47 It is\u2014apart from instruments to measure natural phenomena,\nwhich Baird puts in the focus of his analysis \u2014not \u2018useful\u2019 in the sense that it\nembodied knowledge which can be used to gain and widen existent knowledge. But]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=82\nPages: 82,83\nin creating the smallest thing which can be created by nature; [. . .] If, however, insensate\navarice should drive you into such error, why do you not go to the mines where nature\nproduces this gold, and there become her disciple? She will completely cure you of your\n60\nA. Bernardoni\nfolly by showing you that nothing which you employ in your furnace will be numbered\namong the things she employs in order to produce this gold.24\nAfter the acknowledgement of the ontological difference between nature and\nartificial products every invention produced by man, elsewhere significantly called\nby Leonardo seconda natura (second nature), is welcome:\nGravity and force together with material movement and percussion are the four accidental\npowers by which the human race in its marvellous and varied works seems to reveal itself\nand a second nature in this world; seeing that by the use of such powers all the visible works\nof mortals have their existence and their death.25]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=125\nPages: 125,126\nBetween Maker and Nature. Configurations 12: 1\u201340.\nSmith, Pamela H. 2004. The Body of the Artisan. Art and Experience in the Scientific Revolution.\nChicago: University of Chicago Press.\nStorczer, Stephan G. 1992. Die Handsteinsammlung des Kunsthistorischen Museums in Wien.\nVienna: Diplomarbeit Universita\u0308t Wien.\nArtificial Interventions in the Natural Form of Things: Shared. . .\n103\nStrieder, Peter. 1967. Erzstufe. In Reallexikon zur deutschen Kunstgeschichte 5: 408\u2013418. Stuttgart: Metzler.\nSuhing, Lothar. 1986. \u2018Philosophisches\u2019 in der fru\u0308hneuzeitlichen Berg- und Hu\u0308ttenkunde.\nMetallogenese und Transmutation aus der Sicht montanistischen Erfahrungswissens. In Die\nAlchemie in der europ\u20ac\naischen Kultur- und Wissenschaftsgeschichte, ed. Christoph Meinel,\n293\u2013314. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.\nTheophilus Presbyter. 1847. An Essay Upon Various Arts in Three Books, by Theophilus, Called\nalso Rugerus, Priest and Monk, Forming an Encyclopedia of Christian Art of the Eleventh]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=80\nPages: 80\nvisited in Milan that discusses the organization of the workshop and the artisans\u2019\nawareness of the technological and epistemological value of their works:\n[. . .] So that whoever entered that shop and saw the activity of so many persons would, I\nthink, believe as I did that he had entered an Inferno, nay, on the contrary, a Paradise, where\nthere was a mirror in which sparkled all the beauty of genius and the power of art.19\nBiringuccio underlined the frenetic and very organized work in the workshop\nstressing the beauty of the mind of the artisans and the power of art. The harmonious cooperation between artisans and the plain consciousness of the processes of\nthe art transformed the hell of hard and dirty metallurgical work into the heaven of\nthe pursuit of the artistic goal. This oxymoron referred to the infernal and paradisiacal condition of art, exalting the extremely difficult process in which raw\nmaterial is transformed into artifact, giving back an important social value to]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=120\nPages: 120,119\nto the subject of God as craftsman who, like his earthly colleague, is dependent on\ngood materials and hot fires to make excellent stones and minerals. According to\ndurchaus erkennen kann. Lehrma\u0308\u00dfig lie\u00df sich auf diese Weise ein Sieg u\u0308ber die Su\u0308ndhaftigkeit\nAdams erzielen.\u201d (Ludwig, \u201cTechnik,\u201d 36).\n43\n\u201c[. . .] die wir wohl noch zur Zeit unerforscht lassen mu\u0308ssen, bis wir mit neuen und gescheurten\nAugen hinein in die wesentliche Gestalt der Kreaturen wie Adam vor dem Falle wieder sehen\nwerden.\u201d\nArtificial Interventions in the Natural Form of Things: Shared. . .\n97\ncontemporary notions not only exotic nuts and fruits grew better in warmer regions,\nbut also gold and valuable gems were more frequently to be found there. Mathesius\nstates for example, that areas in the vicinity of the earthly paradise (i.e. somewhere\nin the vicinity of Persia) have particularly excellent mineral and gemstone deposits,\nbecause in these regions the earth still reverberates in memory of the voice of God.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=106\nPages: 106,107\n9\nThis concept can be found in medieval authors writing on natura as goddess, as pro-dea and as\nvicaria (assistant) of God, who was entrusted with the creatio continua, the continuous creations as\npro-creatrix, like Alanus ab Insulis or Jean de Meuns in his roman de la rose. See Modersohn,\nNatura als Gottin.\n10\nBiringuccio, Pirotechnia [1540], and Pirotechnia (1942).\n11\n\u201cMein vornehmen aber sol sich eygentlich dahin lenden, das ich euch meinen Pfarrkindern\nvornehmlich die allmechtige und wunderbarliche hand Gottes und seinen unme\u00dflichen reychtumb\nneben seiner unerforschlichen wey\u00dfheyt unnd genedigen unnd Va\u0308terlichen hertzen inn Scho\u0308pffung\nund offenbarung allerley ertz unnd metalle zeyge, damit ir ewern Got in seinen gaben erkennen\nund preysen lernet, die er euch inn diesem gebirge auf genediger gu\u0308te mittheylet.\u201d (\u201cDie Dritte\nPredigt. Von Ursprung zu und abnemen der Metallen unnd Minerischen Bergkarten und Ertzen,\u201d\nin Mathesius, Sarepta, fol. XXXIIIv).\n84\nH. Haug]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=120\nPages: 120,121\na dichotomy of active force-shaping power and passive shape-receiving material, is\nof greatest importance with regard to God and his creation, which stands as a model\nboth for the visual artist as well as the alchemist, who tries to recreate natural\nprocesses according to his will.\n44\nZuccari, L\u2019idea [1607], Book I, ch. VII, 14. See also the facsimile reproduction Zuccari, Scritti\nd\u2019Arte (1961), 162.\n98\nH. Haug\nIt is not only difficult; it is almost impossible to compare the content of a written\ntext with the content of an object. But it seems inadequate to narrow early modern\nforms and methods of scientific display down to \u2018codified\u2019 knowledge: since the\n1920s a long line of historians of science have studied how the input of workmen\nchanged the methods of Renaissance natural philosophy towards a more matterbased natural scientific research and \u2018experiment\u2019. The concept of the \u2018superior\ncraftsmen\u2019, introduced by Edgar Zilsel in 1942, who started to interact with]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=152\nPages: 152\nlate sixteenth century, but we should be aware that the myth of Galileo still casts its\nhegemonic influence, overshadowing any branch of natural knowledge which\nseems to deviate from the canons of the new mathematized \u2018sciences\u2019.\nIn what follows, I shall try to give a brief glimpse of what is hidden in this\nshadow. In order to do so we have to look into some older sources, depicting\nFlorentine cultural life just before Galileo\u2019s spectacular entrance onto the scene.\nMoreover, we need to take into consideration that, with the partial exception of\nmedicine, the investigation of natural phenomena was intimately connected with\narts and crafts, a prosperous body of activities that, particularly in Florence, had\nbeen flourishing since the late thirteenth century. It can be argued that nowhere else\ndo we find such strong ties between the arts and the sciences than in Renaissance]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=103\nPages: 103\n(Ore Mountains), Harz and other regions through the methods of observation, of\ncollecting and of categorization\u2014was incorporated into scientific treatises on the\nformation of metals and helped to change and develop this domain. The artisan\u2019s\ncraft knowledge about matter and materials rarely found its way into a written form.\nIt was most commonly expressed in its suitable mode, the accomplished work of\nart.2\nThe second part of the article analyses the materials and shape of a coconut\nvessel on display in the Kunsthistorisches Museum in Vienna (Fig. 1) to see if the\naforementioned metallogenetical theories could have had an impact on the form of\na sixteenth-century art object: in this Kunstkammer object an unknown goldsmith\nfrom the Erzgebirge created a mountainous landscape, simultaneously a representation of paradise with Adam and Eve eating from the tree of knowledge and the\ndepiction of a post-expulsion mining area populated by contemporary miners. This]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=118\nPages: 118\nface shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for\ndust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return.\nIn the text of Theophilus Presbyter this connection between the human ability of\nartisanal creativity through his divine derivation (the man as imago and similitudo\nof God according to his faculty) is emphasized. But the negative connotations of all\nhuman artistic creation as the result of the Fall is turned positively into a iure\nhereditario, into the ability to create art and ingenium. For the contemporary\nbeholder the connection of Kunstkammer and Fall of Mankind and the correlation\nof the ability of man to create and cultivate and the loss of the paradisiacal, per\ndefinition non-cultivated condition, must have been obvious.41\nBehind the biblical scene the viewer discovers miners at work, a diviner, who is\nin search of ore deposits, and two workers with wedges extracting minerals from the]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=125\nPages: 125\nChronicken. Nuremberg: J. vom Berg und U. Newbar.\nMathesius, Johannes. 1897. Hochzeitspredigten. Ausgew\u20ac\nahlte Werke, vol. 2, ed. Georg Loesche,\n169\u2013190. Prague/Vienna/Leipzig: Tempsky.\nModersohn, Mechthild. 1997. Natura als Go\u0308ttin im Mittelalter. Ikonographische Studien zu\nDarstellungen der personifizierten Natur. Berlin: Akademie Verlag.\nNewman, William R. 2004. Promethean Ambitions: Alchemy and the Quest to Perfect Nature.\nChicago: University of Chicago Press.\nNobis, Heribert M. 1971. Buch der Natur. In Historisches Wo\u0308rterbuch der Philosophie, vol. 1, ed.\nJoachim Ritter, 957\u2013959. Darmstadt: WBG.\nNummedal, Tara E. 2007. Alchemy and Authority in the Holy Roman Empire. Chicago: University\nof Chicago Press.\nPalissy, Bernard. 1996. Discours admirables. Oevres Comple\u0300tes, vol. 2, ed. Keith Cameron. Montde-Marsan: Editions Interuniversitaires SPEC.\nQuellmalz, Werner. 1969. Zur Materialfrage bergma\u0308nnischer Handsteine der Renaissance.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=105\nPages: 105\nhuman artisan, who imitates nature in his workshop with the substances available to\nhim, stating \u201cGod has various schmeltzwerck [products produced by melting/fusion/\ncasting] in his laboratorio [workshop] and smelts the metals as beautifully and in as\nmany colours as the flowers in the field or the crests of a stonecutter.\u201d7 God is\npersonified as some kind of metalworker, maybe a goldsmith in his workshop, who\nuses a smelting process to form the several metals that can be found in the earth.\nAnd Mathesius doesn\u2019t leave any doubts that this is a perpetual process when he\nexplains:\nThe experience of every day shows\u2014aside from scholarly reports\u2014that our God daily\ncreates and lets grow in the earth all kinds of noble and rough stones as well as the various\nprecious and salubrious bergsafften [juices of the mountain] and various bergarten [minerals], ores and pure metals.8\n5\n\u201cvon ewern metallen oder wi ir pflegt zu reden von allerley bergarten unnd ertzen unnd von iren]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=92\nPages: 92\nremained to Biringuccio the most important \u201cart\u201d for studying the secrets of nature:\nThus, in short, it can be said in conclusion that this art [alchemy] is the origin and\nfoundation of many other arts, wherefore it should be held in reverence and practiced.\nBut he who practices it must be ignorant neither of cause nor of natural effects, and not too\npoor to support the expense. Neither should he do it from avarice, but only in order to enjoy\nthe fine fruits of its effects and the knowledge of them, and that pleasing novelty which it\nshows to the experimenter in operation.42\nBiringuccio considered alchemy a legitimate knowledge grounded on experimental and speculative activity. This is an important epistemological step for\nartisanal processes because alchemy was no longer seen as a utilitarian art but as\na disinterested activity carried out by men to enjoy the fruits of their knowledge.\n41\nBiringuccio, Pirotechnia (1942), 41. For the Italian, see Biringuccio, De la pirotechnia (1977),]"]}

{"result":["[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=82\nPages: 82\nattention was specifically focused on alchemy\u2019s claims to overturn the relationship\nbetween art and nature; however, he also stressed that alchemy was worthy of\npursuit as it might produce knowledge that could improve the condition of\nmankind:\nMan is involved with things produced by nature and nature does not change the ordinary\nkinds of things it creates in the same way that from time to time the things created by man\nare changed; and indeed man is nature\u2019s chief instrument, because nature is concerned only\nwith the production of elementary things, but from these elementary things man produces\nan infinite number of compounds, although he has no power to create any natural things\nexcept another like himself, that is his children. [. . .] And of this the old alchemists will\nserve as my witnesses, who have never either by chance or deliberate experiment succeeded\nin creating the smallest thing which can be created by nature; [. . .] If, however, insensate]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=118\nPages: 118,119\nunderstanding of nature might mean a return to the paradisiacal original state, a\nreversion of the lost Adamic comprehension of the world by just naming it, and that\nthe reading of the book of nature could be the equivalent to reading God\u2019s\nrevelation.42 This becomes evident when Mathesius says that the precise causes\n40\nTheophilus, Essay Upon Various Arts (1847), XLV\u2013XLVII. For the Latin and a German\ntranslation, see Theophilus, \u201cMalerei und Glas,\u201d 49.\n41\nHarrison, Fall of Man.\n42\n\u201cDoch die Klagen, dass man etwas nur \u2018mit gro\u00dfer Mu\u0308he\u2019 bewa\u0308ltigt habe, begegnen einem in\nerza\u0308hlenden Quellen nach wie vor so ha\u0308ufig, dass man als innerweltlichen hochmittelalterlichen\nHauptantrieb zur Scho\u0308pfung neuer Technik die erhoffte Erleichterung ko\u0308rperlicher Arbeit\n96\nH. Haug\nFig. 3 KokosnussDoppelscheuer (coconut\nvessel), open, with the detail\nof Adam and Eve, sixteenth\ncentury St. Joachimsthal\n(?). Vienna,\nKunsthistorisches Inv.\nNo. 885/886]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=92\nPages: 92\nremained to Biringuccio the most important \u201cart\u201d for studying the secrets of nature:\nThus, in short, it can be said in conclusion that this art [alchemy] is the origin and\nfoundation of many other arts, wherefore it should be held in reverence and practiced.\nBut he who practices it must be ignorant neither of cause nor of natural effects, and not too\npoor to support the expense. Neither should he do it from avarice, but only in order to enjoy\nthe fine fruits of its effects and the knowledge of them, and that pleasing novelty which it\nshows to the experimenter in operation.42\nBiringuccio considered alchemy a legitimate knowledge grounded on experimental and speculative activity. This is an important epistemological step for\nartisanal processes because alchemy was no longer seen as a utilitarian art but as\na disinterested activity carried out by men to enjoy the fruits of their knowledge.\n41\nBiringuccio, Pirotechnia (1942), 41. For the Italian, see Biringuccio, De la pirotechnia (1977),]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=120\nPages: 120\nartworks that imitate nature\u2019s processes. This seems to be the basic assumption that\nunderlies all early modern manipulation of and acting with metals: naturally formed\nminerals are presented in the Kunstkammern next to artificialia to exhibit not only\nthe mimicry skills of the artists to imitate the natural forms used as models, but also\nto imitate the natural processes. The discussion of early modern theories on\nmetallogenesis has shown, that the creative process of the human artist and artisan\nwas compared to the natural genesis of the divine artifex. The same primordial\nmatters are available to the goldsmith and the metalworker, to the alchemist and to\n\u2018nature\u2019. All four follow the same working processes, only their ability differentiates the final products. The juxtaposition of form and matter, which is thought of as\na dichotomy of active force-shaping power and passive shape-receiving material, is]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=122\nPages: 122\nareas. But this corresponds with the interconnected nature of these fields, as\npreviously outlined: early modern concepts of metallogenesis must be understood\nas a mixture of religious connotations, their dependency on antique montanistic\ntheories as well as on alchemical lore adopted through medieval Islamic mediation.\nBeyond that, a work of art communicates in different ways than a text. The object\ntransforms the know how of the artisan as it is performed in the working process and\nblends it with the lore of the scholar into embodied, visual knowledge. This\nknowledge, encapsulated in the work of art can then be exhibited in the surroundings of the ruler, in his Kunstkammer collection as well as in processions and\ncourtly festivities.47 It is\u2014apart from instruments to measure natural phenomena,\nwhich Baird puts in the focus of his analysis \u2014not \u2018useful\u2019 in the sense that it\nembodied knowledge which can be used to gain and widen existent knowledge. But]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=146\nPages: 146\nadministration of artistic and scientific activities in order to produce characteristic\nobjects he used as tributes to consolidate his politic alliances.\nThe cohabitation between arts and sciences still corresponded to the ancient\nway: in the Renaissance, according to the philosophers and the theologians, arts and\nsciences both belonged to natural philosophy. Besides, botany and medicine\nbecame part of the symbolic network formed around the ideal prince\u2019s image: the\ndoctor and philosopher prince acting for his people\u2019s health and salvation. This\nimage took on a special aura under Ferdinando I, who dealt in large-scale sacred\nimages with curing powers, like the Miraculous Virgin of Santissima Annunziata or\nthe Madonna of Loreto, and medicine.\nDestined to further dynastic and political propaganda, arts and sciences had to\nreflect grand-ducal power. Therefore, the Galleria dei lavori preserved through\nsecrecy the most progressive techniques, developed a widely recognizable style for\n55]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=120\nPages: 120\nHe would be almost a second God, he [God] also wants to give him [man] the faculty to\nform within himself a mental inner design, so that he [man] by means of this could\nrecognize all the creatures & to create inside him new worlds, & inside would have\n[in form of] a spiritual existence & would enjoy all that, what he enjoys outside [in the\nouter world] as natural existence & and dominates; & in addition by the means of this\ndesign, almost imitating God, & emulating the Nature he [man] could produce infinite\nartificial things which are similar to the natural ones, & and by means of painting, &\nsculpture, makes us see new Paradises on earth.44\nAccording to Zuccari\u2019s art theoretical writings, it is the similarity to God that\nenables both the scientist and the artist to achieve an inner understanding of\nnature\u2014the scientist through research to unveil nature\u2019s secrets and the artist in\nartworks that imitate nature\u2019s processes. This seems to be the basic assumption that]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=82\nPages: 82,83\nin creating the smallest thing which can be created by nature; [. . .] If, however, insensate\navarice should drive you into such error, why do you not go to the mines where nature\nproduces this gold, and there become her disciple? She will completely cure you of your\n60\nA. Bernardoni\nfolly by showing you that nothing which you employ in your furnace will be numbered\namong the things she employs in order to produce this gold.24\nAfter the acknowledgement of the ontological difference between nature and\nartificial products every invention produced by man, elsewhere significantly called\nby Leonardo seconda natura (second nature), is welcome:\nGravity and force together with material movement and percussion are the four accidental\npowers by which the human race in its marvellous and varied works seems to reveal itself\nand a second nature in this world; seeing that by the use of such powers all the visible works\nof mortals have their existence and their death.25]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=117\nPages: 117\nthus the loss of the \u2018uncultivated\u2019, i.e. pre-cultural status of humanity.\nNot only iconographical programs, such as the reliefs at the foot of the Florentine Campanile (which might go back to a design by Giotto (1266\u20131337)) or the\ndepictions on the city palace of Ancona, assert this connection between the Fall and\nthe onset of \u2018artificial\u2019 human activity.39 This connection was often emphasized,\nespecially in texts that were aimed at artists and artisans. An early example is found\nin the preface to the chapter on painting by Theophilus Presbyter in De diversis\nartibus where he writes:\nWe read in the exordium of mundane creation that man, made after the image and likeness\nof God and animated by the inspiration of the Divine breath, was also, by the excellence of\nso much dignity, raised above other living creatures; as capable of reason, he merited to\nparticipate in the counsel and genius of Divine providence, and, gifted with free-will, he]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=121\nPages: 121\ncraftsmen\u2019, introduced by Edgar Zilsel in 1942, who started to interact with\nacademics and humanists, is just one of the many important texts dealing with the\nexchange between the artes mechanicae and the artes liberales from the fifteenth\ncentury onwards, a theory which was recently elaborated and confirmed by Pamela\nH. Smith in The Body of the Artisan in 2004 and by Pamela O. Long in Artisan/\nPractitioners in 2011.45 Again in 2004, Davis Baird\u2019s contribution on \u2018thing\nknowledge\u2019 focussed on a \u2018philosophy of scientific instruments\u2019 and distinguishes\nwithin this epistemology of the artificial object three forms in which an instrument\ncan represent knowledge: firstly as model, secondly as product and medium of\nworking knowledge and thirdly as embodiment of \u2018encapsulated knowledge\u2019. His\ntheoretical system not only applied to scientific instruments, but can also be adapted\nto other artificially created objects, for instance to the Handsteine. In this field, it]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=106\nPages: 106,107\n9\nThis concept can be found in medieval authors writing on natura as goddess, as pro-dea and as\nvicaria (assistant) of God, who was entrusted with the creatio continua, the continuous creations as\npro-creatrix, like Alanus ab Insulis or Jean de Meuns in his roman de la rose. See Modersohn,\nNatura als Gottin.\n10\nBiringuccio, Pirotechnia [1540], and Pirotechnia (1942).\n11\n\u201cMein vornehmen aber sol sich eygentlich dahin lenden, das ich euch meinen Pfarrkindern\nvornehmlich die allmechtige und wunderbarliche hand Gottes und seinen unme\u00dflichen reychtumb\nneben seiner unerforschlichen wey\u00dfheyt unnd genedigen unnd Va\u0308terlichen hertzen inn Scho\u0308pffung\nund offenbarung allerley ertz unnd metalle zeyge, damit ir ewern Got in seinen gaben erkennen\nund preysen lernet, die er euch inn diesem gebirge auf genediger gu\u0308te mittheylet.\u201d (\u201cDie Dritte\nPredigt. Von Ursprung zu und abnemen der Metallen unnd Minerischen Bergkarten und Ertzen,\u201d\nin Mathesius, Sarepta, fol. XXXIIIv).\n84\nH. Haug]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=97\nPages: 97\nconcludes:\nI have done this willingly in order that you may acquire more learning and because I am\ncertain that new information always gives birth in men\u2019s mind to new discoveries and so to\nfurther information. Indeed I am certain that it is the key that arouses intelligent men and\nmakes them, if they wish, arrive at certain conclusions that they could not have reached\nwithout such a foundation, or even nearly approached.54\nThe advancement of learning for Biringuccio depends on continual \u201cdiscoveries\u201d and \u201cnew information,\u201d that results in two processes of knowledge: the first\nleads to the creation of new artificial products and the second determines the\nincrease in and deepening of knowledge about nature. As is clear from this passage,\nhuman creativity can be awakened by practical problems. And once such \u201cnew\ninformation\u201d is integrated into the wealth of knowledge this can lead humanity to\nthe opening of new paths of research.55]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=125\nPages: 125,126\nBetween Maker and Nature. Configurations 12: 1\u201340.\nSmith, Pamela H. 2004. The Body of the Artisan. Art and Experience in the Scientific Revolution.\nChicago: University of Chicago Press.\nStorczer, Stephan G. 1992. Die Handsteinsammlung des Kunsthistorischen Museums in Wien.\nVienna: Diplomarbeit Universita\u0308t Wien.\nArtificial Interventions in the Natural Form of Things: Shared. . .\n103\nStrieder, Peter. 1967. Erzstufe. In Reallexikon zur deutschen Kunstgeschichte 5: 408\u2013418. Stuttgart: Metzler.\nSuhing, Lothar. 1986. \u2018Philosophisches\u2019 in der fru\u0308hneuzeitlichen Berg- und Hu\u0308ttenkunde.\nMetallogenese und Transmutation aus der Sicht montanistischen Erfahrungswissens. In Die\nAlchemie in der europ\u20ac\naischen Kultur- und Wissenschaftsgeschichte, ed. Christoph Meinel,\n293\u2013314. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.\nTheophilus Presbyter. 1847. An Essay Upon Various Arts in Three Books, by Theophilus, Called\nalso Rugerus, Priest and Monk, Forming an Encyclopedia of Christian Art of the Eleventh]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=120\nPages: 120\nbecause in these regions the earth still reverberates in memory of the voice of God.\nAfter a meticulously detailed examination of the serpent\u2019s body the beholder\nwould have noticed an analogy between the artificial braided silver and the naturally occurring forms of a massive silver wire, a curious detail where the artist\u2019s\nhand and the formative power of nature enter into a competitive rivalry. A learned\nreference to contemporary Italian art theory could have followed, that is, to the\ncreation of Man in the image of God and Man\u2019s power to know, imitate and control\nnature. Federico Zuccari (c.1540\u20131609) for example addresses man as \u201calmost\nsecond God,\u201d who received from God the ability of an inner design by which he\ncan understand the world and by which, in imitation of Gold and in emulation of\nnature can create an infinite number of things, so that he can represent a new\nparadise on earth:\nHe would be almost a second God, he [God] also wants to give him [man] the faculty to]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=106\nPages: 106,107\nin Mathesius, Sarepta, fol. XXXIIIv).\n84\nH. Haug\nempirical knowledge within the limits of a regular and harmonic world, where\neverything points back to its origin, i.e. God.\nMathesius and other mineralogists of the sixteenth century could only rely on a\nfew preliminary works when they made their speculations on the Metallogenese, as\nAgricola regrets in the introduction to his De ortu et causis subterraneorum from\n1546:\nThe Greeks and Latins, however, who we see working for more than a thousand years to\nincrease scientific knowledge, all of them only interpreted the writings of Plato and\nAristotle and followed their views; they neither made inquiries about unsolved questions\nnor did they treat them scientifically. When our Albertus started to make observations about\nthe genesis of excavated materials, he blended the teachings of philosophers, astrologers\nand chymists into one.12\nTwo important preliminary writings, Aristotle\u2019s reflections on meteorology and]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=152\nPages: 152\nlate sixteenth century, but we should be aware that the myth of Galileo still casts its\nhegemonic influence, overshadowing any branch of natural knowledge which\nseems to deviate from the canons of the new mathematized \u2018sciences\u2019.\nIn what follows, I shall try to give a brief glimpse of what is hidden in this\nshadow. In order to do so we have to look into some older sources, depicting\nFlorentine cultural life just before Galileo\u2019s spectacular entrance onto the scene.\nMoreover, we need to take into consideration that, with the partial exception of\nmedicine, the investigation of natural phenomena was intimately connected with\narts and crafts, a prosperous body of activities that, particularly in Florence, had\nbeen flourishing since the late thirteenth century. It can be argued that nowhere else\ndo we find such strong ties between the arts and the sciences than in Renaissance]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=105\nPages: 105\n6\nThe concept of nature as \u2018second revelation\u2019 is connected with the metaphor of \u2018reading\u2019 in the\nbook of nature, see Blumenberg, Lesbarkeit; Nobis, Buch der Natur; Rothacker, Buch der Natur;\nand Du\u0308lmen, Buch der Natur, 131\u201350.\n7\n\u201cDenn Gott hat mancherley schmeltzwerck inn seinem laboratorio und schmeltzet je die metal so\nscho\u0308n und vilerely farben als die blu\u0308mlein auff dem felde oder ein Steinschneider sein\nwapenstein.\u201d (\u201cVon Ursprung zu und abnemen der metallen unnd Minerischen bergkarten und\nErtzen,\u201d in Mathesius, Sarepta, fol. XLIr).\n8\n\u201cEs gibet teglicher erfahrung neben der gelerten zeugnu\u00df das unser Gott inn der erden allerley\nedel und gemeine steyne neben mancherley ko\u0308stlichen unnd heylsamen bergsafften unnd\nmancherley bergarten, ertzen und reinen metallen teglich schaffe und wachsen lasse [. . .]\u201d(\u201cDie\nDritte Predigt. Von Ursprung zu und abnemen der Metallen unnd Minerischen Bergkarten und\nErtzen,\u201d in Mathesius, Sarepta, fol. XXXIXr).]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=103\nPages: 103\n(Ore Mountains), Harz and other regions through the methods of observation, of\ncollecting and of categorization\u2014was incorporated into scientific treatises on the\nformation of metals and helped to change and develop this domain. The artisan\u2019s\ncraft knowledge about matter and materials rarely found its way into a written form.\nIt was most commonly expressed in its suitable mode, the accomplished work of\nart.2\nThe second part of the article analyses the materials and shape of a coconut\nvessel on display in the Kunsthistorisches Museum in Vienna (Fig. 1) to see if the\naforementioned metallogenetical theories could have had an impact on the form of\na sixteenth-century art object: in this Kunstkammer object an unknown goldsmith\nfrom the Erzgebirge created a mountainous landscape, simultaneously a representation of paradise with Adam and Eve eating from the tree of knowledge and the\ndepiction of a post-expulsion mining area populated by contemporary miners. This]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=120\nPages: 120,121\na dichotomy of active force-shaping power and passive shape-receiving material, is\nof greatest importance with regard to God and his creation, which stands as a model\nboth for the visual artist as well as the alchemist, who tries to recreate natural\nprocesses according to his will.\n44\nZuccari, L\u2019idea [1607], Book I, ch. VII, 14. See also the facsimile reproduction Zuccari, Scritti\nd\u2019Arte (1961), 162.\n98\nH. Haug\nIt is not only difficult; it is almost impossible to compare the content of a written\ntext with the content of an object. But it seems inadequate to narrow early modern\nforms and methods of scientific display down to \u2018codified\u2019 knowledge: since the\n1920s a long line of historians of science have studied how the input of workmen\nchanged the methods of Renaissance natural philosophy towards a more matterbased natural scientific research and \u2018experiment\u2019. The concept of the \u2018superior\ncraftsmen\u2019, introduced by Edgar Zilsel in 1942, who started to interact with]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=125\nPages: 125\nChronicken. Nuremberg: J. vom Berg und U. Newbar.\nMathesius, Johannes. 1897. Hochzeitspredigten. Ausgew\u20ac\nahlte Werke, vol. 2, ed. Georg Loesche,\n169\u2013190. Prague/Vienna/Leipzig: Tempsky.\nModersohn, Mechthild. 1997. Natura als Go\u0308ttin im Mittelalter. Ikonographische Studien zu\nDarstellungen der personifizierten Natur. Berlin: Akademie Verlag.\nNewman, William R. 2004. Promethean Ambitions: Alchemy and the Quest to Perfect Nature.\nChicago: University of Chicago Press.\nNobis, Heribert M. 1971. Buch der Natur. In Historisches Wo\u0308rterbuch der Philosophie, vol. 1, ed.\nJoachim Ritter, 957\u2013959. Darmstadt: WBG.\nNummedal, Tara E. 2007. Alchemy and Authority in the Holy Roman Empire. Chicago: University\nof Chicago Press.\nPalissy, Bernard. 1996. Discours admirables. Oevres Comple\u0300tes, vol. 2, ed. Keith Cameron. Montde-Marsan: Editions Interuniversitaires SPEC.\nQuellmalz, Werner. 1969. Zur Materialfrage bergma\u0308nnischer Handsteine der Renaissance.]"]}

{"result":["[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=146\nPages: 146\nadministration of artistic and scientific activities in order to produce characteristic\nobjects he used as tributes to consolidate his politic alliances.\nThe cohabitation between arts and sciences still corresponded to the ancient\nway: in the Renaissance, according to the philosophers and the theologians, arts and\nsciences both belonged to natural philosophy. Besides, botany and medicine\nbecame part of the symbolic network formed around the ideal prince\u2019s image: the\ndoctor and philosopher prince acting for his people\u2019s health and salvation. This\nimage took on a special aura under Ferdinando I, who dealt in large-scale sacred\nimages with curing powers, like the Miraculous Virgin of Santissima Annunziata or\nthe Madonna of Loreto, and medicine.\nDestined to further dynastic and political propaganda, arts and sciences had to\nreflect grand-ducal power. Therefore, the Galleria dei lavori preserved through\nsecrecy the most progressive techniques, developed a widely recognizable style for\n55]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=82\nPages: 82\nattention was specifically focused on alchemy\u2019s claims to overturn the relationship\nbetween art and nature; however, he also stressed that alchemy was worthy of\npursuit as it might produce knowledge that could improve the condition of\nmankind:\nMan is involved with things produced by nature and nature does not change the ordinary\nkinds of things it creates in the same way that from time to time the things created by man\nare changed; and indeed man is nature\u2019s chief instrument, because nature is concerned only\nwith the production of elementary things, but from these elementary things man produces\nan infinite number of compounds, although he has no power to create any natural things\nexcept another like himself, that is his children. [. . .] And of this the old alchemists will\nserve as my witnesses, who have never either by chance or deliberate experiment succeeded\nin creating the smallest thing which can be created by nature; [. . .] If, however, insensate]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=125\nPages: 125,126\nBetween Maker and Nature. Configurations 12: 1\u201340.\nSmith, Pamela H. 2004. The Body of the Artisan. Art and Experience in the Scientific Revolution.\nChicago: University of Chicago Press.\nStorczer, Stephan G. 1992. Die Handsteinsammlung des Kunsthistorischen Museums in Wien.\nVienna: Diplomarbeit Universita\u0308t Wien.\nArtificial Interventions in the Natural Form of Things: Shared. . .\n103\nStrieder, Peter. 1967. Erzstufe. In Reallexikon zur deutschen Kunstgeschichte 5: 408\u2013418. Stuttgart: Metzler.\nSuhing, Lothar. 1986. \u2018Philosophisches\u2019 in der fru\u0308hneuzeitlichen Berg- und Hu\u0308ttenkunde.\nMetallogenese und Transmutation aus der Sicht montanistischen Erfahrungswissens. In Die\nAlchemie in der europ\u20ac\naischen Kultur- und Wissenschaftsgeschichte, ed. Christoph Meinel,\n293\u2013314. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.\nTheophilus Presbyter. 1847. An Essay Upon Various Arts in Three Books, by Theophilus, Called\nalso Rugerus, Priest and Monk, Forming an Encyclopedia of Christian Art of the Eleventh]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=152\nPages: 152\nlate sixteenth century, but we should be aware that the myth of Galileo still casts its\nhegemonic influence, overshadowing any branch of natural knowledge which\nseems to deviate from the canons of the new mathematized \u2018sciences\u2019.\nIn what follows, I shall try to give a brief glimpse of what is hidden in this\nshadow. In order to do so we have to look into some older sources, depicting\nFlorentine cultural life just before Galileo\u2019s spectacular entrance onto the scene.\nMoreover, we need to take into consideration that, with the partial exception of\nmedicine, the investigation of natural phenomena was intimately connected with\narts and crafts, a prosperous body of activities that, particularly in Florence, had\nbeen flourishing since the late thirteenth century. It can be argued that nowhere else\ndo we find such strong ties between the arts and the sciences than in Renaissance]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=198\nPages: 198\nsource of random observations made casually in the course of exercising their\ncraft, they initiated projects, conducted experiments, made innovations, read\nlearned treatises, and communicated or collaborated with more traditionallyeducated or more natural philosophically inclined members. While someone like\nAnthoni Grill was undoubtedly an exceptional figure, he nevertheless serves to\nillustrate one end of the spectrum of possible social and intellectual positions\noccupied by early modern gold- and silversmiths. His active participation and\neventual notoriety and success indicate the social boundaries that were crossed\nwithin the network, a situation that also existed with Caillart and Roussel and others\nin the French context as well. These examples thus begin to resituate the role of\nsuch artisan-chymists within the larger ambit of chymistry. While not erased, the\nneat division of artisan and natural philosopher emerges considerably blurred.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=160\nPages: 160\njewelry were the arts most closely connected with alchemy. Their connections\ninspired Francesco to create a new decorative scenario, dominated by alchemy,\nby which illustrate the relation between arts and nature.\nFrancesco was extremely keen, even more than his father, to promote the study\nof the natural sciences and the arts related to them. His passion for the chemical arts\nwas so strong that in 1560, when he was only 19, he was told off by his brother\nGiovanni for attending the works of the fonderia all day long.33 It was Francesco\nwho, in September 1569, charged the architect, engineer and inventor Bernardo\nBuontalenti (1531\u20131608), who had been one of his teachers since 1550, to oversee\nthe construction of Bortolo\u2019s new glass furnace and a new fonderia.34 Francesco I\nalso exploited Buontalenti\u2019s versatile skills in the works of the fusion of precious]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=92\nPages: 92\nremained to Biringuccio the most important \u201cart\u201d for studying the secrets of nature:\nThus, in short, it can be said in conclusion that this art [alchemy] is the origin and\nfoundation of many other arts, wherefore it should be held in reverence and practiced.\nBut he who practices it must be ignorant neither of cause nor of natural effects, and not too\npoor to support the expense. Neither should he do it from avarice, but only in order to enjoy\nthe fine fruits of its effects and the knowledge of them, and that pleasing novelty which it\nshows to the experimenter in operation.42\nBiringuccio considered alchemy a legitimate knowledge grounded on experimental and speculative activity. This is an important epistemological step for\nartisanal processes because alchemy was no longer seen as a utilitarian art but as\na disinterested activity carried out by men to enjoy the fruits of their knowledge.\n41\nBiringuccio, Pirotechnia (1942), 41. For the Italian, see Biringuccio, De la pirotechnia (1977),]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=174\nPages: 174,175\nHapsburg-Lorraine, privileged the traditional disciplines cultivated by the Medici.\nIn the rooms of the new building, opened to the public in 1775, visitors could\nadmire vestiges of the equipment and minerals used in the Casino and the Uffizi\nfonderia in the showcases of the collections on display. It was only much later, in\n1841, that the building of the Tribuna of Galileo proposed a new hierarchy of\nscientific display; here telescopes and mathematical instruments occupied the\ncenter of a vision of science in which there was no more room for the curious\nequipment of the past (Fig. 14).\n154\nM. Beretta\nAcknowledgments I wish to thank Suzy Butters, Valentina Conticelli, Sven Dupre\u0301, Didier Kahn\nand Morgan Wesley for their helpful suggestions. Throughout the text chemical arts is used to\ndenote those arts regulated by guilds, such as glassmaking, dyeing and pharmacy. More generally,\nI use the term arts and artists in association with Florentine guilds. Although in Renaissance]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=120\nPages: 120\nartworks that imitate nature\u2019s processes. This seems to be the basic assumption that\nunderlies all early modern manipulation of and acting with metals: naturally formed\nminerals are presented in the Kunstkammern next to artificialia to exhibit not only\nthe mimicry skills of the artists to imitate the natural forms used as models, but also\nto imitate the natural processes. The discussion of early modern theories on\nmetallogenesis has shown, that the creative process of the human artist and artisan\nwas compared to the natural genesis of the divine artifex. The same primordial\nmatters are available to the goldsmith and the metalworker, to the alchemist and to\n\u2018nature\u2019. All four follow the same working processes, only their ability differentiates the final products. The juxtaposition of form and matter, which is thought of as\na dichotomy of active force-shaping power and passive shape-receiving material, is]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=82\nPages: 82,83\nin creating the smallest thing which can be created by nature; [. . .] If, however, insensate\navarice should drive you into such error, why do you not go to the mines where nature\nproduces this gold, and there become her disciple? She will completely cure you of your\n60\nA. Bernardoni\nfolly by showing you that nothing which you employ in your furnace will be numbered\namong the things she employs in order to produce this gold.24\nAfter the acknowledgement of the ontological difference between nature and\nartificial products every invention produced by man, elsewhere significantly called\nby Leonardo seconda natura (second nature), is welcome:\nGravity and force together with material movement and percussion are the four accidental\npowers by which the human race in its marvellous and varied works seems to reveal itself\nand a second nature in this world; seeing that by the use of such powers all the visible works\nof mortals have their existence and their death.25]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=120\nPages: 120,121\na dichotomy of active force-shaping power and passive shape-receiving material, is\nof greatest importance with regard to God and his creation, which stands as a model\nboth for the visual artist as well as the alchemist, who tries to recreate natural\nprocesses according to his will.\n44\nZuccari, L\u2019idea [1607], Book I, ch. VII, 14. See also the facsimile reproduction Zuccari, Scritti\nd\u2019Arte (1961), 162.\n98\nH. Haug\nIt is not only difficult; it is almost impossible to compare the content of a written\ntext with the content of an object. But it seems inadequate to narrow early modern\nforms and methods of scientific display down to \u2018codified\u2019 knowledge: since the\n1920s a long line of historians of science have studied how the input of workmen\nchanged the methods of Renaissance natural philosophy towards a more matterbased natural scientific research and \u2018experiment\u2019. The concept of the \u2018superior\ncraftsmen\u2019, introduced by Edgar Zilsel in 1942, who started to interact with]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=174\nPages: 174\nhave any significant effects on the Tuscan scientific tradition. Although Galileo\nwould soon become a cherished, almost mythical figure, his efforts did not mark a\nnew direction in natural philosophy. The Accademia del Cimento adopted Galileo\u2019s\nmethod only in part and many of its members pursued natural investigations within\ndifferent traditions, originating in the experiments undertaken in workshops of the\nFonderie of the Casino and the Uffizi. At the end of the seventeenth century,\nimportant alchemical experiments were still performed with Benedetto Bregans\u2019s\nburning lens at Cosimo III\u2019s court and the core of Tuscan science was still\ndominated by natural history, medicine and chemical arts, as if Galileo had never\nexisted. During the eighteenth century, the Reale Museo di fisica e storia naturale,\nthe most important scientific institution founded by the new ruling dynasty of the\nHapsburg-Lorraine, privileged the traditional disciplines cultivated by the Medici.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=99\nPages: 99,100\nKemp, Martin. 1995. \u2018Wrought by No Artist\u2019s Hand\u2019: The Natural, the Artificial, the Exotic, and\nthe Scientific in Some Artifacts from the Renaissance. In Reframing the Renaissance: Visual\nCulture in Europe and Latin America, 1450\u20131650, ed. Claire Farago, 177\u2013196. New Haven:\nYale University Press.\nKemp, Martin. 2006. Leonardo da Vinci: The Marvellous Works of Nature and Man. Oxford:\nOxford University Press.\nKiang, Dawson. 1997. Leonardo and Alchemy: A Bibliographical Note. Achademia Leonardi\nVinci. Journal of Leonardo Studies & Bibliography of Vinciana 10: 199\u2013201.\nLennep, Jacques van. 1985. Alchimie: contribution a\u0300 l\u2019histoire de l\u2019art alchimique. Brussels:\nCre\u0301dit Communal de Belgique.\nLeonardo da Vinci. 1973\u20131980. Codice Atlantico, ed. Augusto Marinoni, 24 vols. Florence:\nGiunti.\nArtisanal Processes and Epistemological Debate in the Works of Leonardo. . .\n77\nLeonardo da Vinci. 1978\u20131980. Corpus of the Anatomical Studies in the Collection of Her Majesty]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=118\nPages: 118,119\nunderstanding of nature might mean a return to the paradisiacal original state, a\nreversion of the lost Adamic comprehension of the world by just naming it, and that\nthe reading of the book of nature could be the equivalent to reading God\u2019s\nrevelation.42 This becomes evident when Mathesius says that the precise causes\n40\nTheophilus, Essay Upon Various Arts (1847), XLV\u2013XLVII. For the Latin and a German\ntranslation, see Theophilus, \u201cMalerei und Glas,\u201d 49.\n41\nHarrison, Fall of Man.\n42\n\u201cDoch die Klagen, dass man etwas nur \u2018mit gro\u00dfer Mu\u0308he\u2019 bewa\u0308ltigt habe, begegnen einem in\nerza\u0308hlenden Quellen nach wie vor so ha\u0308ufig, dass man als innerweltlichen hochmittelalterlichen\nHauptantrieb zur Scho\u0308pfung neuer Technik die erhoffte Erleichterung ko\u0308rperlicher Arbeit\n96\nH. Haug\nFig. 3 KokosnussDoppelscheuer (coconut\nvessel), open, with the detail\nof Adam and Eve, sixteenth\ncentury St. Joachimsthal\n(?). Vienna,\nKunsthistorisches Inv.\nNo. 885/886]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=106\nPages: 106\nMathesius\u2019s texts interweave preaching and scientific imagination and thus attest\nto how strongly early modern natural philosophy and metallurgic research are\ninfluenced by the Christian episteme:\nBut my undertaking shall conduct to that effect, to show to you, my parishioners, the\nalmighty and wonderful hand of God and his immeasurable abundance and his inscrutable\nwisdom and his merciful and fatherly heart in his creation and revelation of all kinds of\nminerals and metals, to make you recognize your God in his gifts and teach you to praise\nhim, which he conveys to you in this mountain in clement benevolence.11\nThis juxtaposition of empirical knowledge based on experience next to philosophical and theological reflections of the causes of things is typical for Mathesius\nand many other writers of the sixteenth century, as they interpret their increasing\n9\nThis concept can be found in medieval authors writing on natura as goddess, as pro-dea and as]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=98\nPages: 98,99\nEmerton, Norma E. 1984. The Scientific Reinterpretation of Form. Ithaca/London: Cornell University Press.\nFerino-Pagden, Sylvia, Francesca del Torre Scheuch, Elisabetta Fedda, and Mino Gabriele. 2003.\nParmigianino e la pratica dell\u2019alchemica. Milan: Silvana editoriale.\nFilarete, Antonio Averlino detto il. 1972. Trattato di architettura, eds. A.M. Finoli and L. Grassi.\nMilan: Il Polifilo.\n76\nA. Bernardoni\nFindlen, Paula. 2002. Inventing Nature: Commerce, Art and Science in the Early Modern Cabinet\nof Curiosities. In Merchants and Marvels: Commerce, Science and Art in Early Modern\nEurope, eds. Pamela H. Smith and Paula Findlen, 297\u2013323. New York: Routledge.\nFrangioni, L. 1992. Milano e le sue misure, appunti di metrologia lombarda fra Tre e Quattrocento. Napoli: Edizioni Scientifiche Italiane.\nFrosini, Fabio. 1997. Pittura come filosofia: note su \u2018spirito\u2019 e \u2018spirituale\u2019. Achademia Leonardi\nVinci. Journal of Leonardo Studies & Bibliography of Vinciana 10: 35\u201359.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=157\nPages: 157\nthe chemical arts was visually displayed in the series of paintings hanging in the\nStudiolo of Palazzo Vecchio, a small dark room decorated with a complex iconographic narrative. Designed for the then Prince Francesco by Vincenzo Borghini\n(1515\u20131580) and Giorgio Vasari (1511\u20131574), its cabinets seem to have included\nsome of the most valuable treasures produced in the fonderia. In addition to all sorts\nof precious stones, glass and porcelain, they carefully stored the rarest natural\nspecimens and the products of alchemical experiments.26 The meaning of this\nroom and its intimate connection with Francesco I\u2019s interest in alchemy, has been\ndiscussed by many, and most recently reconstructed in the comprehensive work by\nValentina Conticelli. Thirty-two artists were employed and coordinated by Vasari\nto accomplish the work. Benvenuto Cellini (1500\u20131571), who shared with his\npatron a keen interest in alchemy, was meant to have taken part\u2014but his premature]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=146\nPages: 146\nthe naturalist Ulisse Aldrovandi (1522\u20131605) from Bologna: the naturalist and the\ngrand duke exchanged medicinal herbs and commissioned artists to sketch and\npaint samples to complete their collections of scientific illustrations.\nThe layout of the Uffizi laboratories turned out to be one of the most significant\ninitiatives of Ferdinando I\u2019s reign. A result of the three first grand dukes of\nTuscany\u2019s museographical, cultural and political interests, the Uffizi were first\nexploited as a \u201cmachine\u201d of power under Ferdinando I. Cosimo I started to build\nthe palace containing the 13 magistratures in order to confirm and demonstrate the\nMedici\u2019s capacity to control and organize the State. Francesco I decided to reserve\nthe upper floor for a dynastic gallery and set up the first workshops. Ferdinando I\ntransferred all the workshops from the Casino di San Marco and organized the\nadministration of artistic and scientific activities in order to produce characteristic]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=81\nPages: 81,82\nGombrich, \u201cLeonardo and the Magicians\u201d; Vasoli, Leonardo e l\u2019alchimia, 69\u201377; Kiang,\n\u201cLeonardo and Alchemy\u201d; Frosini, \u201cPittura come filosofia\u201d; Kemp, Leonardo da Vinci, 293\u2013\n329; Galluzzi, \u201cVinci\u2019s Concept of \u2018Nature\u2019,\u201d; Beretta, \u201cLeonardo and Lucretius\u201d; Bernardoni,\n\u201cElementi, sostanze naturali\u201d; and Nanni, \u201cLucrezio.\u201d For Leonardo\u2019s involvement in the chemical arts, see Schneider, Chemische Wissen Leonardo, 40\u20133, 87\u201392; Partington, History of Chemistry, vol. II, 1\u20138; Taylor, \u201cVinci et la chimie\u201d; Reti, \u201cArti chimiche di Leonardo\u201d (1952a; 1952b);\nBernardoni, \u201cLeonardo and the \u2018chemical arts\u2019,\u201d and Esplosioni, fusioni e trasmutazioni, 38\u201341.\nArtisanal Processes and Epistemological Debate in the Works of Leonardo. . .\n59\nFig. 1 D. Beccafumi,\nFoundry workshop;\ncourtesy of Accademia\nCarrara, Bergamo\ntension between mechanical arts and alchemy during the Renaissance period. His\nattention was specifically focused on alchemy\u2019s claims to overturn the relationship]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=152\nPages: 152\ndo we find such strong ties between the arts and the sciences than in Renaissance\nFlorence. The peculiarity of the Florentine setting had been favored by the extraordinarily rapid elevation of the status of artists, a recognition partly achieved by a\ngrowing appreciation for technical innovations and inventions, a development that\nsolenni maestri d\u2019alchimia, che meriterebbero di esser resi noti; anzi con un poco di pazienza, vi\nsarebbe da formare un catalogo di aneddoti chimici non spregevole.\u201d (Targioni, Selve, vol. VIII,\n160\u20131).\n5\nSee, for instance, Camerota, I Medici e le scienze. A partial exception to this dominate trend is the\ncatalogue of the Medici exhibition of 1980, La corte il mare i mercati. Here Paola Zambelli has\nshown the pervasive relevance of alchemy and occult science at the Medici court. Unfortunately\nZambelli\u2019s section was artificially separated from that of \u2018science.\u2019 On the historiographic]"]}

{"result":["[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=120\nPages: 120\nHe would be almost a second God, he [God] also wants to give him [man] the faculty to\nform within himself a mental inner design, so that he [man] by means of this could\nrecognize all the creatures & to create inside him new worlds, & inside would have\n[in form of] a spiritual existence & would enjoy all that, what he enjoys outside [in the\nouter world] as natural existence & and dominates; & in addition by the means of this\ndesign, almost imitating God, & emulating the Nature he [man] could produce infinite\nartificial things which are similar to the natural ones, & and by means of painting, &\nsculpture, makes us see new Paradises on earth.44\nAccording to Zuccari\u2019s art theoretical writings, it is the similarity to God that\nenables both the scientist and the artist to achieve an inner understanding of\nnature\u2014the scientist through research to unveil nature\u2019s secrets and the artist in\nartworks that imitate nature\u2019s processes. This seems to be the basic assumption that]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=120\nPages: 120\nbecause in these regions the earth still reverberates in memory of the voice of God.\nAfter a meticulously detailed examination of the serpent\u2019s body the beholder\nwould have noticed an analogy between the artificial braided silver and the naturally occurring forms of a massive silver wire, a curious detail where the artist\u2019s\nhand and the formative power of nature enter into a competitive rivalry. A learned\nreference to contemporary Italian art theory could have followed, that is, to the\ncreation of Man in the image of God and Man\u2019s power to know, imitate and control\nnature. Federico Zuccari (c.1540\u20131609) for example addresses man as \u201calmost\nsecond God,\u201d who received from God the ability of an inner design by which he\ncan understand the world and by which, in imitation of Gold and in emulation of\nnature can create an infinite number of things, so that he can represent a new\nparadise on earth:\nHe would be almost a second God, he [God] also wants to give him [man] the faculty to]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=117\nPages: 117\nthus the loss of the \u2018uncultivated\u2019, i.e. pre-cultural status of humanity.\nNot only iconographical programs, such as the reliefs at the foot of the Florentine Campanile (which might go back to a design by Giotto (1266\u20131337)) or the\ndepictions on the city palace of Ancona, assert this connection between the Fall and\nthe onset of \u2018artificial\u2019 human activity.39 This connection was often emphasized,\nespecially in texts that were aimed at artists and artisans. An early example is found\nin the preface to the chapter on painting by Theophilus Presbyter in De diversis\nartibus where he writes:\nWe read in the exordium of mundane creation that man, made after the image and likeness\nof God and animated by the inspiration of the Divine breath, was also, by the excellence of\nso much dignity, raised above other living creatures; as capable of reason, he merited to\nparticipate in the counsel and genius of Divine providence, and, gifted with free-will, he]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=118\nPages: 118\nface shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for\ndust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return.\nIn the text of Theophilus Presbyter this connection between the human ability of\nartisanal creativity through his divine derivation (the man as imago and similitudo\nof God according to his faculty) is emphasized. But the negative connotations of all\nhuman artistic creation as the result of the Fall is turned positively into a iure\nhereditario, into the ability to create art and ingenium. For the contemporary\nbeholder the connection of Kunstkammer and Fall of Mankind and the correlation\nof the ability of man to create and cultivate and the loss of the paradisiacal, per\ndefinition non-cultivated condition, must have been obvious.41\nBehind the biblical scene the viewer discovers miners at work, a diviner, who is\nin search of ore deposits, and two workers with wedges extracting minerals from the]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=120\nPages: 120,119\nto the subject of God as craftsman who, like his earthly colleague, is dependent on\ngood materials and hot fires to make excellent stones and minerals. According to\ndurchaus erkennen kann. Lehrma\u0308\u00dfig lie\u00df sich auf diese Weise ein Sieg u\u0308ber die Su\u0308ndhaftigkeit\nAdams erzielen.\u201d (Ludwig, \u201cTechnik,\u201d 36).\n43\n\u201c[. . .] die wir wohl noch zur Zeit unerforscht lassen mu\u0308ssen, bis wir mit neuen und gescheurten\nAugen hinein in die wesentliche Gestalt der Kreaturen wie Adam vor dem Falle wieder sehen\nwerden.\u201d\nArtificial Interventions in the Natural Form of Things: Shared. . .\n97\ncontemporary notions not only exotic nuts and fruits grew better in warmer regions,\nbut also gold and valuable gems were more frequently to be found there. Mathesius\nstates for example, that areas in the vicinity of the earthly paradise (i.e. somewhere\nin the vicinity of Persia) have particularly excellent mineral and gemstone deposits,\nbecause in these regions the earth still reverberates in memory of the voice of God.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=106\nPages: 106,107\n9\nThis concept can be found in medieval authors writing on natura as goddess, as pro-dea and as\nvicaria (assistant) of God, who was entrusted with the creatio continua, the continuous creations as\npro-creatrix, like Alanus ab Insulis or Jean de Meuns in his roman de la rose. See Modersohn,\nNatura als Gottin.\n10\nBiringuccio, Pirotechnia [1540], and Pirotechnia (1942).\n11\n\u201cMein vornehmen aber sol sich eygentlich dahin lenden, das ich euch meinen Pfarrkindern\nvornehmlich die allmechtige und wunderbarliche hand Gottes und seinen unme\u00dflichen reychtumb\nneben seiner unerforschlichen wey\u00dfheyt unnd genedigen unnd Va\u0308terlichen hertzen inn Scho\u0308pffung\nund offenbarung allerley ertz unnd metalle zeyge, damit ir ewern Got in seinen gaben erkennen\nund preysen lernet, die er euch inn diesem gebirge auf genediger gu\u0308te mittheylet.\u201d (\u201cDie Dritte\nPredigt. Von Ursprung zu und abnemen der Metallen unnd Minerischen Bergkarten und Ertzen,\u201d\nin Mathesius, Sarepta, fol. XXXIIIv).\n84\nH. Haug]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=80\nPages: 80\nvisited in Milan that discusses the organization of the workshop and the artisans\u2019\nawareness of the technological and epistemological value of their works:\n[. . .] So that whoever entered that shop and saw the activity of so many persons would, I\nthink, believe as I did that he had entered an Inferno, nay, on the contrary, a Paradise, where\nthere was a mirror in which sparkled all the beauty of genius and the power of art.19\nBiringuccio underlined the frenetic and very organized work in the workshop\nstressing the beauty of the mind of the artisans and the power of art. The harmonious cooperation between artisans and the plain consciousness of the processes of\nthe art transformed the hell of hard and dirty metallurgical work into the heaven of\nthe pursuit of the artistic goal. This oxymoron referred to the infernal and paradisiacal condition of art, exalting the extremely difficult process in which raw\nmaterial is transformed into artifact, giving back an important social value to]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=118\nPages: 118,119\nunderstanding of nature might mean a return to the paradisiacal original state, a\nreversion of the lost Adamic comprehension of the world by just naming it, and that\nthe reading of the book of nature could be the equivalent to reading God\u2019s\nrevelation.42 This becomes evident when Mathesius says that the precise causes\n40\nTheophilus, Essay Upon Various Arts (1847), XLV\u2013XLVII. For the Latin and a German\ntranslation, see Theophilus, \u201cMalerei und Glas,\u201d 49.\n41\nHarrison, Fall of Man.\n42\n\u201cDoch die Klagen, dass man etwas nur \u2018mit gro\u00dfer Mu\u0308he\u2019 bewa\u0308ltigt habe, begegnen einem in\nerza\u0308hlenden Quellen nach wie vor so ha\u0308ufig, dass man als innerweltlichen hochmittelalterlichen\nHauptantrieb zur Scho\u0308pfung neuer Technik die erhoffte Erleichterung ko\u0308rperlicher Arbeit\n96\nH. Haug\nFig. 3 KokosnussDoppelscheuer (coconut\nvessel), open, with the detail\nof Adam and Eve, sixteenth\ncentury St. Joachimsthal\n(?). Vienna,\nKunsthistorisches Inv.\nNo. 885/886]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=117\nPages: 117\nparticipate in the counsel and genius of Divine providence, and, gifted with free-will, he\nbeheld superior to himself but the will of his Maker and the obligation to reverence his\ndecree. Wherefore, miserably deceived by diabolical astuteness, he lost the privilege of\nimmortality through the fault of disobedience, yet so transmitted his power of wisdom and\nintelligence to his posterity, that whoever would supply care and application might be able\nto acquire a capability of every art and science, as by a hereditary right. In this manner,\nhuman industry, seizing upon this faculty and applying itself in its divers acts to gain and to\npleasure, transmitted it, through the development of time, to the predestined epoch of the\nChristian religion, and it came to pass that a people devoted to God converted to his worship\nthat which Divine ordinance had, to the praise and glory of His name, created. On this\n39\nBlume, \u201cJenseits des Paradieses.\u201d]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=105\nPages: 105\nhuman artisan, who imitates nature in his workshop with the substances available to\nhim, stating \u201cGod has various schmeltzwerck [products produced by melting/fusion/\ncasting] in his laboratorio [workshop] and smelts the metals as beautifully and in as\nmany colours as the flowers in the field or the crests of a stonecutter.\u201d7 God is\npersonified as some kind of metalworker, maybe a goldsmith in his workshop, who\nuses a smelting process to form the several metals that can be found in the earth.\nAnd Mathesius doesn\u2019t leave any doubts that this is a perpetual process when he\nexplains:\nThe experience of every day shows\u2014aside from scholarly reports\u2014that our God daily\ncreates and lets grow in the earth all kinds of noble and rough stones as well as the various\nprecious and salubrious bergsafften [juices of the mountain] and various bergarten [minerals], ores and pure metals.8\n5\n\u201cvon ewern metallen oder wi ir pflegt zu reden von allerley bergarten unnd ertzen unnd von iren]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=120\nPages: 120\nartworks that imitate nature\u2019s processes. This seems to be the basic assumption that\nunderlies all early modern manipulation of and acting with metals: naturally formed\nminerals are presented in the Kunstkammern next to artificialia to exhibit not only\nthe mimicry skills of the artists to imitate the natural forms used as models, but also\nto imitate the natural processes. The discussion of early modern theories on\nmetallogenesis has shown, that the creative process of the human artist and artisan\nwas compared to the natural genesis of the divine artifex. The same primordial\nmatters are available to the goldsmith and the metalworker, to the alchemist and to\n\u2018nature\u2019. All four follow the same working processes, only their ability differentiates the final products. The juxtaposition of form and matter, which is thought of as\na dichotomy of active force-shaping power and passive shape-receiving material, is]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=146\nPages: 146\nadministration of artistic and scientific activities in order to produce characteristic\nobjects he used as tributes to consolidate his politic alliances.\nThe cohabitation between arts and sciences still corresponded to the ancient\nway: in the Renaissance, according to the philosophers and the theologians, arts and\nsciences both belonged to natural philosophy. Besides, botany and medicine\nbecame part of the symbolic network formed around the ideal prince\u2019s image: the\ndoctor and philosopher prince acting for his people\u2019s health and salvation. This\nimage took on a special aura under Ferdinando I, who dealt in large-scale sacred\nimages with curing powers, like the Miraculous Virgin of Santissima Annunziata or\nthe Madonna of Loreto, and medicine.\nDestined to further dynastic and political propaganda, arts and sciences had to\nreflect grand-ducal power. Therefore, the Galleria dei lavori preserved through\nsecrecy the most progressive techniques, developed a widely recognizable style for\n55]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=121\nPages: 121\nprocesses are blended together.\nIconographically speaking the vessel represents a model of the dichotomy of\nmale/female, form/matter: Adam and Eve embody this principle and simultaneously their action indicates the beginning of every human productive action.\nAfter the Fall, every human action is per definitionem a repetition of natural\ncreative processes. Embedded in the context of the miners and the general subject\nof minerals and their genesis and extraction, is the idea of God as creator of metals\nand the human propensity to imitate this processes\u2014whether in alchemical or\nartisanal ways.46\nSecond, the Handstein as product of working knowledge: This object has also a\nmaterial significance, because it is the product of applied (al)chemical knowledge.\nEvery piece of art emanating from the goldsmith\u2019s workshop is the embodiment of\nchemical lore concerning material properties and agency. It is important to note,\n45\n46]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=120\nPages: 120,121\na dichotomy of active force-shaping power and passive shape-receiving material, is\nof greatest importance with regard to God and his creation, which stands as a model\nboth for the visual artist as well as the alchemist, who tries to recreate natural\nprocesses according to his will.\n44\nZuccari, L\u2019idea [1607], Book I, ch. VII, 14. See also the facsimile reproduction Zuccari, Scritti\nd\u2019Arte (1961), 162.\n98\nH. Haug\nIt is not only difficult; it is almost impossible to compare the content of a written\ntext with the content of an object. But it seems inadequate to narrow early modern\nforms and methods of scientific display down to \u2018codified\u2019 knowledge: since the\n1920s a long line of historians of science have studied how the input of workmen\nchanged the methods of Renaissance natural philosophy towards a more matterbased natural scientific research and \u2018experiment\u2019. The concept of the \u2018superior\ncraftsmen\u2019, introduced by Edgar Zilsel in 1942, who started to interact with]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=82\nPages: 82\nattention was specifically focused on alchemy\u2019s claims to overturn the relationship\nbetween art and nature; however, he also stressed that alchemy was worthy of\npursuit as it might produce knowledge that could improve the condition of\nmankind:\nMan is involved with things produced by nature and nature does not change the ordinary\nkinds of things it creates in the same way that from time to time the things created by man\nare changed; and indeed man is nature\u2019s chief instrument, because nature is concerned only\nwith the production of elementary things, but from these elementary things man produces\nan infinite number of compounds, although he has no power to create any natural things\nexcept another like himself, that is his children. [. . .] And of this the old alchemists will\nserve as my witnesses, who have never either by chance or deliberate experiment succeeded\nin creating the smallest thing which can be created by nature; [. . .] If, however, insensate]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=32\nPages: 32\nthe goddess Isis, which probably dates back to the second century AD and contains an\nimportant account of the revelation of the alchemical art. According to the beginning\nof the treatise, Isis received a revelation from two angels who descended from heaven\nbecause they were attracted by the beauty of the goddess (CAAG II 28\u20139):\nIsis the Prophet to Her Son Horus. O son, as you were about to leave and fight a battle\nagainst the unfaithful Typhon for the kingdom of your father, I went to Hormanouthis [city,\nsanctuary?] of the holy art in Egypt, where I stayed a long time. According to the recession\nof the convenient time and to the necessary course of the spherical movement, it happened\nthat one of the angels living in the first firmament, after watching me from above, wanted to\nhave sexual intercourse with me. When he arrived and started taking this direction, I did not\ngive myself, because I wanted to learn the preparation of gold and silver. After I asked him]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=122\nPages: 122\nareas. But this corresponds with the interconnected nature of these fields, as\npreviously outlined: early modern concepts of metallogenesis must be understood\nas a mixture of religious connotations, their dependency on antique montanistic\ntheories as well as on alchemical lore adopted through medieval Islamic mediation.\nBeyond that, a work of art communicates in different ways than a text. The object\ntransforms the know how of the artisan as it is performed in the working process and\nblends it with the lore of the scholar into embodied, visual knowledge. This\nknowledge, encapsulated in the work of art can then be exhibited in the surroundings of the ruler, in his Kunstkammer collection as well as in processions and\ncourtly festivities.47 It is\u2014apart from instruments to measure natural phenomena,\nwhich Baird puts in the focus of his analysis \u2014not \u2018useful\u2019 in the sense that it\nembodied knowledge which can be used to gain and widen existent knowledge. But]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=117\nPages: 117,118\n39\nBlume, \u201cJenseits des Paradieses.\u201d\nArtificial Interventions in the Natural Form of Things: Shared. . .\n95\naccount, the pious devotion of the faithful may not neglect that which the careful prevision\nof our predecessors transmitted to our age [. . .]40\nThis association of the Fall of mankind and the beginning of cultivation, that\nis of artisanal human activity, is pointed out even by God, who announces to\nAdam that from now on he has to feed himself with the work of his own hands\n(Genesis 3, 17\u20139):\nAnd unto Adam he said, Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast\neaten of the tree, of which I commanded thee, saying, Thou shalt not eat of it: cursed is the\nground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life; Thorns also and\nthistles shall it bring forth to thee; and thou shalt eat the herb of the field; In the sweat of thy\nface shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=125\nPages: 125,126\nBetween Maker and Nature. Configurations 12: 1\u201340.\nSmith, Pamela H. 2004. The Body of the Artisan. Art and Experience in the Scientific Revolution.\nChicago: University of Chicago Press.\nStorczer, Stephan G. 1992. Die Handsteinsammlung des Kunsthistorischen Museums in Wien.\nVienna: Diplomarbeit Universita\u0308t Wien.\nArtificial Interventions in the Natural Form of Things: Shared. . .\n103\nStrieder, Peter. 1967. Erzstufe. In Reallexikon zur deutschen Kunstgeschichte 5: 408\u2013418. Stuttgart: Metzler.\nSuhing, Lothar. 1986. \u2018Philosophisches\u2019 in der fru\u0308hneuzeitlichen Berg- und Hu\u0308ttenkunde.\nMetallogenese und Transmutation aus der Sicht montanistischen Erfahrungswissens. In Die\nAlchemie in der europ\u20ac\naischen Kultur- und Wissenschaftsgeschichte, ed. Christoph Meinel,\n293\u2013314. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.\nTheophilus Presbyter. 1847. An Essay Upon Various Arts in Three Books, by Theophilus, Called\nalso Rugerus, Priest and Monk, Forming an Encyclopedia of Christian Art of the Eleventh]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=105\nPages: 105,106\nErtzen,\u201d in Mathesius, Sarepta, fol. XXXIXr).\nArtificial Interventions in the Natural Form of Things: Shared. . .\n83\nMathesius, in line with most contemporaneous authors, assumes a continuing\nemergence of substances with God, or a divine potency incorporated in nature,\nresponsible for the on-going generation of metals.9\nThe main issues that concerned Mathesius and contemporary writers were: what\nsubstances are the sources of the metals? Are there one or more primary matters?\nHow and under what conditions do these primordial materials transmute into the\ndifferent metallic substances? And last but not least: what causes this process?\nMathesius and his \u201cThird Sermon\u201d is not a randomly chosen source. The author\nstood in the centre of scholarly culture in St. Joachimsthal, in one of the most\nimportant centres of the Renaissance mining industry and he was an important link]"]}

{"result":["[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=120\nPages: 120\nartworks that imitate nature\u2019s processes. This seems to be the basic assumption that\nunderlies all early modern manipulation of and acting with metals: naturally formed\nminerals are presented in the Kunstkammern next to artificialia to exhibit not only\nthe mimicry skills of the artists to imitate the natural forms used as models, but also\nto imitate the natural processes. The discussion of early modern theories on\nmetallogenesis has shown, that the creative process of the human artist and artisan\nwas compared to the natural genesis of the divine artifex. The same primordial\nmatters are available to the goldsmith and the metalworker, to the alchemist and to\n\u2018nature\u2019. All four follow the same working processes, only their ability differentiates the final products. The juxtaposition of form and matter, which is thought of as\na dichotomy of active force-shaping power and passive shape-receiving material, is]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=82\nPages: 82,83\nin creating the smallest thing which can be created by nature; [. . .] If, however, insensate\navarice should drive you into such error, why do you not go to the mines where nature\nproduces this gold, and there become her disciple? She will completely cure you of your\n60\nA. Bernardoni\nfolly by showing you that nothing which you employ in your furnace will be numbered\namong the things she employs in order to produce this gold.24\nAfter the acknowledgement of the ontological difference between nature and\nartificial products every invention produced by man, elsewhere significantly called\nby Leonardo seconda natura (second nature), is welcome:\nGravity and force together with material movement and percussion are the four accidental\npowers by which the human race in its marvellous and varied works seems to reveal itself\nand a second nature in this world; seeing that by the use of such powers all the visible works\nof mortals have their existence and their death.25]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=118\nPages: 118,119\nunderstanding of nature might mean a return to the paradisiacal original state, a\nreversion of the lost Adamic comprehension of the world by just naming it, and that\nthe reading of the book of nature could be the equivalent to reading God\u2019s\nrevelation.42 This becomes evident when Mathesius says that the precise causes\n40\nTheophilus, Essay Upon Various Arts (1847), XLV\u2013XLVII. For the Latin and a German\ntranslation, see Theophilus, \u201cMalerei und Glas,\u201d 49.\n41\nHarrison, Fall of Man.\n42\n\u201cDoch die Klagen, dass man etwas nur \u2018mit gro\u00dfer Mu\u0308he\u2019 bewa\u0308ltigt habe, begegnen einem in\nerza\u0308hlenden Quellen nach wie vor so ha\u0308ufig, dass man als innerweltlichen hochmittelalterlichen\nHauptantrieb zur Scho\u0308pfung neuer Technik die erhoffte Erleichterung ko\u0308rperlicher Arbeit\n96\nH. Haug\nFig. 3 KokosnussDoppelscheuer (coconut\nvessel), open, with the detail\nof Adam and Eve, sixteenth\ncentury St. Joachimsthal\n(?). Vienna,\nKunsthistorisches Inv.\nNo. 885/886]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=82\nPages: 82\nattention was specifically focused on alchemy\u2019s claims to overturn the relationship\nbetween art and nature; however, he also stressed that alchemy was worthy of\npursuit as it might produce knowledge that could improve the condition of\nmankind:\nMan is involved with things produced by nature and nature does not change the ordinary\nkinds of things it creates in the same way that from time to time the things created by man\nare changed; and indeed man is nature\u2019s chief instrument, because nature is concerned only\nwith the production of elementary things, but from these elementary things man produces\nan infinite number of compounds, although he has no power to create any natural things\nexcept another like himself, that is his children. [. . .] And of this the old alchemists will\nserve as my witnesses, who have never either by chance or deliberate experiment succeeded\nin creating the smallest thing which can be created by nature; [. . .] If, however, insensate]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=120\nPages: 120\nHe would be almost a second God, he [God] also wants to give him [man] the faculty to\nform within himself a mental inner design, so that he [man] by means of this could\nrecognize all the creatures & to create inside him new worlds, & inside would have\n[in form of] a spiritual existence & would enjoy all that, what he enjoys outside [in the\nouter world] as natural existence & and dominates; & in addition by the means of this\ndesign, almost imitating God, & emulating the Nature he [man] could produce infinite\nartificial things which are similar to the natural ones, & and by means of painting, &\nsculpture, makes us see new Paradises on earth.44\nAccording to Zuccari\u2019s art theoretical writings, it is the similarity to God that\nenables both the scientist and the artist to achieve an inner understanding of\nnature\u2014the scientist through research to unveil nature\u2019s secrets and the artist in\nartworks that imitate nature\u2019s processes. This seems to be the basic assumption that]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=27\nPages: 27\nqualities (namely wet, dry, hot, and cold). These changes are explained through\nexamples taken from various meteorological phenomena mainly based on evaporation and condensation of water.3 For instance, \u201cwater becomes like a stone [i.e.\nchanges into earth] when it freezes [and] becomes air when it evaporates.\u201d4\nMoreover, similar transformations of the basic elements/qualities also help to\nunderstand more complex phenomena, such as the case of a tree burned by a\nlightning strike, in which all the humidity of wood is consumed by the fire.5 In\nPsellos\u2019s opinion, \u03c6\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03ba\u1f74 \u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03af\u03c9\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2 (natural processes of alteration) of the same\nkind are to be detected behind the \u201cart of fire,\u201d which is redefined as \u1f21 \u03c4\u03b5\u0002\u03c7\u03bd\u03b7 \u03c4~\n\u03b7\u03c2\n\u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b2\u03bf\u03bb~\n\u03b7\u03c2 (the art of transformation) at the beginning of the section quoted above\n(II. 3\u20134). This art, in fact, included a wide set of practices and techniques dealing\nwith the transformation of various \u1f55\u03bb\u03b1\u03b9 (materials), such as metals, stones, and]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=120\nPages: 120\nbecause in these regions the earth still reverberates in memory of the voice of God.\nAfter a meticulously detailed examination of the serpent\u2019s body the beholder\nwould have noticed an analogy between the artificial braided silver and the naturally occurring forms of a massive silver wire, a curious detail where the artist\u2019s\nhand and the formative power of nature enter into a competitive rivalry. A learned\nreference to contemporary Italian art theory could have followed, that is, to the\ncreation of Man in the image of God and Man\u2019s power to know, imitate and control\nnature. Federico Zuccari (c.1540\u20131609) for example addresses man as \u201calmost\nsecond God,\u201d who received from God the ability of an inner design by which he\ncan understand the world and by which, in imitation of Gold and in emulation of\nnature can create an infinite number of things, so that he can represent a new\nparadise on earth:\nHe would be almost a second God, he [God] also wants to give him [man] the faculty to]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=113\nPages: 113,114\nsache bien que l\u2019or & l\u2019argent & tous autres metaux sont une euvre divine, & que c\u2019est\ntemerairement entrepris contre la gloire de Dieu, de vouloir usuper sur ce qui est de son estat.\u201d\n(Palissy, \u201cDiscours admirables,\u201d 105\u20136).\nArtificial Interventions in the Natural Form of Things: Shared. . .\n91\nHereupon theorique asked directly after the analogy of semen in plants and\nmetals.29 Palissy/practique then argues against the alchemists who claim to imitate\nin their vaisseaux, which \u201cserve as a womb for the generation of metals,\u201d the natural\ncreation and \u201cthat they want to imitate the uterus of a woman or an animal.\u201d30\nAccording to Palissy this is impossible, because \u201cthe matters of the metals are\ndivine seeds. I say on a level divine so that they are unknown to men: even\ninvisible.\u201d31\nFor Palissy the metal seed is a real fact but also an analogy for the alchemist who\ncounterfeits God\u2019s own work of growing metals, a divine process, which will]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=121\nPages: 121\nprocesses are blended together.\nIconographically speaking the vessel represents a model of the dichotomy of\nmale/female, form/matter: Adam and Eve embody this principle and simultaneously their action indicates the beginning of every human productive action.\nAfter the Fall, every human action is per definitionem a repetition of natural\ncreative processes. Embedded in the context of the miners and the general subject\nof minerals and their genesis and extraction, is the idea of God as creator of metals\nand the human propensity to imitate this processes\u2014whether in alchemical or\nartisanal ways.46\nSecond, the Handstein as product of working knowledge: This object has also a\nmaterial significance, because it is the product of applied (al)chemical knowledge.\nEvery piece of art emanating from the goldsmith\u2019s workshop is the embodiment of\nchemical lore concerning material properties and agency. It is important to note,\n45\n46]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=112\nPages: 112,111\nTrockenheit u\u0308bereinstimmen.\u201d (Calw, Bergb\u20ac\nuchlein, 117).\n22\nArtificial Interventions in the Natural Form of Things: Shared. . .\n89\nthe earth, as if they were second planets [. . .] where every metal has great resemblance to\nhis planet, like offspring have in relation to their father.24\nHe ends with the provocative question: \u201cBut since there are only seven planets,\nwhich will they call the producer of bismuth?\u201d and concludes that the forming\ninfluence of the stars on earthy matter is a futile conceit.\nThe second issue in discussion (after the issue of the \u2018cause\u2019, i.e. the creator, who\nshapes the species of the metals) was the question of the substances or materials\nfrom which metals were generated, thus of the primordial matter from which the\ngeneration can commence.\nIn the texts three main theories can be distinguished: firstly that of an ens primum\nor a materia prima, that is a more or less solid primordial matter, secondly one that]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=97\nPages: 97\nconcludes:\nI have done this willingly in order that you may acquire more learning and because I am\ncertain that new information always gives birth in men\u2019s mind to new discoveries and so to\nfurther information. Indeed I am certain that it is the key that arouses intelligent men and\nmakes them, if they wish, arrive at certain conclusions that they could not have reached\nwithout such a foundation, or even nearly approached.54\nThe advancement of learning for Biringuccio depends on continual \u201cdiscoveries\u201d and \u201cnew information,\u201d that results in two processes of knowledge: the first\nleads to the creation of new artificial products and the second determines the\nincrease in and deepening of knowledge about nature. As is clear from this passage,\nhuman creativity can be awakened by practical problems. And once such \u201cnew\ninformation\u201d is integrated into the wealth of knowledge this can lead humanity to\nthe opening of new paths of research.55]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=106\nPages: 106,107\n9\nThis concept can be found in medieval authors writing on natura as goddess, as pro-dea and as\nvicaria (assistant) of God, who was entrusted with the creatio continua, the continuous creations as\npro-creatrix, like Alanus ab Insulis or Jean de Meuns in his roman de la rose. See Modersohn,\nNatura als Gottin.\n10\nBiringuccio, Pirotechnia [1540], and Pirotechnia (1942).\n11\n\u201cMein vornehmen aber sol sich eygentlich dahin lenden, das ich euch meinen Pfarrkindern\nvornehmlich die allmechtige und wunderbarliche hand Gottes und seinen unme\u00dflichen reychtumb\nneben seiner unerforschlichen wey\u00dfheyt unnd genedigen unnd Va\u0308terlichen hertzen inn Scho\u0308pffung\nund offenbarung allerley ertz unnd metalle zeyge, damit ir ewern Got in seinen gaben erkennen\nund preysen lernet, die er euch inn diesem gebirge auf genediger gu\u0308te mittheylet.\u201d (\u201cDie Dritte\nPredigt. Von Ursprung zu und abnemen der Metallen unnd Minerischen Bergkarten und Ertzen,\u201d\nin Mathesius, Sarepta, fol. XXXIIIv).\n84\nH. Haug]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=117\nPages: 117\nthus the loss of the \u2018uncultivated\u2019, i.e. pre-cultural status of humanity.\nNot only iconographical programs, such as the reliefs at the foot of the Florentine Campanile (which might go back to a design by Giotto (1266\u20131337)) or the\ndepictions on the city palace of Ancona, assert this connection between the Fall and\nthe onset of \u2018artificial\u2019 human activity.39 This connection was often emphasized,\nespecially in texts that were aimed at artists and artisans. An early example is found\nin the preface to the chapter on painting by Theophilus Presbyter in De diversis\nartibus where he writes:\nWe read in the exordium of mundane creation that man, made after the image and likeness\nof God and animated by the inspiration of the Divine breath, was also, by the excellence of\nso much dignity, raised above other living creatures; as capable of reason, he merited to\nparticipate in the counsel and genius of Divine providence, and, gifted with free-will, he]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=105\nPages: 105\nhuman artisan, who imitates nature in his workshop with the substances available to\nhim, stating \u201cGod has various schmeltzwerck [products produced by melting/fusion/\ncasting] in his laboratorio [workshop] and smelts the metals as beautifully and in as\nmany colours as the flowers in the field or the crests of a stonecutter.\u201d7 God is\npersonified as some kind of metalworker, maybe a goldsmith in his workshop, who\nuses a smelting process to form the several metals that can be found in the earth.\nAnd Mathesius doesn\u2019t leave any doubts that this is a perpetual process when he\nexplains:\nThe experience of every day shows\u2014aside from scholarly reports\u2014that our God daily\ncreates and lets grow in the earth all kinds of noble and rough stones as well as the various\nprecious and salubrious bergsafften [juices of the mountain] and various bergarten [minerals], ores and pure metals.8\n5\n\u201cvon ewern metallen oder wi ir pflegt zu reden von allerley bergarten unnd ertzen unnd von iren]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=113\nPages: 113\nformative power, or in other words: a creator and a material in which the creation\ncan manifest. This duality of primordial passive matter and active forming principle\ncan be thought of in terms of natural procreational processes which approximates\nthe third\u2014mineralistic\u2014to the other two reigns, the floral and the animalistic,\nwhere by seed or semen procreation and growth is initiated. If this biological\nanalogy taken from the animal and herbal kingdoms is applied to the mineral, it\ncan be extended to metallogenesis: if in the field of animals and plants male and\nfemale beings can be found who procreate by the union of the active and formative\nmale seeds or semen and the female passive receiving matter\u2014and if this means\nthat this species can recreate self-reliantly\u2014 then it is not too far fetched to suspect\ncomparable ways of reproduction and growth in the reign of minerals and assume\nthe existence of metal \u2018semen\u2019.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=125\nPages: 125\nChronicken. Nuremberg: J. vom Berg und U. Newbar.\nMathesius, Johannes. 1897. Hochzeitspredigten. Ausgew\u20ac\nahlte Werke, vol. 2, ed. Georg Loesche,\n169\u2013190. Prague/Vienna/Leipzig: Tempsky.\nModersohn, Mechthild. 1997. Natura als Go\u0308ttin im Mittelalter. Ikonographische Studien zu\nDarstellungen der personifizierten Natur. Berlin: Akademie Verlag.\nNewman, William R. 2004. Promethean Ambitions: Alchemy and the Quest to Perfect Nature.\nChicago: University of Chicago Press.\nNobis, Heribert M. 1971. Buch der Natur. In Historisches Wo\u0308rterbuch der Philosophie, vol. 1, ed.\nJoachim Ritter, 957\u2013959. Darmstadt: WBG.\nNummedal, Tara E. 2007. Alchemy and Authority in the Holy Roman Empire. Chicago: University\nof Chicago Press.\nPalissy, Bernard. 1996. Discours admirables. Oevres Comple\u0300tes, vol. 2, ed. Keith Cameron. Montde-Marsan: Editions Interuniversitaires SPEC.\nQuellmalz, Werner. 1969. Zur Materialfrage bergma\u0308nnischer Handsteine der Renaissance.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=121\nPages: 121,122\nchemical lore concerning material properties and agency. It is important to note,\n45\n46\nZilsel, \u201cRoots\u201d; Smith, Body of the Artisan; and Long, Artisan/Practitioners.\nNewman, Promethean Ambitions, ch. III, 34\u2013114.\nArtificial Interventions in the Natural Form of Things: Shared. . .\n99\nthat the procedures applied by an alchemist and by a goldsmith are in large parts the\nsame: both required the know how to purify metals, to isolate them from the mixed\nmineral forms they are found in and transform them into massive pure metals. Both\nthe alchemist and the goldsmith share the same theoretical concepts, assuming that\nsulphur and quicksilver are the two original components of all metals. By alloying\nthese metals, by forcing them into forms, both locate their actions within the context\nof natural metallogenesis and both suppose, that they thereby imitate God and his\ncreative processes. But it is hard to prove that the goldsmith followed the same]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=125\nPages: 125,126\nBetween Maker and Nature. Configurations 12: 1\u201340.\nSmith, Pamela H. 2004. The Body of the Artisan. Art and Experience in the Scientific Revolution.\nChicago: University of Chicago Press.\nStorczer, Stephan G. 1992. Die Handsteinsammlung des Kunsthistorischen Museums in Wien.\nVienna: Diplomarbeit Universita\u0308t Wien.\nArtificial Interventions in the Natural Form of Things: Shared. . .\n103\nStrieder, Peter. 1967. Erzstufe. In Reallexikon zur deutschen Kunstgeschichte 5: 408\u2013418. Stuttgart: Metzler.\nSuhing, Lothar. 1986. \u2018Philosophisches\u2019 in der fru\u0308hneuzeitlichen Berg- und Hu\u0308ttenkunde.\nMetallogenese und Transmutation aus der Sicht montanistischen Erfahrungswissens. In Die\nAlchemie in der europ\u20ac\naischen Kultur- und Wissenschaftsgeschichte, ed. Christoph Meinel,\n293\u2013314. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.\nTheophilus Presbyter. 1847. An Essay Upon Various Arts in Three Books, by Theophilus, Called\nalso Rugerus, Priest and Monk, Forming an Encyclopedia of Christian Art of the Eleventh]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=91\nPages: 91,92\nof substance.40 Atoms as we will also see in the case of Biringuccio are something\n36\n\u201cVetro a cio\u0300 che si vegga li attimi nell\u2019acqua che si move.\u201d (Leonardo, Codex Atlanticus,\nfol. 589v).\n37\nMarinoni, \u201cL\u2019Essere del nulla,\u201d 209\u201332; Bernardoni, \u201cElementi, sostanze naturali,\u201d 99\u2013104;\nBeretta, \u201cLeonardo and Lucretius\u201d; and Nanni, \u201cLucrezio.\u201d\n38\nLeonardo, Manuscript F, 138 [fol. 74v, IV]. The phenomenon is also noted on folio 87r, see\nLeonardo, Manuscript F, 158\u20139 [fol. 87r]; and on folio 78r, see Leonardo, Manuscript L, 89\u201390\n[fol. 78r].\n39\nLeonardo, Codex Hammer, 4A, fol. 4r.\n40\n\u201cattimo non e\u0300 parte della materia donde nascie.\u201d (Leonardo, Codex Arundel, fol. 176v).\nArtisanal Processes and Epistemological Debate in the Works of Leonardo. . .\n69\nmaterial, which could be seen or imagined observing natural or artificial phenomena of matter transformation.\nBiringuccio\u2019s Pirotechnia and the Knowledge of Nature]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=117\nPages: 117,118\n39\nBlume, \u201cJenseits des Paradieses.\u201d\nArtificial Interventions in the Natural Form of Things: Shared. . .\n95\naccount, the pious devotion of the faithful may not neglect that which the careful prevision\nof our predecessors transmitted to our age [. . .]40\nThis association of the Fall of mankind and the beginning of cultivation, that\nis of artisanal human activity, is pointed out even by God, who announces to\nAdam that from now on he has to feed himself with the work of his own hands\n(Genesis 3, 17\u20139):\nAnd unto Adam he said, Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast\neaten of the tree, of which I commanded thee, saying, Thou shalt not eat of it: cursed is the\nground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life; Thorns also and\nthistles shall it bring forth to thee; and thou shalt eat the herb of the field; In the sweat of thy\nface shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for]"]}

{"result":["[Summary from page 180 to page 198 out of a total of 220:\nPages 180:\nGoldsmiths and Chymists: The Activity of Artisans Within Alchemical Circles\n159\nestablishments, and in noisy workshops. Most recently there has been particular\ninterest in exploring alchemy\u2019s place among artists and artisans, an investigation\nthat rightly reflects the crucial position of material production within chymistry\nthroughout its history. Important questions remain however in regard to demonstrating the specific theoretical and practical content of such artisanal endeavors,\nand in terms of identifying connections between them and the better documented\nand recognized work carried out in more visible and more intellectually elevated\ncircles.5 How did artists and artisans understand chymistry, and to what extent did\nthey practice it? To what extent were they familiar with more bookish or scholarly\nideas, practices, practitioners (and vice versa)? Can exchanges of knowledge\nbetween the two groups be clearly documented? Can we identify what practices,\nmaterials, or ideas passed between them, and how one group might have responded\nto information from the other? Answering such questions promises to further\nilluminate chymistry\u2019s cultural and intellectual place in early modern Europe.\nSome such connections seem relatively clear. Chymical workshops appear\nfrequently in Netherlandish genre painting, indicating that Northern artists were\nclearly aware of the figure of the alchemist and his iconic value.6 Likewise, the\nallegorical images of widely varying artistic quality in chymical books and manuscripts imply some sort of contact between author/practitioner and artist. Yet such\nartworks do not necessarily indicate that the artists were actually in direct and\nmeaningful contact with chymists. On a purely commercial level, artists would\nhave been in contact (possibly directly in some instances, but probably more\nfrequently indirectly through a retailer) with makers of chymically-prepared pigments such as vermilion or white lead, just as metalworkers and assayers would\nhave connected with producers of mineral acids, fabric-makers with dye manufacturers, and so forth. Yet none of these contacts tells us anything about possible\nepistemic exchanges or collaborations on the level of practical or theoretical\nknowledge.\nDocumented examples of extended collaborations or exchanges between artisans and natural philosophers would be both more interesting and more informative\nfor mapping out the domains and dynamics of early modern alchemical practice. A\npromising locus for such study is to be found particularly among gold- and\nsilversmiths. On the one hand, their trade regularly involved chymical processes\nsuch as assaying, refining, and so forth, and they were thus more or less conversant\nwith chymical substances (acids, salts, metals, amalgams, etc.) and chymical\noperations (fusion, quartation, distillation, etc.) and would frequently have\nmaintained workshops equipped with the necessary equipment (furnaces, flues,\nfuel, retorts, crucibles, etc.) needed for chymical work generally. On the other\nhand, the basic materials of their artisanal labors\u2014gold and silver\u2014held a central\n5\nSee Smith, Body of the Artisan.\nPrincipe & DeWitt, Transmutations; and Brinkman, Alchemist in de prentkunst. Lennep, Art et\nalchimie, is also useful, especially for its illustrations, but suffers from an inaccurate understanding\nof alchemy and its practice.\n6\n\nPages 181:\n160\nL.M. Principe\nposition in chymistry, that is to say, in the transmutational endeavors that figured so\nprominently in early modern chymistry and that promised such highly profitable\nreturns. Thus, the artisanal experience of gold- and silversmithing provided a\ncertain commonality with the pursuit of metallic chymistry, and might easily\nhave inclined such artisans toward transmutational endeavors, and hence toward\ncontact with other aspiring transmuters who were not themselves artisans. The\npractical experience of gold- and silversmiths also rendered them sources of\ninformation for those wishing to know more about the properties and potentialities\nof the precious metals. Accordingly, gold- and silversmiths figure prominently in\nmany examples of the genre of \u201ctransmutation histories\u201d\u2014detailed published\naccounts of successful transmutations\u2014where such artisans are routinely called\nin to assay a sample of the gold or silver produced, and thus act as expert witnesses\nto its authenticity.7\nFortunately for such a study, there existed a mid seventeenth-century network of\nalchemical practitioners where such interactions can be well documented. From the\n1640s through the 1660s, a network of correspondents and collaborators that included\nseveral gold- and silversmiths linked three major urban centers\u2014Amsterdam, Paris,\nand London\u2014and freely crossed political, linguistic, social, and confessional boundaries. Its numerous participants shared ideas, experiences, and aspirations relating to\na variety of chymically-based projects, and, crucially for such a project as this one,\nthis network left behind a wealth of written records that provide historians with the\nnecessary clear evidence from which to work. I will therefore focus here on the\nchymical activities of gold- and silversmiths within this group and their interactions\nwith its other members and with the broader realms of chymistry.\nAnthoni and Andries Grill in the Netherlands and Sweden\nOne part of this network has already been extensively studied, namely the portion\ngathered around the intelligencer Samuel Hartlib (1600\u20131662) in London.8 The\nHartlib Circle\u2019s utopian, educational, and commercial schemes made chymistry a\nsubject of particular interest due to its lucrative potential. An important contact in\nthis regard was the former Calvinist minister Johann Moriaen (c.1591\u20131668) in\nAmsterdam. Moriaen both pursued his own chymical interests and aspirations and\nfunctioned as a communications hub for others who shared those interests. Working\nfrom Moriaen\u2019s surviving correspondence with Hartlib and his prote\u0301ge\u0301 Benjamin\nWorsley (1618\u20131673), John Young has beautifully documented several chymical\n7\nOn transmutation histories, see Principe, Secrets of Alchemy, 167\u201370, Aspiring Adept, 93\u20138, 108\u2013\n11; and Newman, Gehennical Fire, 3\u201313.\n8\nClassic treatments of the Hartlib Circle include Turnbull, Hartlib; and Webster, Great\nInstauration.\n\nPages 182:\nGoldsmiths and Chymists: The Activity of Artisans Within Alchemical Circles\n161\nprojects in which Moriaen was involved. One of these projects, undertaken in 1651,\ninvolved trying to produce silver from tin. Four hopeful experimenters collaborated\non this project: Moriaen, Worsley, the German inventor and chymist Johannes\nKu\u0308ffler (1595\u20131677), and one whom Young calls a \u201cvery shadowy figure\u201d named\nAnthoni Grill and who is most often designated simply as Aurifaber, that is, the\ngoldsmith.9\nGrill is, in fact, not so shadowy a figure. He has left behind substantial historical\ntraces, artifacts, and documentation. Furthermore, while his involvement with\ntransmutational chymistry has hitherto been taken as a failure, fresh research now\nnot only documents his laudible chymical ingenuity and engagement with contemporaneous scholarship, but also reveals that he eventually turned his chymical\nexpertise into an enormous success. Grill thus provides an outstanding and detailed\nexample of the alchemical activity of an artisan.\nAnthoni Grill was born about 1607 in Augsburg. He and two brothers, all silverand goldsmiths like their father Balthasar Grill before them, left Germany to\npractice their trade in the Netherlands.10 Several pieces of fine silverwork by\nAnthoni\u2019s younger brother Johannes (c.1614\u20131670) survive, as do a few pieces\nprobably by Anthoni himself (Figs. 1 and 2).11 Their elder brother Andries (1604\u2013\n1665), who set up shop in The Hague, is considered by some to have been one of the\nfinest gold- and silversmiths in the mid-century Netherlands and several pieces of\nhis work also survive (Fig. 3).12 Anthoni arrived in Amsterdam around 1630,\nmarried in 1634, and became established as a silversmith on the Koningsstraat.\nYet his interests and ambitions soon led him beyond the artisanal working of\nprecious metals. Notarial records indicate that already in 1635 he undertook a\nproject to reclaim silver, copper, and lead from used testen (cupels), indicating an\ninterest, and presumably some degree of technical ability, in chymical processes.\nBy 1649 he was known as an assayer as well as a silver- and goldsmith. The notarial\nrecords also report that in 1651, he paid the handsome sum of 12,000 guilders (over\n\u00a31,000) for a house with a large yard on the Looiersgracht in order to set up a\nsmelterij (smelter) for obtaining gold and silver.13\nThis Dutch archival record is corroborated and elaborated in letters from\nMoriaen in Amsterdam to Worsley in London. These letters also recount the extent\nof Grill\u2019s devotion, growing knowledge, and labor in chymical processes. Moriaen\n9\nYoung, Johann Moriaen, 226\u20139, 231. Young translates Aurifaber as goldmaker (which would\nhave been aurifactor) rather than as goldsmith. The identification of Aurifaber as Grill is made in\nHartlib\u2019s Ephemerides for 1650, Hartlib Papers (hereinafter HP) 28/1/49B. For Worsley, see\nLeng, Benjamin Worsley. On Ku\u0308ffler, the son-in-law of the inventor Cornelius Drebbel, see\nYoung, Johann Moriaen, 52\u20137; and Principe, Aspiring Adept, 85\u20136.\n10\nEeghen, \u201cGrill\u2019s Hofje.\u201d\n11\nLorm, Amsterdams goud en zilver, 44\u20137, 54\u20136, 59\u201360; brief biographies on 506\u20137 by Dirk Jan\nBiemond. I am grateful to Dr. Lorenz Seelig for this reference, and for his generous and invaluable\ncomments upon this paper.\n12\nGelder, \u201cHaagsche bekerschroef.\u201d\n13\nEeghen, \u201cGrill\u2019s Hofje,\u201d 50.\n\nPages 183:\n162\nFig. 1 Silver and part-gilt\ncruet and spice set attributed\nto Anthoni Grill, 1642\n(Courtesy of Rijksmuseum\nAmsterdam, BK\u20131997\u20131)\nFig. 2 Silver platter\nshowing allegories of the\nfour seasons, four ages of\nman, and four elements by\nJohannes Grill, 1649\n(Courtesy of Rijksmuseum\nAmsterdam)\nL.M. Principe\n\nPages 184:\nGoldsmiths and Chymists: The Activity of Artisans Within Alchemical Circles\n163\nFig. 3 Silver pitcher by\nAndries Grill, 1649\n(Courtesy of Rijksmuseum\nAmsterdam, BK\u2013NM\u2013\n13270\u2013B)\nreports that Grill\u2019s decision to purchase the property on the Looiersgracht arose\nfrom their collaborative project for extracting silver from tin for which Moriaen\u2019s\nown furnace was found to be \u201ctoo narrow and feeble.\u201d Yet Grill\u2019s aspirations went\nmuch further than this one project, for he set up on the property, besides his\nlodgings, six laboratories [laboratoria]\nnot so much indeed for our work as for his own, this same work, I say, which he has\ndiscovered with his own thoughts from reading partly Paracelsus and partly Glauber [. . .].\nHe knows besides how to draw gold or silver out of any talc, just as the talc is disposed and\nendowed by nature. This knowledge indeed spawned such boldness that he did not hesitate\nto spend 25,000 guilders or more in buying the estate and in erecting things necessary for\nthe work, and he is sparing no labor in completing them as quickly as possible, and is\nleaving no stone unturned.14\n14\n\u201cAurifaber, non procul ab aedibus meis 12 florenorum millibus fundum sibi coe\u0308mit, in quo\npraeter domicilium sex laboratoria diversa exstruit, jam de opere certus non tam nostro, quam suo\nipsius, isto inquam opere quod ex lectione, partim Paracelsi partim Glauberi, propria\u0302 meditatione\nconsequutus est [. . .] novit praeterea ex quolibet Talco argentum vel aurum elicere prout Talcum\ndispositum et ditatum a Natura est. Haec porro\u0300 scientia peperit audaciam illam ut non dubitaret\n25 florenorum millia aut amplius in emendo fundo et exstruendis ad opus necessariis, impendere in\nquo etiam qua\u0300m citissime\u0300 perficiendo nulli labori parcit, nullum non movet lapidem [. . .].\u201d\n(Moriaen to Worsley, 31 March 1651, HP 9/16/3A\u20134B, on 4A).\n\nPages 185:\n164\nL.M. Principe\nTwo months later, Moriaen remarked to Worsley:\nYou would really be astonished if you saw the supplies, instruments, and beautiful order of\nthe laboratories! He [Grill] and his wife now spend the nights in the new lodgings so that\nthey can be with the workers morning and evening; the building is progressing quickly, but\nso much construction nevertheless requires a reasonable amount of time.15\nGrill also displayed his knowledge and experience by critiquing several\nchymical processes that the chymical entrepreneur Johann Rudolf Glauber\n(c.1604\u20131670) had boasted about and endeavored to sell.16 In particular, Grill\ndetermined that Glauber\u2019s process for separating gold and silver \u201cdoes not excel\nthat which is customary to him [Grill] in regard to either the labor or the cost.\u201d\nGrill\u2019s own method, which he probably developed in the course of his assaying\nwork, used special vessels (made of gold!) to limit breakage and loss and cleverly\nrecovered and recycled the acid necessary for the process, thus cutting costs by\ntwo-thirds. Hence, as Moriaen asserts, \u201cthe Goldsmith\u2019s method exceeds others in\nits utility and facility.\u201d17\nGrill was clearly much more than a mere operator. In terms of the collaborative\ntin project, he developed one of the main experimental protocols to be used,\nreferred to by Worsley as the \u201cGrillian\u201d method.18 Though it is not possible to\nreconstruct from the sources at hand the theoretical basis upon which he developed\nhis method, this process was characterized by an attention to operational facility\nand feasibility in comparison with the more laborious method proposed by their\ncollaborator Ku\u0308ffler. The third collaborator, Worsley, also offered operational\nsuggestions about the process, which are not recorded, but from other contemporaneous sources, Worsley seems to have had more enthusiasm about the potential of\nchymistry than experience in its practice.19 Moriaen reported that Grill\u2019s workers\n15\n\u201c[. . .] mirareris profecto si Laboratoriorum copiam, apparatum et ordinem decentem videres.\nIam ipse cum Uxore in novo hospitio pernoctant, ut laborantibus matutine\u0300 et sero adesse possint,\naedificium etiam celeriter progreditur sed tot ac tanta, moram tamen requirunt justam.\u201d (Moriaen\nto Worsley, 26 May 1651, HP 9/16/6A).\n16\nOn Glauber, see Young, Johann Moriaen, 183\u201398, passim; and Smith, \u201cVital Spirits.\u201d\n17\n\u201cIlla de qua Glauberus gloriari solebat, aurifabro judice, non antecellit hanc sibi usitatam, vel\nquo\u0300 ad laborem vel quo\u0300 ad lucrum [. . .]. Aurifabri artificium aliis et utilitate et facilitate sua\u0302\npraestat.\u201d (Moriaen to Worsley, 31 March 1651, HP 9/16/3A). Grill\u2019s method isolated the residual\nsilver nitrate from the parting, and, rather than recovering the silver by the more usual method of\nprecipitation with copper, instead destructively distilled the nitrate, leaving the silver as a residue\nand allowing much of the nitric acid used initially to be recovered as a distillate. Grill also took the\nunusual step of using vessels made of gold [\u201cvasis suis aureis\u201d], rather than of glass, for distilling\nthe acid. Despite the cost of the precious metal, its durability (and inertness) relative to constantly\nbreaking or exploding glass vessels, actually saved money, considering that there would be no loss\nof the precious metal. Hartlib might be referring either to Grill or to a member of his family still in\nAugsburg when he recorded that Moriaen had informed him that \u201cthe Goldsmith at Augsb[urg]\nmade his melting or refining Pots instead of glass or earth of pure gold wherby hee hath gained or\nsaved many thou[sand]s,\u201d see HP 28/2/17B.\n18\nMoriaen to Worsley, 26 May 1651, HP 9/16/6A\u20136B.\n19\nNewman & Principe, Alchemy Tried in the Fire, 236\u201356.\n\nPages 186:\nGoldsmiths and Chymists: The Activity of Artisans Within Alchemical Circles\n165\ncould consistently prepare two and one-half pounds (five Marks) of silver from\n100 pounds of tin, a quantity augmentable by repeating the process on the\nuntransmuted tin recovered. It is possible that they were separating silver present\nas an impurity in the tin and/or the lead used in the process, although Moriaen\u2019s\nclaim to have eventually turned 27 % of the weight of the tin into silver is\nimplausible. In the end, the project for obtaining silver from tin seems not to\nhave fulfilled initial expectations given Moriaen\u2019s and Grill\u2019s subsequent financial\ndifficulties, even though (or perhaps because) Grill, according to one report, spent\n\u00a31,200 on it.20\nNevertheless, some initial success may stand behind the contract that Grill\nsigned in July 1653 with his brother Andries to supply him with silver, presumably\nfor use and sale in his silversmithing business.21 Significantly, Andries himself\nworked on transmutational alchemy as well. The Danish traveller, savant, and\nchymical author Olaus Borrichius (1626\u20131690) was told during his trip through\nthe Netherlands in 1662 that \u201cthe goldsmith Grill of The Hague, a German, drew a\ngreat deal of lead, some silver, and some gold, from Norwegian lead ore.\u201d The ore\ncame from Skien, and Andries worked on it in hundred pound quantities, implying\nthat his operational resources were substantial.22 Rather more interesting is a\nsecond report Borrichius obtained in Paris three years later in 1665:\nGrill of The Hague [. . .] dissolved or cooked a piece of lead in spirit of salt for several\nmonths, saw something star-like in the midst of the spirit [. . .] and after the liquid had\nevaporated, by assaying the remaining material in a cupel, he found a sixth part of it to be\ngood silver, but afterwards was unable to find a similar spirit of salt.23\nAt least as surprising as the transmutation itself is the fact that Andries Grill did\nthis experiment \u201cupon the advice of Bohn of Leipzig,\u201d surely the famous chymist,\nauthor, and professor of medicine at the University of Leipzig, Johannes Bohn\n(1640\u20131718). Under what circumstances would a silversmith in The Hague be in\ncontact with a professor of Leipzig? Since the experiment lasted several months, it\nmust have been begun in 1664, well before Bohn had published anything on\nchemistry, and even before he formally received his doctorate. In 1663\u20131664,\nhowever, Bohn was travelling through Northern Europe, including the Netherlands,\nand thus must have met and spoken with Grill at that time, and suggested this\ntransmutational experiment to him. This solution begs the question of why Bohn\n20\nHP 9/16/3B; \u201chee [Grill] adventur\u2019s 12. hundred lb upon an Exp[eriment] of Tinne and\nsomething else in which Mr. Mor[iaen] hath also an Adventure and is a very promising busines.\u201d\n(Hartlib, Ephemerides 1651, HP 28/2/15A). This figure might simply refer to the purchase of the\nestate, rather than to the direct costs for the tin project.\n21\nEeghens, \u201cGrill\u2019s Hofje,\u201d 50. Much more about Anthoni\u2019s activities and aspirations could\ncertainly be gained from a closer inspection of the many acts recorded by his notary Justus van\nde Ven, such as this contract with Andries, which I have not been able to examine directly.\n22\nBorrichius, Itinerarium, vol. II, 58\u20139, 1 February 1662.\n23\nBorrichius, Itinerarium, vol. IV, 276, 4 March 1665.\n\nPages 187:\n166\nL.M. Principe\nwould have visited Grill in the first place, unless Grill had achieved some notoriety\nfor chymical interests or knowledge, that is, in topics of interest to Bohn as well.\nWhatever notoriety Andries Grill had obtained prior to Bohn\u2019s visit was substantially augmented shortly thereafter when one of the most celebrated reports of\nthe Philosophers\u2019 Stone recounted the same experiment with lead that Borrichius\nhad recorded privately. In late 1666, Johann Friedrich Helvetius (1625\u20131709),\nphysician to the Prince of Orange (1650\u20131702), reportedly received a visit at his\nhouse in The Hague from a mysterious stranger. This visitor showed Helvetius\nsome heavy lumps of material that he claimed to be the Philosophers\u2019 Stone that he\nhad prepared, and eventually gave Helvetius a tiny sample. After the visitor\ndeparted, Helvetius melted some lead, cast in the crumb of material according to\nthe instructions he had been given, and thereby produced pure gold that was\nafterwards successfully examined by a goldsmith and then formally assayed by a\nlocal silversmith named Brechtel, an artisan undoubtedly identifiable as Hans\nCoenraet Brechtel (1609\u20131675), a native of Nuremberg, resident in The Hague\nfrom 1640, and the most prominent silversmith in the city at this time.24 Helvetius\npublished this account as Vitulus aureus in 1667, and the story gained wide renown\nacross Europe, provoking the interest of many, including Benedict Spinoza (1632\u2013\n1677) and Robert Boyle (1627\u20131691).\nAs a preamble to his own account, Helvetius reported other transmutational\nexperiences, one of which \u201cwas done at The Hague by a certain silversmith whose\nname is Grill.\u201d25 Helvetius recounts that this \u201csilversmith and student of alchemy\nmuch-engaged in the art\u201d obtained some spirit of salt \u201cnot prepared by the common\nmethod\u201d from Helvetius\u2019s friend Johann Caspar Kno\u0308ttner, a cloth dyer (and apparently, another type of artisan employed in chymical work). Consistent with\nBorrichius\u2019s private diary\u2019s account of the event, Helvetius tells how Grill poured\nthis spirit of salt over some lead in a glazed vessel (\u201csuch as is used for preserves\nand confections\u201d) and after two weeks was delighted to see a silvery \u201cstar\u201d floating\nin the liquid\u2014perhaps some sort of crystalline concretion. Grill told Helvetius of\nthis phenomenon, which the silversmith believed to be the \u201csignate star of the\nphilosophers that he had read about in Basilius [Valentinus].\u201d Helvetius and \u201cmany\nother honest men\u201d went to see the experiment and marveled at it. After the\nsummer\u2019s heat had evaporated the liquid, Helvetius continues, Grill took some of\nthe now spongy and ashen-colored lead, with a piece of the star-like formation, and\ncupelled it. From one pound he obtained 12 ounces of silver, and out of this silver he\nisolated two ounces of gold. Helvetius notes that he still owns some of Grill\u2019s\nspongy lead, a piece of the star, and samples of the transmuted silver and gold, all of\nwhich he can display to interested or as yet unconvinced inquirers.\nUnfortunately, this wonderful success did not make Andries rich. For he tried to\nlearn Kno\u0308ttner\u2019s method for preparing the spirit of salt, but the cloth-dyer had in the\n24\nFor Brechtel (or Breghtel) and his work, see Pijzel-Dommisse, Haags goud en zilver, 30:\n\u201czonder twijfel de belangrijkste en meest veelzijdige Haagse zilversmid uit de zeventiende eeuw.\u201d\n25\nHelvetius, Vitulus aureus, 831\u20132.\n\nPages 188:\nGoldsmiths and Chymists: The Activity of Artisans Within Alchemical Circles\n167\nmeantime forgotten exactly which sort of spirit of salt he had given Grill, and while\ntrying to determine which it was, \u201che and his entire family were seized by the\nplague, and died.\u201d As for the silversmith, shortly thereafter \u201che fell into the water\nand exchanged life for death; no investigator after the death of these two has been\nable to discover the art of making it.\u201d26\nReturning again to the younger brother Anthoni in Amsterdam, we find that his\nchymical work and interests continued unabated despite the collapse of the collaborative venture on tin. A 1657 letter to Moriaen indicates that by that time Grill had\ntravelled to the coppermines of Sweden and done assaying there. His account of\nSwedish ores and answers to chymical questions posed to him (probably from\nWorsley) display significant knowledge of metallic smelting, refining, and\nassaying. The same letter also reports that he had just purchased the astounding\nquantity of fourteen thousand pounds of English or Scottish potloet, that is, the lead\ncompound\u2014mostly litharge (lead oxides)\u2014used for glazing earthenware.27 Grill\ncomplained however, that he was cheated in some unspecified way, such that the\nmaterial proved unsatisfactory for his intended purpose. He nevertheless remarked\nthat although \u201cI find good uses for it in the little, I want to try it also in the great, and\nif it turns out well I will let you know.\u201d The meaning here of im kleinen and im\ngro\u00dfen remain slightly ambiguous, but it is possible that these terms refer to the\n\u201cLesser Work\u201d and \u201cGreater Work,\u201d namely, two methods of effecting metallic\ntransmutation, the latter synonymous with making the Philosophers\u2019 Stone.28\nAnthoni Grill\u2019s Swedish Success\nIn 1659, Grill left Amsterdam in poor financial shape. But his story does not end\nthere. He and his family emigrated from the Netherlands and settled in Sweden. The\nfull details of his activities there remain to be uncovered at present; however, it is\nclear that in Sweden, a land rich in metallic ores (which is presumably what drew\nhim there) Grill\u2019s fortunes improved dramatically. Borrichius, once again, provides\na report. In 1663, the Danish savant, then in Paris, learned that Grill:\nstirred up partly by the works of Glauber, and partly by his own industry [propria\u0302\nindustria\u0302], melts out gold and silver with profit from [a mixture of] litharge, iron and\ncopper scoriae, sand (especially the slate from Angers) [. . .] and a particular red earth, such\n26\nHelvetius, Vitulus aureus, 832. Indeed, Andries is known to have died in 1665, consistent with\nHelvetius\u2019s account.\n27\nGrill to Moriaen, 13 June 1657, transcribed in Moriaen to Hartlib, 22 Jun 1657; HP 42/2/10A\u2013\n11B. A Latin translation exists at HP 56/1/64A.\n28\n\u201c[I]m kleinen finde Ich guten nuzen dabey, wills im gro\u00dfen auch versuchen und so es woll\nausfalt will ichs den H[errn] wissen la\u00dfen.\u201d (HP 42/2/11A). The meaning is clearer in the Latin\nversion: \u201cIn minore opere usum ejus deprehendo satis commodum, neque desinam idem probare in\nmajori, et si quid eo proficiam, faciam Te certiorem.\u201d (HP 56/1/64B).\n\nPages 189:\n168\nL.M. Principe\nFig. 4 Grillska Huset (the Grill House ) in Stockholm, no. 3 Stortorget; the adjoining house on the\nright, no. 5, was also purchased by Grill in the seventeenth century (Photograph by the author)\nthat he obtains more than 40 crowns [aurei] a day after having deducted the expenses for\nsixteen servants and 900 pounds of litharge.29\nThis process is possibly a continuation or development of the work with potloet\nthat Grill had attempted while still in Amsterdam. What is clear however is that\nGrill\u2019s social and financial situation must have become quite solid by this time in\norder for him to run a workshop that employed 16 assistants and that could process\n900 pounds of litharge in a day. After Borrichius summarizes Grill\u2019s procedure, he\nrecords the opinion of \u201can extremely knowledgeable Frenchman\u201d that this process\nwas not the mere extraction of preexisting precious metals, but a true transmutation\nof the lead. Applying Helmontian (or perhaps Suchtenian) theory, the unnamed\nFrench chymist explained Grill\u2019s results as \u201can exaltation of the lead through the\nfermentative odor of the admixed scoriae.\u201d30 He added that if Grill had recognized\n29\nBorrichius, Itinerarium, vol. III, 105\u20137, 6 October 1663.\nOn Helmontian theory, see Newman & Principe, Alchemy Tried in the Fire, 56\u201391. Interestingly, this idea of using the \u201cfermentative odor\u201d of copper scoria to effect transmutation was a\n30\n\nPages 190:\nGoldsmiths and Chymists: The Activity of Artisans Within Alchemical Circles\n169\nthis operation as fermentative, and left the mixture in a hotter fire longer, he could\nhave increased his daily profit to 300 crowns, and suggested that Grill should build a\nbigger furnace outside of some city to effect it. The Frenchman also compared his\nown experiments with litharge and their results to those carried out by Grill.31 That\nBorrichius and a learned French chymist heard about and discussed this matter\nseriously in Paris indicates that Grill and his chymical work in Sweden had attained\na substantial level of international notoriety.\nBy 1664, Grill had risen to become Riksguardien vid Kronans Myntverk (Master\nof the Royal Mint) in Stockholm. How exactly he attained this prominent state\nposition less than five years after fleeing his creditors in Amsterdam remains to be\ntold, but certainly it required the expertise he had accumulated over the years in\nassaying, metalworking, and chymical processes involving metals and minerals.\nInterestingly, when he received the position as mintmaster, he also obtained rights\nto make and sell gold- and silverware and a license to engage in foreign trade,\nshowing that he had by no means turned his back on his traditional artisanal craft of\nsilversmithing.32 It is also reported that Grill was involved in lead and silver\nproduction at the mines in Stora Skedvi in the province of Dalarna, and tried to\nextract silver and gold from copper ore.\nIn 1664, Borrichius was part of a conversation at Henri Justel\u2019s (1620\u20131693)\nhouse in Paris where he heard from Abraham Cronstro\u0308m (1640\u20131696) that \u201cGrill\ntried new arts in Sweden in vain.\u201d33 Cronstro\u0308m was son of the mintmaster and\nprefect of the Avesta copper mines in Sweden, and would himself become a\nmintmaster in Stockholm in 1674. Regardless of Cro\u0308nstrom\u2019s less-than-positive\nassertion about Grill\u2019s unspecified \u201cnew arts,\u201d it is clear that Grill had achieved\nconsiderable success and renown in Sweden, such that he came to the notice (and\nperhaps the envy) of the large and powerful Cronstro\u0308m family. Indeed, Grill\namassed a fortune large enough to purchase a prominent residence on the oldest\nand most fashionable square in Stockholm, not far from the Royal Mint and the\nRoyal Palace. This house remained in the Grill family for more than two centuries;\nit still stands at No. 3 Stortorget, and continues to be known today as the Grillska\nHuset (Grill House, Fig. 4). Upon Grill\u2019s death in late 1675, Anthoni passed his\nfinancial and social success on to his descendants. His son Anthoni (1640\u20131702),\nwho had come with the family from Amsterdam, followed his father\u2019s profession,\nestablishing himself as a goldsmith, jeweller, and merchant in Stockholm, and took\nup his father\u2019s post as mintmaster, as well as becoming engaged in ironworks at\nSo\u0308derfors.34 His eldest son, also named Anthoni Grill (1664\u20131727), returned to\npathway investigated by George Starkey\u2014who was also a member of the correspondence network\nexplored in this paper\u2014during the 1650s, Newman & Principe, Alchemy Tried in the Fire, 128\u201335,\nesp. 130\u20131.\n31\nBorrichius, Itinerarium, vol. III, 106\u20137.\n32\nAnrep, Svenska Sl\u20ac\nagtboken, vol. I, 94\u20135. Borrichius, Itinerarium, vol. IV, 99, 27 August 1664\nrefers to Grill as monetarius Belga (the Dutch mintmaster).\n33\nBorrichius, Itinerarium, vol. IV, 99.\n34\nAnrep, Svenska Sl\u20ac\nagtboken, vol. I, 95.\n\nPages 191:\n170\nL.M. Principe\nAmsterdam in 1686 where he amassed a considerable fortune, bought a substantial\nhouse on the Keisersgracht, became official assayer to the exchange bank in 1712\n(presumably having been trained in the practice by his father and/or grandfather),\nand in 1721 established the hofje\u2014an almshouse for the elderly\u2014still known today\nas Grill\u2019s Hofje.35 Two other sons of Anthoni\u2014Abraham and Carlos\u2014remained in\nStockholm where they established and ran one of largest and most successful\nmerchant houses of eighteenth-century Sweden.36\nAfter Grill\u2019s remove to Sweden, the house and magnificent laboratories he had\nleft behind on the Looiersgracht were rented out in 1660 to none other than Glauber,\nwho lived and worked there until the complex was ordered to be sold in 1661 to pay\noff Grill\u2019s Dutch creditors.37 It was very probably in these lodgings that the\nphysician, traveller, and scholar Samuel Sorbie\u0300re (1615\u20131670) visited Glauber in\n1660 and marveled at his multiple (\u201cno fewer than four, at the back of a large\nhouse\u201d) laboratories: \u201cHis laboratories are magnificent, and occupy a wing of his\nlodgings and the rear of his garden. They are of a prodigious size, and of a\ncompletely unique structure.\u201d38 Most or all of what so impressed Sorbie\u0300re was in\nfact probably designed and erected by Grill, the construction of which led ultimately to his bankruptcy and emigration to Sweden.\nAnthoni Grill thus emerges as an artisan who developed a substantial\nknowledge\u2014practical and theoretical\u2014of chymistry, both transmutational and\nmore broadly metallic, and thereby elevated himself to a high social and financial\nsituation. Not only was Anthoni capable of designing, carrying out, and improving\npractical productive processes, but he also operated at a higher epistemic level,\nreading the books of at least Paracelsus (1493\u20131541) and Glauber and designing\ntherefrom new experiments and processes propria\u0302 meditatione and propria\u0302\nindustria\u0302. From his initial profession of silver- and goldsmithing and the associated\ncraft of assaying, Grill kept expanding his horizons and expertise to engage in\nsophisticated and sometimes collaborative chymical projects that reached all the\nway to that summum bonum, the preparation of the Philosophers\u2019 Stone, and he\ndesigned and built substantial and costly laboratories for his processes and explorations. The knowledge embodied in these workspaces and their instruments were\nundoubtedly transmitted to his coworkers and laborants, and certainly to Glauber\nwho chose to rent Grill\u2019s laboratories almost as soon as they became available.\nInformation and new findings from Grill in Amsterdam were shared with his\ncollaborators, and transmitted by Moriaen into England where they were disseminated through the Hartlib Circle, which at this time included far better-known and\nwidely-published chymists like George Starkey (1628\u20131665) and Boyle. Likewise,\nnews and details of Grill\u2019s Swedish work were discussed as far away as Paris, where\n35\nEeghens, \u201cGrill\u2019s Hofje,\u201d 51\u20136; and Kroes, \u201cNederlands-Zweedse familie Grill,\u201d 75\u2013101.\nMu\u0308ller, Merchant Houses of Stockholm.\n37\nEeghens, \u201cGrill\u2019s Hofje,\u201d 50.\n38\nSorbie\u0300re, Diverses matieres curieuses, 176 and 180, in a letter dated 13 July 1660 to Guillaume\nde Bautru.\n36\n\nPages 192:\nGoldsmiths and Chymists: The Activity of Artisans Within Alchemical Circles\n171\none learned chymist found it sufficiently interesting to apply the latest chymical\ntheories to it. The accounts tendered by Borrichius and Helvetius indicate that\nAndries Grill too was tied into a network of chymists in and outside of The Hague,\njust as his brother Anthoni was with respect to Amsterdam. Helvetius and others\ngathered at Andries\u2019 workshop to see a remarkable experiment about which he had\ninformed them, and Helvetius used the silversmith\u2019s results in his own publication.\nAdditionally, just as Anthoni had been reading and interpreting at least Glauber and\nParacelsus, so too his brother Andries read Basilius Valentinus, and connected what\nhe had read to the results of his practical work. Thus it is clear that the two\nsilversmiths were not operating in isolation from other practitioners, nor separated\nfrom the textual and other intellectual traditions of chymistry, but clearly\nexchanged information with these other groups.\nAnthoni Grill was almost certainly unusual among silver- and goldsmiths in\nterms of his chymical sophistication and investigations, not to mention the eventual\nsuccess he acquired thereby for himself and for his family. One should not,\ntherefore, extend his example too readily to metalworking artisans as a whole; we\nwill need more case-studies to assess accurately the place of such artisans in the\nchymical world of early modern Europe. Nevertheless, Anthoni and Andries Grill\ndo provide clear and well-documented examples of the chymical activities and the\nintellectual contacts and contexts that some seventeenth-century artisans could\nhave. Now I will turn to examples provided by goldsmiths elsewhere in Europe.\nParisian Goldsmiths and Chymists\nMoriaen and the chymical group around him in the Netherlands that included\nAnthoni Grill maintained connections to circles wider than the one in England.\nThe recent discovery of a large cache of formerly unidentified manuscripts belonging to the diplomat, adventurer, and natural philosopher Sir Kenelm Digby (1603\u2013\n1665) reveals that Moriaen was also in direct contact with one of the most important\nchymists in France at the very same time he was in contact with Worsley, Hartlib,\nand Starkey in England.39 One volume of these Digby manuscripts consists of\nlengthy excerpts copied from notebooks kept by Samuel Cottereau Duclos (1598\u2013\n1685).40 Duclos was the first chymist chosen for the Acade\u0301mie Royale des Sciences\nupon its formation in 1666, and he became a leading figure in that body. He\npublished on chymical composition and the analysis of mineral waters, wrote a\nsubstantial treatise on salts, sought the Philosophers\u2019 Stone and the alkahest,\nand presented a lengthy critique of Boyle\u2019s ideas on chymistry particularly his\n39\n40\nPrincipe, \u201cSir Kenelm Digby.\u201d\nBibliothe\u0300que Nationale et Universitaire de Strasbourg (hereinafter BNU) MS 370.\n\nPages 193:\n172\nL.M. Principe\napplication of the mechanical philosophy to chymical processes.41 The Digby\nmanuscript preserves partial transcripts of letters from Moriaen and Glauber to\nDuclos dating to 1651\u20131652. Moriaen sent Duclos information about Glauber\u2019s\nprocesses\u2014he sent some of the very same material simultaneously to Starkey in\nLondon\u2014and acted as a conduit for queries from Duclos to Glauber, and Glauber\u2019s\nresponses back to Duclos, thus brokering an exchange between the technological\nentrepreneur Glauber and one of France\u2019s most eminent chymists.42\nThe fact that Digby was able to make copies out of Duclos\u2019 notebook attests to a\nclose relationship between the two, a relationship corroborated by their collaborative work outlined in other manuscripts of the Digby cache. But these same\nmanuscripts also reveal a wider circle of closely-knit chymists active in Paris\nthroughout the 1650s and 1660s. This circle included, besides Duclos and Digby,\nthe abbe\u0301 Jullien de Loberie (chaplain of the Colle\u0300ge Fortet) and an abbe\u0301 Boucaud,\nThomas Gobelin (member of a prominent family and counselor to the Paris\nParlement), the chymical authors Jean-Baptiste de la Noue, Pierre Borel, and\nFranc\u0327ois de Soucy, Sieur de Gerzan, as well as a host of others. The group shared\nmanuscripts, processes, and other information gathered from books or private\ncorrespondence, and collaborated (in various combinations) on practical chymical\nprocesses, most frequently of a transmutational nature. Some of them frequented\nwell-known intellectual groupings such as the academy of the abbe\u0301 Bourdelot.43\nThe travelling savants Borrichius and Henry Oldenburg (1619\u20131677) also\ninteracted with the group during their visits to Paris.\nSeveral documents record the participation of goldsmiths in this Parisian\nchymical circle. One notable example is an experiment recorded initially by Duclos\nin the early 1650s under the heading aurum redivivum and transcribed and annotated later by Digby. The process involves sealing gold hermetically in a flask and\nexposing it to sunlight and moonlight at particular seasons and then burying it in\nthe ground for extended periods, reportedly causing the gold to undergo various\nchanges to its properties.44 The annotations in Digby\u2019s handwriting clearly indicate\nthat Duclos thought highly enough of the report that he attempted to repeat the\nexperiment himself. What is probably the same process was described some years\nlater by the abbe\u0301 Boucaud, a close chymical associate of Duclos, who attributed the\nwork to quidam aurifaber (a certain goldsmith).45 Digby annotated his transcription\nof the process with a cross-reference reading \u201cSee among my loose papers, the same\nprocesse communicated to me by Monsieur Caillard, who wrought it with the\n41\nOn Duclos, see Sturdy, Science and Social Status, 107\u20139; Tode\u0301riciu, \u201cBiographie de Samuel\nDuclos,\u201d 64\u20137; Stroup, Company of Scientists, and \u201cAffaire Duclos.\u201d\n42\nPrincipe, \u201cSir Kenelm Digby,\u201d 16\u20138.\n43\nOn the Bourdelot Academy, see Brown, Scientific Organizations, 231\u201353.\n44\nBNU MS 370, fol. 39v\u201341v.\n45\nBorrichius, Itinerarium, vol. III, 134, 7 Dec. 1663, items 4 and 12.\n\nPages 194:\nGoldsmiths and Chymists: The Activity of Artisans Within Alchemical Circles\n173\nauthor.\u201d46 This Caillard was himself a goldsmith, identified as such by Boucaud\nwhen he describes what is certainly a further development of the same avenue of\nresearch\u2014involving burying a hermetically-sealed flask of gold four feet deep\non the hill of Montmartre\u2014that was carried out by \u201cCaillard aurifaber.\u201d47 Four\ngenerations of goldsmiths named Caillard (or Caillart) are known to have been\nactive in Paris during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. The Caillart known to\nDigby and Boucaud may have been the most well-known of these, Jacques Caillart\nthe Elder, who practiced his trade in Paris from about 1620 until the 1660s.\nAlternatively, the alchemical Caillart may have been his son, Jacques Caillart the\nYounger, born about 1622 and active until at least the 1670s.48\nThese accounts are of particular interest for several reasons. First of all, the\nprocess for preparing this aurum redivivum seems to have been conceived and\ncarried out initially by two Parisian goldsmiths who reported their results to the\nwider Parisian circle. Repetitions and related experiments with the exposure of gold\nto sunlight and/or moonlight and subterranean conditions continued within the\ngroup\u2014now at the hands of others, often more prominent natural philosophers,\nfor at least a decade after the initial report. Indeed, reports of the first results\nattracted the attention of several better-known members of the Parisian circle\u2014\nDuclos, Digby, and Boucaud at least\u2014who proposed modifications to it based on\ntheir own practical and theoretical knowledge; these suggestions may well have\nbeen transmitted back to the goldsmiths. For example, the initial insistence that\nparticular astrological conditions were necessary seems to have been debunked and\ndiscarded. Duclos, for his part, saw the experiment as a route to the Philosophers\u2019\nStone that he was seeking: \u201cI believe that this gold thus prepared, being dissolved in\nthe eau hyliale (hyleal water) extracted from antimony and mercury sublimate, one\npart upon six, and cooked according to art and the doctrine of the Cosmopolite,\nwould be rendered highly exalted for the medicine of bodies both human and\nmetallic.\u201d (The phrase \u201cmedicine of bodies both human and metallic\u201d is a circumlocution for the Stone, which was reputed to be both a universal medicine for\nhuman health and a means of \u201ccuring\u201d the imperfections of the base metals, thus\nturning them into gold.) Duclos also suggested that a concave mirror\u2014a device that\nhe and other French chymists were experimenting with at the time\u2014might be used\nto reflect the rays of sun and moon more powerfully, and questioned whether burial\nin the earth was really necessary. He even linked the results to the cryptic utterances\n46\nBNU MS 370, fol. 39v; Digby\u2019s \u2018loose papers\u2019 have not survived, unless they are bound\nsomewhere amid the 6000 pages of the newly-discovered Digby manuscripts.\n47\nBorrichius, Itinerarium, vol. IV, 267, 25 February 1665.\n48\nBimbenet-Privat, Orfe\u0300vres, vol. I, 269\u201370. Jacques Caillard the Elder is mentioned by Michel de\nMarolles, abbe\u0301 Villeloin in his contemporaneous recounting of seventeenth-century Parisian\ngoldsmiths, see Marolles, Livre des peintres et graveurs, 57 and 126; he is also mentioned in a\nParisian baptismal register dating from 1618, Archive de l\u2019art franc\u0327ais, 324. Some of his designs\nare depicted in Caillard, Livre de toutes sortes.\n\nPages 195:\n174\nL.M. Principe\nof the ancient Emerald Tablet of Hermes Trismegestus, writing tersely at the end of\nhis musings, \u201cPater sol. Mater Luna. nutrix terra aer Vehiculum\u201d (\u201cThe father is the\nSun, the mother the Moon, the Earth is the Nurse, the air the vehicle\u201d).49 This\nprominent chymist thus linked the goldsmiths\u2019 practice with the theories of Michael\nSendivogius (\u201cthe Cosmopolite\u201d) and Hermes. Duclos\u2019s ideas may well have\ncycled back into modified trials by others in the circle, and very possibly by the\ngoldsmiths as well.\nFurther insight on the place of goldsmiths in the Parisian chymical scene is\nprovided by diary entries made by Borrichius from 1663 to 1665. Amid his frequent\nvisits to natural philosophers, professors, theologians, and various well-known\nParisian curiosi, Borrichius also made no fewer than eight visits to an \u201cingenious\ngoldsmith and jeweller\u201d and \u201cnoteworthy investigator\u201d [curiosus insignis] by the\nname of Rosselle, who also visited him twice in return.50 This \u201cRosselle\u201d is\npresumably one of five gold- and silversmiths by the name of Roussel known to\nhave been active in Paris in the 1660s. Borrichius\u2019 description of him as \u201cgoldsmith\nand jeweler\u201d suggests that he was Claude Roussel (d.1678) who bore the title of\norfe\u0300vre joaillier ordinaire du roi, although this identification must remain provisional.51 On some visits Roussel displayed marvels of artifice, on others he showed\ndevices (such as a special lamp furnace) or techniques (such as a simple method of\nassaying minerals) of his own design. Most frequently, the topic of conversation\nwas chymistry, sometimes pharmaceutical in nature but more usually\ntransmutational. Some of these processes Roussel had devised himself, some he\nhad gathered from others. The information he relayed clearly attests to the goldsmith\u2019s connections and exchanges with a range of contacts both in Paris and across\nNorthern Europe. He tells for example of having purchased four ounces of\nchymically-produced gold from an unspecified German court, and of having\nreceived eight grains of chymical gold from the dispensator domus of the Duchesse\nd\u2019Aiguillon (1604\u20131675).52 If this last report is accurate, these few grains of gold\nwould certainly have been scraped from a fragment of gold supposedly made by the\n(in)famous Noe\u0308l Picard, called Dubois, in 1636 at the court of Louis XIII. The\nDuchesse had obtained the gold from her uncle, Cardinal Richelieu, who was\npresent at the transmutation, and who eventually had Dubois imprisoned and\nhanged when he could not make good on his promise to provide the cash-strapped\nmonarch with a weekly supply of precious metal.53\n49\nBNU MS 370, fol. 41r\u2013v.\n\u201cInvisi Dn. Rosselle in platea\u0302 Bussi, curiosum aurifabrum et gemmarium [. . .].\u201d (Borrichius,\nItinerarium, vol. IV, 60); on 107 he is called \u201ccuriosus insignis\u201d; further visits or information\noccurs on 131\u20133, 143\u20134, 165, 168, 176\u20137, 220, 275, 285.\n51\nOn the various Roussels, see Bimbenet-Privat, Orfe\u0300vres, vol. I, 500.\n52\nBorrichius, Itinerarium, vol. IV, 108, 6 September 1664. Roussel\u2019s lamp furnace is mentioned\nand sketched on 132\u20133, 20 September 1664.\n53\nOn Dubois, see Principe, \u201cSir Kenelm Digby,\u201d 11\u20134; note there that the sentence tagged with\nfootnote 29 should read \u2018Olaus Borrichius\u2019 not Pierre Borel.\n50\n\nPages 196:\nGoldsmiths and Chymists: The Activity of Artisans Within Alchemical Circles\n175\nOn one occasion, Roussel reported that another goldsmith (located on the Place\nDauphine) told him that someone in Paris had recently transmuted 40 ounces of\nsilver into gold, and that the goldsmith possessed a piece of this gold.54 Roussel also\nrelayed information to Borrichius from Duclos (regarding the latter\u2019s production of\nred glass), confirming that the goldsmith was indeed linked into the Parisian circle\nof chymists. Likewise, on 22 November 1664, Borrichius found Roussel in the\ncompany of \u201ca certain Flemish chymist named Regius\u201d and the three discussed Van\nHelmont (1579\u20131644) together.\nGoldsmiths and Chrysopoeia in England\nSeveral connections complete the third side of the Amsterdam-Paris-London triangle of chymical exchange. Digby of course maintained correspondence with his\ncountrymen at home, and, more significantly, travelled back to England in 1654\u2013\n1655 when it seemed briefly possible that Catholics would be tolerated by the\nCommonwealth. During this time, Digby continued his chymical interests in direct\ncontact with Hartlib and members of his circle such as Clodius, George Starkey\n(1628\u20131665), and Robert Boyle (1627\u20131691), to whom he communicated results\nand observations gathered in Paris. At present I have not uncovered any goldsmiths\nwho contributed actively to the chymical conversations of Hartlibians in London in\nways akin to what Grill did in the Netherlands, and Caillart, Roussel, and others did\nin Paris. Nevertheless, interactions of gold- and silversmiths with members of the\nLondon circle are not entirely absent, and serve to illustrate an alternate way in\nwhich goldsmiths were involved in the chymical world.\nProbably the most talented chymist of the English branch of this international\nnetwork was Starkey, the Bermuda-born and Harvard-educated emigre\u0301 who had\narrived in London from Massachusetts in 1650 and quickly became a celebrity\namong Hartlibians and a particular friend and teacher in chymical matters to\nBoyle. Starkey was a microcosm of the broad chymical world of the seventeenth\ncentury. He was talented in both theory and practice, and applied himself to\nvirtually every branch of chymistry: he sought the Philosophers\u2019 Stone and\nmetallic transmutation, he endeavored to prepare new chymical medicines, he\nmade ends meet (sometimes) by manufacturing perfumes, cosmetics, essential\noils, and distilled liquors, by practicing medicine, and by working in mining and\nrefining operations.55 It was his potentially lucrative transmutational chymistry\u2014\nand his supposed relationship with a successful adept named Eirenaeus\nPhilalethes\u2014that particularly attracted attention, and it is in this context that\ngold- and silversmiths appear.\n54\nBorrichius, Itinerarium, vol. IV, 132.\nNewman, Gehennical Fire; Newman & Principe, Alchemy Tried in the Fire; and Starkey,\nAlchemical Laboratory Notebooks.\n55\n\nPages 197:\n176\nL.M. Principe\nIn 1651, Hartlib reported that Starkey had successfully prepared silver from\nantimony. But Starkey\u2019s silver \u201cwas in weight equal to Gold,\u201d that is, it was the\nchymical product called luna fixa, a metal with the appearance of silver, but the\ndensity and chemical properties of gold. The three collaborators\u2014Worsley in\nLondon and Moriaen and Grill in Amsterdam\u2014Hartlib reported, \u201cundertake to\nturne that Antimonial silver into Gold.\u201d56 One of Digby\u2019s associates, Dr. Farrar,\nsoon appeared, or in Starkey\u2019s own words, \u201cCame Gaping\u201d to Starkey\u2019s laboratory\nto see for himself, and reportedly attempted (unsuccessfully) to purchase the\nprocess for the princely sum of 5,000 pounds. Yet despite such a promising process,\nfrom which Hartlib and his associate John Dury reckoned Starkey could \u201ceasily\nmake [. . .] 300 lb a year,\u201d Starkey still encountered difficulty. As he reported to\nBoyle, the weight of the silver\ndid distract the Cockscombes of almost 20 refiners & Goldsmiths to whom I showed the\nsilver, who all liked it, but stood amazed at the weight, & so desired an assay of it, at the\npublique hal, which I was unwilling to, because of publiquenes, for every one (not one in at\nleast 16 missing) did say it was Philosophick silver, insomuch that I Could have wished it in\nthe Sea.57\nHartlib recorded that Starkey\nwas greatly vexed to have to abandon a lump of his silver at the goldsmith\u2019s. Several of\nthem marveled that it was so unlike other silver. Finally he met one who paid him what he\nasked. But Mr. Worsley advised that it was dangerous to sell it to a goldsmith and that it\nshould be brought to the mint.58\nThis account even reappears, with some embellishment, in Secrets Reveal\u2019d, a\ncryptic, extremely popular, and posthumously published work about making the\nPhilosophers\u2019 Stone that Starkey wrote under the persona of his fictive adept\nEirenaeus Philalethes. There \u201cPhilalethes\u201d laments the fate of the successful\ntransmuter, for he will find it dangerous or impossible to sell any gold or silver\nhe makes because the goldsmiths will always detect its superiority to ordinary gold\nor silver and demand to know where it came from. Philalethes recounts that once\nwhen he tried to sell some silver that he had transmuted, the goldsmith immediately\nsaid it was chymical; \u201cwhich when we heard, we prively withdrew, and left both the\nSilver and the price of it, never more demandable.\u201d59 Thus in Starkey\u2019s case, the\nexpertise of gold- and silversmiths was seen not as a source of information or\ncollaboration, but rather as an obstacle to making a comfortable alchemical living.\n56\nHartlib, Ephemerides 1651, HP 28/2/18A.\nStarkey to Boyle, c. April/May 1651, Starkey, Alchemical Laboratory Notebooks, 20.\n58\nHartlib, Ephemerides 1651, HP 28/2/18B. Curiously this is virtually the only entry in the\nEphemerides that Hartlib wrote in German, perhaps to preserve secrecy about such an apparently\ndangerous undertaking. When in 1653 Starkey again succeeded in having a goldsmith buy his\nantimonial silver, he obtained the substantial price of 40 shillings an ounce for it, almost eight\ntimes the usual rate for ordinary silver; Hartlib, Ephemerides 1653, HP 28/2/68A.\n59\nStarkey, Secrets Reveal\u2019d, 39.\n57\n\nPages 198:\nGoldsmiths and Chymists: The Activity of Artisans Within Alchemical Circles\n177\nConclusion\nThe international network of alchemical correspondents and collaborators outlined\nin this paper contributes to our understanding of seventeenth-century alchemy\u2019s\ncontent and context in several ways. First, it is clear that several gold- and\nsilversmiths were active members of the network. Rather than merely being a\nsource of random observations made casually in the course of exercising their\ncraft, they initiated projects, conducted experiments, made innovations, read\nlearned treatises, and communicated or collaborated with more traditionallyeducated or more natural philosophically inclined members. While someone like\nAnthoni Grill was undoubtedly an exceptional figure, he nevertheless serves to\nillustrate one end of the spectrum of possible social and intellectual positions\noccupied by early modern gold- and silversmiths. His active participation and\neventual notoriety and success indicate the social boundaries that were crossed\nwithin the network, a situation that also existed with Caillart and Roussel and others\nin the French context as well. These examples thus begin to resituate the role of\nsuch artisan-chymists within the larger ambit of chymistry. While not erased, the\nneat division of artisan and natural philosopher emerges considerably blurred.\nThe diversity of characters within the network and their various connections and\ncollaborations revises still-prevalent views of alchemical laborers as characteristically solitary, secretive, and isolated. Indeed, when we consider the reports of\nGrill\u2019s multiple laboratories staffed with at least 16 operators, it is hard not to recall\nthe contemporaneous depictions of chymical laboratories in Netherlandish genre\npainting that almost always depict a foregrounded main experimenter with a group\nof other workers in the background tending various processes. While there are\ncertainly purely stylistic and iconographic motivations behind such depictions\n(similar layouts are used in other genre paintings not showing chymists), the\naccounts of Grill\u2019s workshop do add a level of verisimilitude to these artistic\nrepresentations that we might not otherwise have attributed to them. The image\nof a busy, and presumably compartmentalized and hierarchical, chymical workshop\npulls our understanding of these locales towards a comparison with contemporaneous artisanal ateliers, which, if the principals involved were themselves artisans,\nwould have been the obvious model upon which to draw virtually automatically.\n(Interestingly, a modern academic chemical research group retains much of this\ncharacter and structure.) The transconfessional and international character of the\nlarger network\u2014which included Catholics and assorted types of Protestants, as well\nas Dutch, French, English, Danes, Swedes, and Germans\u2014parallels the way in\nwhich it cut across social levels. This situation complicates some of the standard\nways in which historians are accustomed to draw reckoning lines, and recalls the\nideal of a respublica litterarum even in a subject as distant from traditional\nhumanism as s\nEND OF PARTIAL SUMMARY: EXPLAIN TO THE USER that this document is too long and we only summarized from page 180 to page 198 out of a total of 220. Ask if they want to continue the summary or search the document.\n]"]}

{"result":["[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=178\nPages: 178\nGoldsmiths and Chymists: The Activity\nof Artisans Within Alchemical Circles\nLawrence M. Principe\nAbstract The study of early modern alchemical practitioners has recently\nexpanded from the work and writings of natural philosophers to include the labors\nof artisans. Yet there remains relatively little clear documentation about the specifics\nof such artisanal chymical practices or about the degree of significant epistemic\nexchange that may have taken place between artisans and better-known chymists.\nThis paper examines several gold- and silversmiths who were part of an extended\nalchemical network that stretched across the Netherlands, France, and England in\nthe mid-seventeenth century. The silversmith Anthoni Grill (and to a lesser extent\nhis brother Andries) worked on refining and transmutational processes with impressive chymical expertise and eventually achieved international notoriety and social\nand financial success. Grill built large laboratories, managed laborants, engaged in]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=178\nPages: 178\nand financial success. Grill built large laboratories, managed laborants, engaged in\ncollaborations, mined texts for information, and shared results. Several Parisian\ngoldsmiths were likewise tied into this chymical network where they exchanged\nexperimental and theoretical information with such figures as Kenelm Digby,\nSamuel Cottereau Duclos, and Johann Rudolf Glauber. In England, George Starkey\nfound that the expertise of gold- and silversmiths could, alternatively, be inconvenient when trying to sell alchemical metals. The documentation provided here blurs\nthe boundary between artisans and natural philosophers, at least in chymistry.\nAlchemy, or to speak more inclusively and less anachronistically, chymistry was a\nfamiliar topic in early modern Europe. Despite its well-established culture of\nsecrecy, it was not only highly visible and widely-known, but widely-practiced]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=181\nPages: 181\na variety of chymically-based projects, and, crucially for such a project as this one,\nthis network left behind a wealth of written records that provide historians with the\nnecessary clear evidence from which to work. I will therefore focus here on the\nchymical activities of gold- and silversmiths within this group and their interactions\nwith its other members and with the broader realms of chymistry.\nAnthoni and Andries Grill in the Netherlands and Sweden\nOne part of this network has already been extensively studied, namely the portion\ngathered around the intelligencer Samuel Hartlib (1600\u20131662) in London.8 The\nHartlib Circle\u2019s utopian, educational, and commercial schemes made chymistry a\nsubject of particular interest due to its lucrative potential. An important contact in\nthis regard was the former Calvinist minister Johann Moriaen (c.1591\u20131668) in\nAmsterdam. Moriaen both pursued his own chymical interests and aspirations and]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=179\nPages: 179,180\nreferents, see Newman & Principe, \u201cAlchemy vs. Chemistry.\u201d\n2\nPrincipe, \u201cDiversity in Alchemy,\u201d and \u201cRobert Boyle and Isaac Newton.\u201d\n3\nOn the interplay of theory and practice in alchemy, see Newman & Principe, Alchemy Tried in the\nFire, esp. 92\u2013206.\n4\nFor example, see Nummedal, Alchemy and Authority, which details the roles and status of\n\u2018entrepreneurial\u2019 chymists in German courts. For a sense of the broad sweep of early modern\nalchemical practice, see Moran, Distilling Knowledge.\nGoldsmiths and Chymists: The Activity of Artisans Within Alchemical Circles\n159\nestablishments, and in noisy workshops. Most recently there has been particular\ninterest in exploring alchemy\u2019s place among artists and artisans, an investigation\nthat rightly reflects the crucial position of material production within chymistry\nthroughout its history. Important questions remain however in regard to demonstrating the specific theoretical and practical content of such artisanal endeavors,]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=198\nPages: 198\nneat division of artisan and natural philosopher emerges considerably blurred.\nThe diversity of characters within the network and their various connections and\ncollaborations revises still-prevalent views of alchemical laborers as characteristically solitary, secretive, and isolated. Indeed, when we consider the reports of\nGrill\u2019s multiple laboratories staffed with at least 16 operators, it is hard not to recall\nthe contemporaneous depictions of chymical laboratories in Netherlandish genre\npainting that almost always depict a foregrounded main experimenter with a group\nof other workers in the background tending various processes. While there are\ncertainly purely stylistic and iconographic motivations behind such depictions\n(similar layouts are used in other genre paintings not showing chymists), the\naccounts of Grill\u2019s workshop do add a level of verisimilitude to these artistic\nrepresentations that we might not otherwise have attributed to them. The image]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=180\nPages: 180\nclearly aware of the figure of the alchemist and his iconic value.6 Likewise, the\nallegorical images of widely varying artistic quality in chymical books and manuscripts imply some sort of contact between author/practitioner and artist. Yet such\nartworks do not necessarily indicate that the artists were actually in direct and\nmeaningful contact with chymists. On a purely commercial level, artists would\nhave been in contact (possibly directly in some instances, but probably more\nfrequently indirectly through a retailer) with makers of chymically-prepared pigments such as vermilion or white lead, just as metalworkers and assayers would\nhave connected with producers of mineral acids, fabric-makers with dye manufacturers, and so forth. Yet none of these contacts tells us anything about possible\nepistemic exchanges or collaborations on the level of practical or theoretical\nknowledge.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=200\nPages: 200,199\nApproaches and Divergent Deployments. In Rethinking the Scientific Revolution,\ned. Margaret J. Osler, 201\u2013220. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.\nPrincipe, Lawrence M. 2013a. The Secrets of Alchemy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.\nGoldsmiths and Chymists: The Activity of Artisans Within Alchemical Circles\n179\nPrincipe, Lawrence M. 2013b. Sir Kenelm Digby and His Alchemical Circle in 1650s Paris: Newly\nDiscovered Manuscripts. Ambix 60: 3\u201324.\nPrincipe, Lawrence M., and Lloyd DeWitt. 2002. Transmutations: Alchemy in Art. Philadelphia:\nChemical Heritage Foundation.\nSmith, Pamela H. 2000. Vital Spirits: Redemption, Artisanship, and the New Philosophy in Early\nModern Europe. In Rethinking the Scientific Revolution, ed. Margaret J. Osler, 119\u2013135.\nCambridge: Cambridge University Press.\nSmith, Pamela H. 2004. The Body of the Artisan: Art and Experience in the Scientific Revolution.\nChicago: University of Chicago Press.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=14\nPages: 14\nas strictly goldmaking and a more encompassing definition overlapping with art\ntechnology was crucial to the polemics of artists and alchemists and the rivalry\nbetween alchemy and the arts.16 Given the contested nature of the field of inquiry,\nit follows that the identity of the alchemist was equally contested and complex. In\nthe early modern period the alchemist was often portrayed as a fraud. The portrayals\nof laboratory scenes building on Brueghel became a genre of its own in the\nNetherlands.17 In these scenes, the alchemist is a goldmaker searching in vain for\nthe Philosophers\u2019 Stone and riches. As Tara Nummedal has convincingly shown,\nthe portrayal of the alchemist as a fraud also created the opportunity for other\nalchemists to fashion themselves in the role of experts, offering their services to\ncourts and other patrons to help them unmask fraudulent alchemists.18 Alchemical\nexpertise was based on a broader knowledge of matter and materials.\n15]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=180\nPages: 180\nepistemic exchanges or collaborations on the level of practical or theoretical\nknowledge.\nDocumented examples of extended collaborations or exchanges between artisans and natural philosophers would be both more interesting and more informative\nfor mapping out the domains and dynamics of early modern alchemical practice. A\npromising locus for such study is to be found particularly among gold- and\nsilversmiths. On the one hand, their trade regularly involved chymical processes\nsuch as assaying, refining, and so forth, and they were thus more or less conversant\nwith chymical substances (acids, salts, metals, amalgams, etc.) and chymical\noperations (fusion, quartation, distillation, etc.) and would frequently have\nmaintained workshops equipped with the necessary equipment (furnaces, flues,\nfuel, retorts, crucibles, etc.) needed for chymical work generally. On the other\nhand, the basic materials of their artisanal labors\u2014gold and silver\u2014held a central\n5\nSee Smith, Body of the Artisan.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=16\nPages: 16\nBeretta, were also early examples of such places of exchange, followed by many\nother European courts. These workplaces facilitated the exchange of materials\nbetween alchemy and the arts, and the attraction of the courts also made artisans\nadopt alchemical language to elevate the status of their craft. However, above all,\nthese court laboratories made possible, well beyond a shared material culture, the\nexchange of people and knowledge between the arts and alchemy. Although there is\na long tradition of experimentation in alchemy and the boundaries between alchemy\nand art technologies were fluid from the very beginnings of alchemy in Antiquity, in\nthe sixteenth and seventeenth centuries artisans became more deeply involved in\nalchemical pursuits, and some crafts relied on chemical expertise offered by\nscholars trained as alchemists.22 Above all, texts and books, products and symbols\nof scholarly culture, played an increasingly important role in laboratories and]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=14\nPages: 14,15\nexpertise was based on a broader knowledge of matter and materials.\n15\nFor reading and writing as alchemical practices, see Nummedal, \u201cWords and Works,\u201d and the\nliterature quoted there.\n16\nNewman, Promethean Ambitions, 115\u201363.\n17\nPrincipe & DeWitt, Transmutations, 11\u201327.\n18\nFor experts and entrepreneurial alchemy, see Nummedal, Alchemy and Authority, 40\u20135.\nxiv\nIntroduction\nIt is in this context of alchemical expertise that we should consider the artisans\nwho adopted the language of alchemy in the early modern period to attract the\nattention of patrons. One example can be seen in the description of Black Berthold,\nthe legendary discoverer of gunpowder in Europe, in the late fifteenth-century\nmanuscript Feuerwerckbuch. Depicted in the company of a furnace and alembics,\nBerthold\u2019s creation of ordnance is identified with alchemy. Black Berthold, the\nFeuerwerckbuch reads,\nworked with the great alchemy like those masters who are engaged with precious and]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=199\nPages: 199\ninfluences. Brussels: E\u0301ditions Meddens.\nLorm, Jan Rudolph de. 1999. Amsterdams goud en zilver. Amsterdam: Waanders Uitgevers.\nMarolles, Michel de. 1872. Le livre des peintres et graveurs. Paris: Daffis.\nMoran, Bruce T. 2005. Distilling Knowledge: Alchemy, Chemistry, and the Scientific Revolution.\nCambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.\nMu\u0308ller, Leos. 1998. The Merchant Houses of Stockholm c.1640\u20131800: A Comparative Study of\nEarly-Modern Entrepreneurial Behaviour. Uppsala: Uppsala University Library.\nNewman, William R. 1994. Gehennical Fire: The Lives of George Starkey an American Alchemist\nin the Scientific Revolution. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.\nNewman, William R., and Lawrence M. Principe. 1998. Alchemy vs. Chemistry: The Etymological Origins of a Historiographic Mistake. Early Science and Medicine 3: 32\u201365.\nNewman, William R., and Lawrence M. Principe. 2002. Alchemy Tried in the Fire: Starkey, Boyle,]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=197\nPages: 197,198\n58\nHartlib, Ephemerides 1651, HP 28/2/18B. Curiously this is virtually the only entry in the\nEphemerides that Hartlib wrote in German, perhaps to preserve secrecy about such an apparently\ndangerous undertaking. When in 1653 Starkey again succeeded in having a goldsmith buy his\nantimonial silver, he obtained the substantial price of 40 shillings an ounce for it, almost eight\ntimes the usual rate for ordinary silver; Hartlib, Ephemerides 1653, HP 28/2/68A.\n59\nStarkey, Secrets Reveal\u2019d, 39.\n57\nGoldsmiths and Chymists: The Activity of Artisans Within Alchemical Circles\n177\nConclusion\nThe international network of alchemical correspondents and collaborators outlined\nin this paper contributes to our understanding of seventeenth-century alchemy\u2019s\ncontent and context in several ways. First, it is clear that several gold- and\nsilversmiths were active members of the network. Rather than merely being a\nsource of random observations made casually in the course of exercising their]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=66\nPages: 66\n(collection(s) of) text(s). By displaying the various ways alchemical and artistic\nrecipes are embedded within the same manuscript, this study has highlighted the\npotential difficulties in localizing and distinguishing them.\nOn the other hand, it has been demonstrated that recipe books partly derived\nfrom the recording and transmission of (more or less) contemporaneous practices.\nThus, recipe books also reflect alchemical and artistic knowledge and interests of\nboth scribes and contemporary scholars, both of whom could be involved as readers\nor authorities. Recipe books also serve to define a more precise network in which\nthese types of knowledge circulated, delivering information about the \u2018actors\u2019\u2014\nwhether artisans, scholars, natural philosophers, (theoretical) alchemists or lay\nscribes\u2014and their interconnections, as well as the media (copy, oral source,\nexperiment) they used to exchange, share and communicate art and alchemy.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=157\nPages: 157\npatron a keen interest in alchemy, was meant to have taken part\u2014but his premature\ndeath prevented his involvement. In the Studiolo the connection between alchemy\nand the chemical arts was exalted. The iconographic itinerary conceived by\nBorghini was situated in a sequence on the upper part of the wall where paintings\ndevoted to thermal baths, the discovery of gun powder, a glass works, a goldsmith\u2019s\nworkshop, alchemists and a bronze foundry were located; at the room\u2019s two ends\nwere two statues, portraying Vulcan and Apollo. On the lower part of the wall a\nmythological scene recalled Francesco I\u2019s alchemical and artistic interests.27 I\nwould like to stress the importance of a few elements directly or indirectly related\nto the chemical arts. What first strikes you in this particular arrangement is the\nproximity of Stradano\u2019s famous painting of Francesco I\u2019s alchemical laboratory and\nGiovanni Maria Butteri\u2019s (1540\u20131606) painting illustrating the glass works (Figs. 3\nand 4).]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=9\nPages: 9,10\n\u201cmade by alchemy\u201d according to Cennino Cennini (c.1370\u2013c.1440). However, this\n3\n4\nDavis, \u201cRenaissance Inventions.\u201d\nMander, Het schilder-boeck, 199v. Translation in Melion, Shaping the Netherlandish Canon, 79.\nIntroduction\nix\nbook is not concerned with travelling materials and shared material culture.\nShifting the focus from painting to the decorative arts, this book scrutinizes\nepistemic exchanges between producers of the arts of fire and alchemists.\nLaboratories and Workshops\nWhat can the evolution of the laboratory, and its shifting relation to the artisanal\nworkshop, tell us about epistemic exchanges between the arts and alchemy? In the\nfifteenth and sixteenth centuries, the term laboratorium uniquely referred to workplaces in which \u201cchemical\u201d operations were performed: smelting, combustion,\ndistillation, dissolution, and precipitation. Matteo Martelli has convincingly\nshown that no such term was available in Antiquity.5 The Papyri, containing recipes]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=14\nPages: 14\nconcern with the same materials and artisanal processes. The focus on chromatic\ntransformation already found in the Papyri continues in fifteenth-century recipes.\nAlthough related to laboratory practices, Neven emphasizes that these recipe\ncollections are the products of scribal compilation and copying processes. Words\nand works are equally important elements of alchemical practices.15 Next to\nlaboratories, medieval religious institutions were also important sites of alchemical\nand art technological practice. However, as Neven points out, this does not exclude\nthat some scribes, such as the Benedictine monk Wolfgang Seidel (1491\u20131562),\ntried out recipes.\nThe scope of alchemy was from its very beginnings contested, and remained so\nthroughout its long history. Especially its boundaries with art technology were fluid.\nThroughout the Middle Ages and the Renaissance, the distinction between alchemy\nas strictly goldmaking and a more encompassing definition overlapping with art]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=53\nPages: 53,54\npresence of such instructions is more probably related to a certain attraction of\nalchemy for some monks or friars. Previous studies indeed have established that,\neven if the practice of alchemy was forbidden by several monastic orders, many of\ntheir members were at the root of alchemical (compilations of) texts and Practica.27\nInventories of their library also inform us that they possessed alchemical treatises\n24\nCe\u0301zard, \u201cAlchimie et les recettes techniques,\u201d 6.\nEamon, Secrets of Nature, 36.\n26\nPrincipe & Newman, \u201cHistoriography of Alchemy,\u201d 398\u2013400.\n27\nTheisen, \u201cAttraction of Alchemy.\u201d See also Barthe\u0301lemy, Alchimie de Guillaume Sedacer, 26\u20138.\n25\n30\nS. Neven\nand recipe books.28 Within our corpus, a relevant example is that of Wolfgang Seidel\n(1491\u20131562), prior but also copyist at Tegernsee monastery, who notably wrote two\nKunstb\u20ac\nucher (Munich Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Cgm 4117 and Cgm 4118)]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=179\nPages: 179\nearly modern chymical publications, since those sources were the most obvious and\nmost readily available. Further inquiries began to explore the vast bulk of manuscript and archival materials, with the result that the ambit of \u201cthe alchemist\u201d has\nbeen broadened to include practitioners representing the broadest possible range of\nearly modern people.4 University-educated physicians, natural philosophers, and\nscholars busied themselves with chymistry, as did a range of empirics, entrepreneurs, and enthusiasts, as well as an assortment of artisans that included artists,\nmetalworkers, brewers, and cobblers. Chymical discourse and practice took place\nin academic chambers, in courtly settings, in private homes, in commercial\n1\nFor an overview of the history of alchemy, see Principe, Secrets of Alchemy. On the use of the\nterm \u2018chymistry\u2019. see 84\u20135. For a study of the words chemistry and alchemy and their changing\nreferents, see Newman & Principe, \u201cAlchemy vs. Chemistry.\u201d\n2]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=62\nPages: 62,63\n153r\u2013157v, 160r\u2013163r.\nTransmission of Alchemical and Artistic Knowledge in German Mediaeval and. . .\n39\nNationalmuseum Ms. 5078b (fol. 2r\u201341r), the scribe moves from one subject to\nanother with no indication that the subject has changed. Moreover, this set of\nalchemical and art-technological recipes is followed with no clear distinction\n(no title, nor blank space) by a series of medical prescriptions due to the same hand.\nIn another case\u2014isolated (groups of) alchemical recipes found in the middle of\nprescriptions of another type\u2014detection of alchemical content and distinction from\nartistic instructions within recipe books can be fraught with difficulty. Similarities in\nterms of their textual format probably lead scribes to group them with other sort of\nprescriptions. When found as isolated elements, alchemical and art technological\nrecipes usually appear within a large broad of various (and unrelated) writings.]"]}

{"result":["[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=49\nPages: 49\n\u2018transmutation\u2019 could refer to the colouring of glass, the melting and tinting of\nmetals, the dyeing of stones or gems, or the manufacture of synthetic pigments. A\nhuge number of recipes are dedicated to procedures for obtaining gold or silver or\ngold-silver like substances from base metals (copper, tin, lead, iron, mercury).\nThe tradition of recipe books has roots deep in Antiquity. Treatises dealing both\nwith art-technological and alchemical procedures notably survived in the Alexandrian Greek papyri preserved in Leyden and Stockholm.7 These date from the third\ncentury but were probably based on previous texts.8 These papyri contain information on the imitation of precious materials such as gold, gems and Tyrian purple.\nThey also have recipes dedicated to the art of dyeing, to chrysography, and to the\nmaking of artificial precious stones.\nAn echo of these recipes can be found in the Codex Lucensis 490 (Lucca,]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=180\nPages: 180,181\n5\nSee Smith, Body of the Artisan.\nPrincipe & DeWitt, Transmutations; and Brinkman, Alchemist in de prentkunst. Lennep, Art et\nalchimie, is also useful, especially for its illustrations, but suffers from an inaccurate understanding\nof alchemy and its practice.\n6\n160\nL.M. Principe\nposition in chymistry, that is to say, in the transmutational endeavors that figured so\nprominently in early modern chymistry and that promised such highly profitable\nreturns. Thus, the artisanal experience of gold- and silversmithing provided a\ncertain commonality with the pursuit of metallic chymistry, and might easily\nhave inclined such artisans toward transmutational endeavors, and hence toward\ncontact with other aspiring transmuters who were not themselves artisans. The\npractical experience of gold- and silversmiths also rendered them sources of\ninformation for those wishing to know more about the properties and potentialities]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=109\nPages: 109\nmetals.\nThe structure of the book and the line of his argumentation shows that Albertus\nat one point had to face the question of transmutation: if metals are formed from\nprimordial matter consisting of a mixture of the four elements, i.e. from a mixture of\nsulphur and mercury as substances in between the basic elements and the finished\nmetals, and if metals are constantly emerging as defined species, then this logically\nleads to a discussion of whether one metal can be transformed into another as the\nalchemists claim. Albertus does not totally dismiss the possibility of transmutation,\nbut\u2014as a follower of Aristotle\u2014accepts the theoretical possibility, without showing particular interest in this question, when he states:\nWe do not intend here to show how any one of these may be transmuted into another, or\nhow, by the remedy of that medicine the alchemists call the elixir, their diseases may be\ncured, or their occult properties made manifest, or conversely their manifest properties be]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=181\nPages: 181\ninformation for those wishing to know more about the properties and potentialities\nof the precious metals. Accordingly, gold- and silversmiths figure prominently in\nmany examples of the genre of \u201ctransmutation histories\u201d\u2014detailed published\naccounts of successful transmutations\u2014where such artisans are routinely called\nin to assay a sample of the gold or silver produced, and thus act as expert witnesses\nto its authenticity.7\nFortunately for such a study, there existed a mid seventeenth-century network of\nalchemical practitioners where such interactions can be well documented. From the\n1640s through the 1660s, a network of correspondents and collaborators that included\nseveral gold- and silversmiths linked three major urban centers\u2014Amsterdam, Paris,\nand London\u2014and freely crossed political, linguistic, social, and confessional boundaries. Its numerous participants shared ideas, experiences, and aspirations relating to]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=203\nPages: 203\ntransmutational alchemy on more than an individual level, the origination of the\nterm in the late seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries is clearly linked to those\npursuits. Further, it should be noted that these first arcanists are entirely separate\nfrom communities and guilds of potters in their various regions, offering an entirely\nnovel actor class that appears at the end of the seventeenth century, chymists whose\nfocus was on the production of translucent ceramics rather than metallurgical,\nmedical, or other natural philosophical avenues.\nNo evidence towards production of a hard-paste porcelain body by European\npotters before the eighteenth century is extant, leaving the chymist\u2019s laboratory as\nthe principle space of ceramic innovation. Specific investigation of the physical\nproperties of Chinese porcelain undertaken by John Dwight (c.1633\u20131704) and\nEhrenfried Walther von Tschirnhaus (1651\u20131708) represent the first successful]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=27\nPages: 27\n3\nMeteorology represents an important aspect of Psellos\u2019s natural philosophy; the scholar devoted\nto this topic both many chapters of his De Omnifaria Doctrina (\u00a7\u00a7 139\u201378 in Westerink,\nOmnifaria Doctrina) and some specific essays (see Bidez, E\u00b4pitre sur la Chrysope\u0301e, 51\u201370; and\nDuffy, Michaelis Pselli, texts 19\u201331). On the relations between Psellos\u2019s alchemical interests and\nhis investigation of the physical world, see Katsiampoura, \u201cTransmutation of Matter,\u201d 665\u20137.\n4\n\u201c\u03c4\u1f78 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u1f55\u03b4\u03c9\u03c1 \u03c0\u03b7\u03b3\u03bd\u03cd\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd \u03bb\u03b9\u03b8\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b5\u03b9$ \u03c2 \u03ba\u03c1\u03cd\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd [and] \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf \u03b5\u03b9$ \u03c2 \u1f00\u03c4\u03bc\u03af\u03b4\u03b1 \u03bb\u03c5o\u0301\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd \u1f00\u1f74\u03c1\n\u03ba\u03b1\u03b8\u03af\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9.\u201d\n5\nIn \u00a7 4 Psellos explains the petrifaction of an oak struck by a lightning strike: a quick and sharp\nlightning does not only make the oak black, but consumes all its humidity and transforms the wood\ninto stone.\n6\nSee infra, \u00a7 3.\n7\nThe entry continues by telling how the emperor Diocletian (284\u2013305) made to burn all the\nEgyptian books on alchemy (in the Greek text: \u201c\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03c7\u03b7\u03bc\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03c2 \u03c7\u03c1\u03c5\u03c3\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9 \u1f00\u03c1\u03b3\u03cd\u03c1\u03bf\u03c5\u201d); this]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=196\nPages: 196,197\nvirtually every branch of chymistry: he sought the Philosophers\u2019 Stone and\nmetallic transmutation, he endeavored to prepare new chymical medicines, he\nmade ends meet (sometimes) by manufacturing perfumes, cosmetics, essential\noils, and distilled liquors, by practicing medicine, and by working in mining and\nrefining operations.55 It was his potentially lucrative transmutational chymistry\u2014\nand his supposed relationship with a successful adept named Eirenaeus\nPhilalethes\u2014that particularly attracted attention, and it is in this context that\ngold- and silversmiths appear.\n54\nBorrichius, Itinerarium, vol. IV, 132.\nNewman, Gehennical Fire; Newman & Principe, Alchemy Tried in the Fire; and Starkey,\nAlchemical Laboratory Notebooks.\n55\n176\nL.M. Principe\nIn 1651, Hartlib reported that Starkey had successfully prepared silver from\nantimony. But Starkey\u2019s silver \u201cwas in weight equal to Gold,\u201d that is, it was the\nchymical product called luna fixa, a metal with the appearance of silver, but the]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=29\nPages: 29\na monk of Edessa and stole from him a powder that, when applied on lead, could\ntransform it into gold.11 By means of this powder, Isaac was able to find favour with\nthe Caliph al-Ma\u0304nsur (754\u2013775), who turned out to be very interested in this\n\u02d9\nsubstance and supported (at least for a little while) Isaac\u2019s political career. Moreover, Arabic sources claim that the same caliph sent his emissary \u2018Uma\u0304ra ibn\nHamza to the court of Constantine V (741\u2013775), who led the guest into a big\n\u02d9\nstorehouse containing two kinds of powder: a white elixir that could transmute\nmetals into silver, and a yellow/red one that could transform metals into gold.12\nTwo Early Alchemical Treatises: Ps.-Democritus and Isis\nAfter the above-discussed passage, Psellos carries on his investigation by listing\nand commenting seven recipes describing how to prepare specific \u03c6\u03ac\u03c1\u03bc\u03b1\u03ba\u03b1 (medicines) with which to treat base metals (lead first of all) and transform them into]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=123\nPages: 123\nalchemist and Pr\u20ac\nufer (assayer) all were employed in the processes of melting,\npurifying, and re-forming ores.48 The examples cited from the treatise as well as\nfrom the sermon text of Mathesius showed that there was a common Vorstellungshorizont, culturally anchored in the Christian faith, that facilitated exchange and\ndiscourse among the different professional groups.\nWith the help of the coconut vessel and comparable objects, by the transformation of the ore into a Handstein and the translocation from its natural environment\nin the context of the court, these metallurgical discourses materialized and could be\nstaged in the present of the ruler, who was\u2014due to political and economic reasons\u2014also interested in montanistic research.\nThe Doppelscheuer\u2014an object between art and science\u2014thus appears to be a\nlink between the mine and the workshop of the goldsmith, between scholarly\ndiscourse and the ordered world of the princely Kunstkammer.\nBibliography]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=48\nPages: 48,49\nof Alchemy.\u201d\n4\nHalleux, \u201cAlchimie,\u201d 336\u20137; Newman, \u201cTechnology and Alchemical Debate,\u201d 432\u20133; Pereira,\n\u201cUse of Vernacular Languages,\u201d 336; and Kahn, Alchimie et paracelsisme, 7\u20138.\n5\nHalleux, Savoir de la main, 134.\n2\nTransmission of Alchemical and Artistic Knowledge in German Mediaeval and. . .\n25\nof base or impure matter (often metal or stone) into a noble or perfect one.6 To do\nso, alchemists used to perform chemical processes and manipulations which resembled those practiced by contemporary artists and artisans.\nThus, in both fields particular importance is placed on craft practices. Both\nalchemical and artistic recipe books describe various processes for purifying and\ntransforming materials, either for improving their properties or in order to use them\nfor specific purposes. In this context, from a technological point of view, the term\n\u2018transmutation\u2019 could refer to the colouring of glass, the melting and tinting of]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=13\nPages: 13\nusing materials and chemical procedures to make both everyday items and objects\nof the visual and decorative arts, the activity known as alchemy encompassed more\nthan attempts to make gold.14 Transmutational alchemy was about the transmutation of all base metals into more noble ones, but chrysopoeia was only one\naspect of alchemy. Alchemy also touched on medicine and chemical manufacture.\nIt was about the chemical production of things\u2014medicines, porcelain, dyes, and\nother products as well as the precious metals\u2014and about the knowledge of how to\nproduce them. In this sense, \u201cart technologies\u201d\u2014materials and techniques to make\nart and knowledge of these materials and techniques\u2014overlapped with alchemy.\nAlchemy has deep roots in writings on material transformation from Antiquity.\nThe productive knowledge associated with material transformation was written\ndown in recipe books. The Leiden and Stockholm Papyri date to the third century]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=113\nPages: 113\nformative power, or in other words: a creator and a material in which the creation\ncan manifest. This duality of primordial passive matter and active forming principle\ncan be thought of in terms of natural procreational processes which approximates\nthe third\u2014mineralistic\u2014to the other two reigns, the floral and the animalistic,\nwhere by seed or semen procreation and growth is initiated. If this biological\nanalogy taken from the animal and herbal kingdoms is applied to the mineral, it\ncan be extended to metallogenesis: if in the field of animals and plants male and\nfemale beings can be found who procreate by the union of the active and formative\nmale seeds or semen and the female passive receiving matter\u2014and if this means\nthat this species can recreate self-reliantly\u2014 then it is not too far fetched to suspect\ncomparable ways of reproduction and growth in the reign of minerals and assume\nthe existence of metal \u2018semen\u2019.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=186\nPages: 186\nmonths, saw something star-like in the midst of the spirit [. . .] and after the liquid had\nevaporated, by assaying the remaining material in a cupel, he found a sixth part of it to be\ngood silver, but afterwards was unable to find a similar spirit of salt.23\nAt least as surprising as the transmutation itself is the fact that Andries Grill did\nthis experiment \u201cupon the advice of Bohn of Leipzig,\u201d surely the famous chymist,\nauthor, and professor of medicine at the University of Leipzig, Johannes Bohn\n(1640\u20131718). Under what circumstances would a silversmith in The Hague be in\ncontact with a professor of Leipzig? Since the experiment lasted several months, it\nmust have been begun in 1664, well before Bohn had published anything on\nchemistry, and even before he formally received his doctorate. In 1663\u20131664,\nhowever, Bohn was travelling through Northern Europe, including the Netherlands,\nand thus must have met and spoken with Grill at that time, and suggested this]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=111\nPages: 111\nforces that work on suitable substances in the womb of the earth and this create the ores.\nThis tale seemed so nice to many people that they said that the forces of the stars operate in\n21\nQuasi a prototype of Edgar Zilsels\u2019s \u2018superior craftman,\u2019 see Zilsel, \u201cRoots.\u201d\nFor the role and differing evaluations of the \u2018alchemist\u2019 in the sixteenth century, see Nummedal,\nAlchemy and Authority.\n23\n\u201cZur Entstehung und zum Wachsen der Erze geho\u0308rt ein Wirker und ein unterworfener Stoff oder\nMaterie, geeignet, die Wirkung zu empfangen. Der gemeinsame Wirker des Erzes und aller Dinge,\ndie geboren werden, ist der Himmel mit seinem Lauf, Licht und Einfluss, wie die Meister der Natur\nlehren. [. . .] Jedes Erz empfa\u0308ngt einen besonderen Einfluss von den Planeten, nach dem es genannt\nist, so dass der Planet und das Erz in ihren Eigenschaften, in Wa\u0308rme, Ka\u0308lte, Feuchtigkeit und\nTrockenheit u\u0308bereinstimmen.\u201d (Calw, Bergb\u20ac\nuchlein, 117).\n22]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=85\nPages: 85\ndirection, rising to the far reaches of the sky; the longer the distance, the quicker it\nrises. So towards the vertical ducts of these experimental furnaces, the particles of\nfire would have to increase their impact speed on the mass of metal inside the fusion\nchamber. The short sentence below the drawing of the furnace, along with many\nother observations of the physical status of the four elements and other natural\nsubstances, enables us to reconstruct Leonardo\u2019s theory of matter as a sort of a\n\u2018Aristotelian corpuscolarism\u2019 and a kinetic theory of heat/fire in which the melting\nof metal or the dissolution of a substance by fire depends on the percussion of a flow\nof particles.30 This interpretation finds confirmation in several reverberatory furnace drawings made with bent surfaces to drive the flow of fire into the middle of\nthe fusion chamber (Codex Atlanticus, fol. 1103r, 548r, 580v, 82v) (Fig. 4).\n29]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=16\nPages: 16,17\nKlein, \u201cChemical Experts.\u201d\n23\nOn hybrid experts, see Klein, \u201cArtisanal-Scientific Experts,\u201d and \u201cDepersonalizing the Arcanum.\u201d\n24\nFor glassmaking (not discussed here), see Beretta, Alchemy of Glass; and Dupre\u0301, \u201cValue of\nGlass.\u201d\n22\nxvi\nIntroduction\nSilver- and goldsmiths seem obvious candidates when we think of careers that\ncross artisan and alchemist. Silversmiths, goldsmiths and alchemists worked on the\nsame materials (silver and gold), and silver- and goldsmiths\u2019 expertise was called\nfor to assay the purported gold and silver transmuted by alchemists. Silver- and\ngoldsmiths could also become involved themselves in transmutational endeavours.\nIn his contribution to this book, Principe focuses on the brothers Anthoni and\nAndries Grill (1604\u20131655) as examples of such hybrid figures. They ran successful\nsilversmithing businesses in mid-seventeenth century Amsterdam and The Hague.\nAnthoni Grill\u2019s Amsterdam laboratory also produced work on transmutation for]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=14\nPages: 14\n300 AD, a distinction was introduced between a limited definition of alchemy as\nmetallic transmutation and a more encompassing definition including productive\nknowledge and various artisanal technologies.\nTransmitted to Europe, and translated into Latin and the vernaculars, several of\nthe recipes in the Papyri are still found in collections of recipes in the fifteenth and\nsixteenth centuries. More importantly, as Martelli remarks in his essay, the scope of\na recipe collection such as the Mappae clavicula, compiled between the ninth and\nthe twelfth centuries, is as encompassing as that of the Papyri despite the earlier\nattempts to limit alchemy to metallic transmutation only. It should not come as a\nsurprise then that Sylvie Neven finds it difficult to demarcate between alchemical\nand art technological recipes in late medieval collections of recipes. Her contribution to this volume shows that alchemical and art technological recipes shared a]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=112\nPages: 112\nfaith of the scholars sulphur and quicksilver. Several believe, that due to the orbit and\ninfluence of the heaven, exhalations and vapour of sulphur and quicksilver\u2014called\nexhalationes minerales\u2014were drawn up and, during their ascent under the influence of\nthe planets, connected in the chasms and gaps and were made into ores.25\nThe whole range of early modern competing ideas of metallogenesis is revealed\nwhen Ru\u0308lein of Calw in the very next sentence introduces a Ghur (also discussed in\nthe \u201cThird Sermon\u201d of Mathesius) as a kind of \u201chumid, cold, mucous, completely\nsulphur-free matter, which is extracted virtually as sweat of the earth\u201d as an equally\nvalid theory, a humid and mucilaginous element able to transmute under the\n24\n\u201cAstrologorum autem sententia est, errantes stellas influxu & viribus, quas exercent in materia,\nad id in terrae visceribus aptata, efficere metella: inerrantes vero gemmas. Quod figmentum]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=26\nPages: 26,27\n2\nThe Alchemical Art of Dyeing: The Fourfold Division of Alchemy. . .\n3\nThe passage comes after a long introduction (\u00a7\u00a7 1\u20134) in which Psellos rhetorically\ndiscusses the philosophical framework within which chrysopoeia is to be understood and assessed. At the very beginning (\u00a7 1, ll. 5f.) the scholar identifies the main\ntopic of his letter with \u1f21 \u1f10\u03bc\u03c0\u03cd\u03c1\u03b9\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b5\u0002\u03c7\u03bd\u03b7 (the art of fire), whose first aim is said to be\nthe transformation of lead, tin, and any other metal into gold (\u00a7 1, ll. 12\u201315). The\nkey concept of transformation is framed and expanded in the following paragraphs\n(\u00a7\u00a7 2\u20134), where Psellos tries to set the basic principles guiding his \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u2019\u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03ae\u03bc\u03b7\u03c2\n(scientific) explanation of this art. He insists on the four elements that compose the\nphysical world, on their reciprocal changes, and on the alterations of the four\nqualities (namely wet, dry, hot, and cold). These changes are explained through]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=111\nPages: 111\nartificers of fraud and who are not on the same level as \u2018real\u2019 metallurgists.22\nThirdly Agricola takes on the astrologers, referring to the authors who claim that\nthe seven planets as formative powers influence some kind of primordial metallic\narch-matter to create the seven known metals. The theory that celestial bodies\ninfluence and shape earthly substances is treated at the beginning of Ru\u0308lein of\nCalw\u2019s Bergb\u20ac\nuchlein:\nFor the formation and growth of ores an effector is required and a subordinated material or\nmatter, which is adapted to receive the effect. The common effector of the ores and of all\nthings that are born is heaven with his orbits, his light and his influence, as the masters of\nnature teach. [. . .] Every ore receives a special influence from the planet he is named after,\nso that the planet and the ore concur in their warmth, coldness, humidity and aridity.23\nThe early modern efforts to categorize the world and its substances, based on]"]}

{"result":["[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=178\nPages: 178\nand financial success. Grill built large laboratories, managed laborants, engaged in\ncollaborations, mined texts for information, and shared results. Several Parisian\ngoldsmiths were likewise tied into this chymical network where they exchanged\nexperimental and theoretical information with such figures as Kenelm Digby,\nSamuel Cottereau Duclos, and Johann Rudolf Glauber. In England, George Starkey\nfound that the expertise of gold- and silversmiths could, alternatively, be inconvenient when trying to sell alchemical metals. The documentation provided here blurs\nthe boundary between artisans and natural philosophers, at least in chymistry.\nAlchemy, or to speak more inclusively and less anachronistically, chymistry was a\nfamiliar topic in early modern Europe. Despite its well-established culture of\nsecrecy, it was not only highly visible and widely-known, but widely-practiced]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=198\nPages: 198,199\nrepresentations that we might not otherwise have attributed to them. The image\nof a busy, and presumably compartmentalized and hierarchical, chymical workshop\npulls our understanding of these locales towards a comparison with contemporaneous artisanal ateliers, which, if the principals involved were themselves artisans,\nwould have been the obvious model upon which to draw virtually automatically.\n(Interestingly, a modern academic chemical research group retains much of this\ncharacter and structure.) The transconfessional and international character of the\nlarger network\u2014which included Catholics and assorted types of Protestants, as well\nas Dutch, French, English, Danes, Swedes, and Germans\u2014parallels the way in\nwhich it cut across social levels. This situation complicates some of the standard\nways in which historians are accustomed to draw reckoning lines, and recalls the\nideal of a respublica litterarum even in a subject as distant from traditional\nhumanism as sooty chymistry.\n178]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=181\nPages: 181\na variety of chymically-based projects, and, crucially for such a project as this one,\nthis network left behind a wealth of written records that provide historians with the\nnecessary clear evidence from which to work. I will therefore focus here on the\nchymical activities of gold- and silversmiths within this group and their interactions\nwith its other members and with the broader realms of chymistry.\nAnthoni and Andries Grill in the Netherlands and Sweden\nOne part of this network has already been extensively studied, namely the portion\ngathered around the intelligencer Samuel Hartlib (1600\u20131662) in London.8 The\nHartlib Circle\u2019s utopian, educational, and commercial schemes made chymistry a\nsubject of particular interest due to its lucrative potential. An important contact in\nthis regard was the former Calvinist minister Johann Moriaen (c.1591\u20131668) in\nAmsterdam. Moriaen both pursued his own chymical interests and aspirations and]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=180\nPages: 180\nepistemic exchanges or collaborations on the level of practical or theoretical\nknowledge.\nDocumented examples of extended collaborations or exchanges between artisans and natural philosophers would be both more interesting and more informative\nfor mapping out the domains and dynamics of early modern alchemical practice. A\npromising locus for such study is to be found particularly among gold- and\nsilversmiths. On the one hand, their trade regularly involved chymical processes\nsuch as assaying, refining, and so forth, and they were thus more or less conversant\nwith chymical substances (acids, salts, metals, amalgams, etc.) and chymical\noperations (fusion, quartation, distillation, etc.) and would frequently have\nmaintained workshops equipped with the necessary equipment (furnaces, flues,\nfuel, retorts, crucibles, etc.) needed for chymical work generally. On the other\nhand, the basic materials of their artisanal labors\u2014gold and silver\u2014held a central\n5\nSee Smith, Body of the Artisan.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=198\nPages: 198\nneat division of artisan and natural philosopher emerges considerably blurred.\nThe diversity of characters within the network and their various connections and\ncollaborations revises still-prevalent views of alchemical laborers as characteristically solitary, secretive, and isolated. Indeed, when we consider the reports of\nGrill\u2019s multiple laboratories staffed with at least 16 operators, it is hard not to recall\nthe contemporaneous depictions of chymical laboratories in Netherlandish genre\npainting that almost always depict a foregrounded main experimenter with a group\nof other workers in the background tending various processes. While there are\ncertainly purely stylistic and iconographic motivations behind such depictions\n(similar layouts are used in other genre paintings not showing chymists), the\naccounts of Grill\u2019s workshop do add a level of verisimilitude to these artistic\nrepresentations that we might not otherwise have attributed to them. The image]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=193\nPages: 193\nmanuscripts also reveal a wider circle of closely-knit chymists active in Paris\nthroughout the 1650s and 1660s. This circle included, besides Duclos and Digby,\nthe abbe\u0301 Jullien de Loberie (chaplain of the Colle\u0300ge Fortet) and an abbe\u0301 Boucaud,\nThomas Gobelin (member of a prominent family and counselor to the Paris\nParlement), the chymical authors Jean-Baptiste de la Noue, Pierre Borel, and\nFranc\u0327ois de Soucy, Sieur de Gerzan, as well as a host of others. The group shared\nmanuscripts, processes, and other information gathered from books or private\ncorrespondence, and collaborated (in various combinations) on practical chymical\nprocesses, most frequently of a transmutational nature. Some of them frequented\nwell-known intellectual groupings such as the academy of the abbe\u0301 Bourdelot.43\nThe travelling savants Borrichius and Henry Oldenburg (1619\u20131677) also\ninteracted with the group during their visits to Paris.\nSeveral documents record the participation of goldsmiths in this Parisian]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=180\nPages: 180\nclearly aware of the figure of the alchemist and his iconic value.6 Likewise, the\nallegorical images of widely varying artistic quality in chymical books and manuscripts imply some sort of contact between author/practitioner and artist. Yet such\nartworks do not necessarily indicate that the artists were actually in direct and\nmeaningful contact with chymists. On a purely commercial level, artists would\nhave been in contact (possibly directly in some instances, but probably more\nfrequently indirectly through a retailer) with makers of chymically-prepared pigments such as vermilion or white lead, just as metalworkers and assayers would\nhave connected with producers of mineral acids, fabric-makers with dye manufacturers, and so forth. Yet none of these contacts tells us anything about possible\nepistemic exchanges or collaborations on the level of practical or theoretical\nknowledge.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=180\nPages: 180\nand in terms of identifying connections between them and the better documented\nand recognized work carried out in more visible and more intellectually elevated\ncircles.5 How did artists and artisans understand chymistry, and to what extent did\nthey practice it? To what extent were they familiar with more bookish or scholarly\nideas, practices, practitioners (and vice versa)? Can exchanges of knowledge\nbetween the two groups be clearly documented? Can we identify what practices,\nmaterials, or ideas passed between them, and how one group might have responded\nto information from the other? Answering such questions promises to further\nilluminate chymistry\u2019s cultural and intellectual place in early modern Europe.\nSome such connections seem relatively clear. Chymical workshops appear\nfrequently in Netherlandish genre painting, indicating that Northern artists were\nclearly aware of the figure of the alchemist and his iconic value.6 Likewise, the]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=179\nPages: 179\nearly modern chymical publications, since those sources were the most obvious and\nmost readily available. Further inquiries began to explore the vast bulk of manuscript and archival materials, with the result that the ambit of \u201cthe alchemist\u201d has\nbeen broadened to include practitioners representing the broadest possible range of\nearly modern people.4 University-educated physicians, natural philosophers, and\nscholars busied themselves with chymistry, as did a range of empirics, entrepreneurs, and enthusiasts, as well as an assortment of artisans that included artists,\nmetalworkers, brewers, and cobblers. Chymical discourse and practice took place\nin academic chambers, in courtly settings, in private homes, in commercial\n1\nFor an overview of the history of alchemy, see Principe, Secrets of Alchemy. On the use of the\nterm \u2018chymistry\u2019. see 84\u20135. For a study of the words chemistry and alchemy and their changing\nreferents, see Newman & Principe, \u201cAlchemy vs. Chemistry.\u201d\n2]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=196\nPages: 196\nwho contributed actively to the chymical conversations of Hartlibians in London in\nways akin to what Grill did in the Netherlands, and Caillart, Roussel, and others did\nin Paris. Nevertheless, interactions of gold- and silversmiths with members of the\nLondon circle are not entirely absent, and serve to illustrate an alternate way in\nwhich goldsmiths were involved in the chymical world.\nProbably the most talented chymist of the English branch of this international\nnetwork was Starkey, the Bermuda-born and Harvard-educated emigre\u0301 who had\narrived in London from Massachusetts in 1650 and quickly became a celebrity\namong Hartlibians and a particular friend and teacher in chymical matters to\nBoyle. Starkey was a microcosm of the broad chymical world of the seventeenth\ncentury. He was talented in both theory and practice, and applied himself to\nvirtually every branch of chymistry: he sought the Philosophers\u2019 Stone and]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=179\nPages: 179\nWhat was the correct starting material for the Philosophers\u2019 Stone and how should\nit be processed? Which authorities were trustworthy and which should be rejected?\nTheoretical choices and commitments both guided and were guided by practical\nexperimentation in the laboratory, leading to new ideas and practices as workers\nreinterpreted older authorities to fit their observations or struck out in new directions to achieve a variety of goals.3 Thus diversity is to be found not only in\ntheoretical notions but in practices as well; the dynamic interaction between head\nand hand stands as a hallmark of the chymical tradition.\nYet another aspect of chymical diversity lies with the practitioners themselves.\nWho pursued and practiced early modern chymistry? Naturally enough, modern\nscholarly inquiry focussed first on those who contributed to the enormous flood of\nearly modern chymical publications, since those sources were the most obvious and]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=13\nPages: 13\nusing materials and chemical procedures to make both everyday items and objects\nof the visual and decorative arts, the activity known as alchemy encompassed more\nthan attempts to make gold.14 Transmutational alchemy was about the transmutation of all base metals into more noble ones, but chrysopoeia was only one\naspect of alchemy. Alchemy also touched on medicine and chemical manufacture.\nIt was about the chemical production of things\u2014medicines, porcelain, dyes, and\nother products as well as the precious metals\u2014and about the knowledge of how to\nproduce them. In this sense, \u201cart technologies\u201d\u2014materials and techniques to make\nart and knowledge of these materials and techniques\u2014overlapped with alchemy.\nAlchemy has deep roots in writings on material transformation from Antiquity.\nThe productive knowledge associated with material transformation was written\ndown in recipe books. The Leiden and Stockholm Papyri date to the third century]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=218\nPages: 218\nthe Chinese material.\nChymical Laboratory as Potter\u2019s Workshop\nThe early modern inclusion of ceramics within the arts of the fire brought with it\naccess to the experimental techniques developed by alchemist and chymists. This\nshift allowed an interrogative approach to the production of porcelain that utilized\nmany of the tools traditionally found in the craftsman\u2019s workshop while\ncircumventing the gradual processes of craft innovation. When we consider\nchymistry as both a kind of knowledge, and an object-producing discipline, the\napplication of its techniques to reverse the process of making porcelain is a logical\nextension of the economic demand for china and the intellectual drive toward\nmaker\u2019s knowledge as expressed by Bacon.\nCertainly, the history of ceramics after the seventeenth century is inextricably\nlinked to chemistry\u2019s success at solving increasingly sophisticated questions of\nluxury pottery production. We need look no further than William Cookworthy\u2019s]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=196\nPages: 196\nof chymists. Likewise, on 22 November 1664, Borrichius found Roussel in the\ncompany of \u201ca certain Flemish chymist named Regius\u201d and the three discussed Van\nHelmont (1579\u20131644) together.\nGoldsmiths and Chrysopoeia in England\nSeveral connections complete the third side of the Amsterdam-Paris-London triangle of chymical exchange. Digby of course maintained correspondence with his\ncountrymen at home, and, more significantly, travelled back to England in 1654\u2013\n1655 when it seemed briefly possible that Catholics would be tolerated by the\nCommonwealth. During this time, Digby continued his chymical interests in direct\ncontact with Hartlib and members of his circle such as Clodius, George Starkey\n(1628\u20131665), and Robert Boyle (1627\u20131691), to whom he communicated results\nand observations gathered in Paris. At present I have not uncovered any goldsmiths\nwho contributed actively to the chymical conversations of Hartlibians in London in]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=179\nPages: 179,180\nreferents, see Newman & Principe, \u201cAlchemy vs. Chemistry.\u201d\n2\nPrincipe, \u201cDiversity in Alchemy,\u201d and \u201cRobert Boyle and Isaac Newton.\u201d\n3\nOn the interplay of theory and practice in alchemy, see Newman & Principe, Alchemy Tried in the\nFire, esp. 92\u2013206.\n4\nFor example, see Nummedal, Alchemy and Authority, which details the roles and status of\n\u2018entrepreneurial\u2019 chymists in German courts. For a sense of the broad sweep of early modern\nalchemical practice, see Moran, Distilling Knowledge.\nGoldsmiths and Chymists: The Activity of Artisans Within Alchemical Circles\n159\nestablishments, and in noisy workshops. Most recently there has been particular\ninterest in exploring alchemy\u2019s place among artists and artisans, an investigation\nthat rightly reflects the crucial position of material production within chymistry\nthroughout its history. Important questions remain however in regard to demonstrating the specific theoretical and practical content of such artisanal endeavors,]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=198\nPages: 198\nsource of random observations made casually in the course of exercising their\ncraft, they initiated projects, conducted experiments, made innovations, read\nlearned treatises, and communicated or collaborated with more traditionallyeducated or more natural philosophically inclined members. While someone like\nAnthoni Grill was undoubtedly an exceptional figure, he nevertheless serves to\nillustrate one end of the spectrum of possible social and intellectual positions\noccupied by early modern gold- and silversmiths. His active participation and\neventual notoriety and success indicate the social boundaries that were crossed\nwithin the network, a situation that also existed with Caillart and Roussel and others\nin the French context as well. These examples thus begin to resituate the role of\nsuch artisan-chymists within the larger ambit of chymistry. While not erased, the\nneat division of artisan and natural philosopher emerges considerably blurred.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=178\nPages: 178\nGoldsmiths and Chymists: The Activity\nof Artisans Within Alchemical Circles\nLawrence M. Principe\nAbstract The study of early modern alchemical practitioners has recently\nexpanded from the work and writings of natural philosophers to include the labors\nof artisans. Yet there remains relatively little clear documentation about the specifics\nof such artisanal chymical practices or about the degree of significant epistemic\nexchange that may have taken place between artisans and better-known chymists.\nThis paper examines several gold- and silversmiths who were part of an extended\nalchemical network that stretched across the Netherlands, France, and England in\nthe mid-seventeenth century. The silversmith Anthoni Grill (and to a lesser extent\nhis brother Andries) worked on refining and transmutational processes with impressive chymical expertise and eventually achieved international notoriety and social\nand financial success. Grill built large laboratories, managed laborants, engaged in]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=203\nPages: 203\ntransmutational alchemy on more than an individual level, the origination of the\nterm in the late seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries is clearly linked to those\npursuits. Further, it should be noted that these first arcanists are entirely separate\nfrom communities and guilds of potters in their various regions, offering an entirely\nnovel actor class that appears at the end of the seventeenth century, chymists whose\nfocus was on the production of translucent ceramics rather than metallurgical,\nmedical, or other natural philosophical avenues.\nNo evidence towards production of a hard-paste porcelain body by European\npotters before the eighteenth century is extant, leaving the chymist\u2019s laboratory as\nthe principle space of ceramic innovation. Specific investigation of the physical\nproperties of Chinese porcelain undertaken by John Dwight (c.1633\u20131704) and\nEhrenfried Walther von Tschirnhaus (1651\u20131708) represent the first successful]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=179\nPages: 179\nauthors themselves would have us believe of their art, and what much of the earlier\nsecondary literature claimed, the sages did not \u201call say one thing.\u201d Moving beyond\nthe rhetorical representations of alchemy as a largely monolithic and static tradition, scholars now recognize that early modern chymical thought was both diverse\nand dynamic. Vigorous disagreements and successive innovations characterized\nvirtually its entire history, and most of all, its early modern existence. On the\nbroadest scale, opinions varied in regard to what chymistry\u2019s main goals should\ninclude\u2014chrysopoeia (metallic transmutation), chemiatria (medicinal applications), commercial production, and so on. Even within any one of these important\nbranches, both theoretical frameworks and practical approaches varied widely.\nWhat was the correct hidden composition of metals, and of matter more generally?\nWhat was the correct starting material for the Philosophers\u2019 Stone and how should]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=203\nPages: 203\nEhrenfried Walther von Tschirnhaus (1651\u20131708) represent the first successful\nexamples of chymistry\u2019s methodological apparatus being directed toward porcelain\ninnovation. Thermal experiment was an important element in the practices of both\nindividuals and evidence presented in the archaeological record demonstrates\nDwight\u2019s re-firing of Chinese sherds while Tschirnhaus published results of the\nexperimental application of burning lenses to determine the physical properties of\nvaried ceramic bodies. Dwight was ultimately unsuccessful in his endeavors, likely\ndue to economic realities, while Tschirnhaus\u2019s work would lay the cornerstones for\nthe eventual production of Meissen porcelain.\nThe Potter\u2019s Art as Craft Practice\nTo understand why the shift from the intellectual space of the craft workshop to the\nchymical laboratory was critical to the advancement of European ceramic development, an examination of the awkward position of pottery within the hierarchy of]"]}

{"result":["[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=180\nPages: 180\nepistemic exchanges or collaborations on the level of practical or theoretical\nknowledge.\nDocumented examples of extended collaborations or exchanges between artisans and natural philosophers would be both more interesting and more informative\nfor mapping out the domains and dynamics of early modern alchemical practice. A\npromising locus for such study is to be found particularly among gold- and\nsilversmiths. On the one hand, their trade regularly involved chymical processes\nsuch as assaying, refining, and so forth, and they were thus more or less conversant\nwith chymical substances (acids, salts, metals, amalgams, etc.) and chymical\noperations (fusion, quartation, distillation, etc.) and would frequently have\nmaintained workshops equipped with the necessary equipment (furnaces, flues,\nfuel, retorts, crucibles, etc.) needed for chymical work generally. On the other\nhand, the basic materials of their artisanal labors\u2014gold and silver\u2014held a central\n5\nSee Smith, Body of the Artisan.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=180\nPages: 180\nclearly aware of the figure of the alchemist and his iconic value.6 Likewise, the\nallegorical images of widely varying artistic quality in chymical books and manuscripts imply some sort of contact between author/practitioner and artist. Yet such\nartworks do not necessarily indicate that the artists were actually in direct and\nmeaningful contact with chymists. On a purely commercial level, artists would\nhave been in contact (possibly directly in some instances, but probably more\nfrequently indirectly through a retailer) with makers of chymically-prepared pigments such as vermilion or white lead, just as metalworkers and assayers would\nhave connected with producers of mineral acids, fabric-makers with dye manufacturers, and so forth. Yet none of these contacts tells us anything about possible\nepistemic exchanges or collaborations on the level of practical or theoretical\nknowledge.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=178\nPages: 178\nand financial success. Grill built large laboratories, managed laborants, engaged in\ncollaborations, mined texts for information, and shared results. Several Parisian\ngoldsmiths were likewise tied into this chymical network where they exchanged\nexperimental and theoretical information with such figures as Kenelm Digby,\nSamuel Cottereau Duclos, and Johann Rudolf Glauber. In England, George Starkey\nfound that the expertise of gold- and silversmiths could, alternatively, be inconvenient when trying to sell alchemical metals. The documentation provided here blurs\nthe boundary between artisans and natural philosophers, at least in chymistry.\nAlchemy, or to speak more inclusively and less anachronistically, chymistry was a\nfamiliar topic in early modern Europe. Despite its well-established culture of\nsecrecy, it was not only highly visible and widely-known, but widely-practiced]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=178\nPages: 178\nGoldsmiths and Chymists: The Activity\nof Artisans Within Alchemical Circles\nLawrence M. Principe\nAbstract The study of early modern alchemical practitioners has recently\nexpanded from the work and writings of natural philosophers to include the labors\nof artisans. Yet there remains relatively little clear documentation about the specifics\nof such artisanal chymical practices or about the degree of significant epistemic\nexchange that may have taken place between artisans and better-known chymists.\nThis paper examines several gold- and silversmiths who were part of an extended\nalchemical network that stretched across the Netherlands, France, and England in\nthe mid-seventeenth century. The silversmith Anthoni Grill (and to a lesser extent\nhis brother Andries) worked on refining and transmutational processes with impressive chymical expertise and eventually achieved international notoriety and social\nand financial success. Grill built large laboratories, managed laborants, engaged in]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=14\nPages: 14\nas strictly goldmaking and a more encompassing definition overlapping with art\ntechnology was crucial to the polemics of artists and alchemists and the rivalry\nbetween alchemy and the arts.16 Given the contested nature of the field of inquiry,\nit follows that the identity of the alchemist was equally contested and complex. In\nthe early modern period the alchemist was often portrayed as a fraud. The portrayals\nof laboratory scenes building on Brueghel became a genre of its own in the\nNetherlands.17 In these scenes, the alchemist is a goldmaker searching in vain for\nthe Philosophers\u2019 Stone and riches. As Tara Nummedal has convincingly shown,\nthe portrayal of the alchemist as a fraud also created the opportunity for other\nalchemists to fashion themselves in the role of experts, offering their services to\ncourts and other patrons to help them unmask fraudulent alchemists.18 Alchemical\nexpertise was based on a broader knowledge of matter and materials.\n15]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=48\nPages: 48\ndisciplines may lead to association, contamination and confusion within this textual\ngenre. It finally suggests some clues to help locate, distinguish and demarcate\nalchemical content within the literature of recipes.\nArt and Alchemy Within Recipe Books\nAt first sight, any overlap between alchemy and art-technology within recipe books\ncan be broadly explained by the mutual use of various materials and substances\nsuch as \u201ccommon stones, gems, and types of marble, gold and other metals, sulfurs,\nsalts, and inks, azures, minium, and other colors, oils and burning pitches, and\ncountless other things.\u201d2 More precisely, the field of art-technology encompasses a\nlarge range of craft practices involved in the production of pieces of art (including\nthose which incorporate such substances). This \u2018hand\u2019 knowledge, is related to the\nmechanical arts and is divorced from the philosophical or speculative dimension.\nYet, alchemy could be described as the practical, philosophical and medical search]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=157\nPages: 157\npatron a keen interest in alchemy, was meant to have taken part\u2014but his premature\ndeath prevented his involvement. In the Studiolo the connection between alchemy\nand the chemical arts was exalted. The iconographic itinerary conceived by\nBorghini was situated in a sequence on the upper part of the wall where paintings\ndevoted to thermal baths, the discovery of gun powder, a glass works, a goldsmith\u2019s\nworkshop, alchemists and a bronze foundry were located; at the room\u2019s two ends\nwere two statues, portraying Vulcan and Apollo. On the lower part of the wall a\nmythological scene recalled Francesco I\u2019s alchemical and artistic interests.27 I\nwould like to stress the importance of a few elements directly or indirectly related\nto the chemical arts. What first strikes you in this particular arrangement is the\nproximity of Stradano\u2019s famous painting of Francesco I\u2019s alchemical laboratory and\nGiovanni Maria Butteri\u2019s (1540\u20131606) painting illustrating the glass works (Figs. 3\nand 4).]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=179\nPages: 179,180\nreferents, see Newman & Principe, \u201cAlchemy vs. Chemistry.\u201d\n2\nPrincipe, \u201cDiversity in Alchemy,\u201d and \u201cRobert Boyle and Isaac Newton.\u201d\n3\nOn the interplay of theory and practice in alchemy, see Newman & Principe, Alchemy Tried in the\nFire, esp. 92\u2013206.\n4\nFor example, see Nummedal, Alchemy and Authority, which details the roles and status of\n\u2018entrepreneurial\u2019 chymists in German courts. For a sense of the broad sweep of early modern\nalchemical practice, see Moran, Distilling Knowledge.\nGoldsmiths and Chymists: The Activity of Artisans Within Alchemical Circles\n159\nestablishments, and in noisy workshops. Most recently there has been particular\ninterest in exploring alchemy\u2019s place among artists and artisans, an investigation\nthat rightly reflects the crucial position of material production within chymistry\nthroughout its history. Important questions remain however in regard to demonstrating the specific theoretical and practical content of such artisanal endeavors,]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=16\nPages: 16\nBeretta, were also early examples of such places of exchange, followed by many\nother European courts. These workplaces facilitated the exchange of materials\nbetween alchemy and the arts, and the attraction of the courts also made artisans\nadopt alchemical language to elevate the status of their craft. However, above all,\nthese court laboratories made possible, well beyond a shared material culture, the\nexchange of people and knowledge between the arts and alchemy. Although there is\na long tradition of experimentation in alchemy and the boundaries between alchemy\nand art technologies were fluid from the very beginnings of alchemy in Antiquity, in\nthe sixteenth and seventeenth centuries artisans became more deeply involved in\nalchemical pursuits, and some crafts relied on chemical expertise offered by\nscholars trained as alchemists.22 Above all, texts and books, products and symbols\nof scholarly culture, played an increasingly important role in laboratories and]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=180\nPages: 180\nand in terms of identifying connections between them and the better documented\nand recognized work carried out in more visible and more intellectually elevated\ncircles.5 How did artists and artisans understand chymistry, and to what extent did\nthey practice it? To what extent were they familiar with more bookish or scholarly\nideas, practices, practitioners (and vice versa)? Can exchanges of knowledge\nbetween the two groups be clearly documented? Can we identify what practices,\nmaterials, or ideas passed between them, and how one group might have responded\nto information from the other? Answering such questions promises to further\nilluminate chymistry\u2019s cultural and intellectual place in early modern Europe.\nSome such connections seem relatively clear. Chymical workshops appear\nfrequently in Netherlandish genre painting, indicating that Northern artists were\nclearly aware of the figure of the alchemist and his iconic value.6 Likewise, the]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=160\nPages: 160\njewelry were the arts most closely connected with alchemy. Their connections\ninspired Francesco to create a new decorative scenario, dominated by alchemy,\nby which illustrate the relation between arts and nature.\nFrancesco was extremely keen, even more than his father, to promote the study\nof the natural sciences and the arts related to them. His passion for the chemical arts\nwas so strong that in 1560, when he was only 19, he was told off by his brother\nGiovanni for attending the works of the fonderia all day long.33 It was Francesco\nwho, in September 1569, charged the architect, engineer and inventor Bernardo\nBuontalenti (1531\u20131608), who had been one of his teachers since 1550, to oversee\nthe construction of Bortolo\u2019s new glass furnace and a new fonderia.34 Francesco I\nalso exploited Buontalenti\u2019s versatile skills in the works of the fusion of precious]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=14\nPages: 14\nconcern with the same materials and artisanal processes. The focus on chromatic\ntransformation already found in the Papyri continues in fifteenth-century recipes.\nAlthough related to laboratory practices, Neven emphasizes that these recipe\ncollections are the products of scribal compilation and copying processes. Words\nand works are equally important elements of alchemical practices.15 Next to\nlaboratories, medieval religious institutions were also important sites of alchemical\nand art technological practice. However, as Neven points out, this does not exclude\nthat some scribes, such as the Benedictine monk Wolfgang Seidel (1491\u20131562),\ntried out recipes.\nThe scope of alchemy was from its very beginnings contested, and remained so\nthroughout its long history. Especially its boundaries with art technology were fluid.\nThroughout the Middle Ages and the Renaissance, the distinction between alchemy\nas strictly goldmaking and a more encompassing definition overlapping with art]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=9\nPages: 9,10\n\u201cmade by alchemy\u201d according to Cennino Cennini (c.1370\u2013c.1440). However, this\n3\n4\nDavis, \u201cRenaissance Inventions.\u201d\nMander, Het schilder-boeck, 199v. Translation in Melion, Shaping the Netherlandish Canon, 79.\nIntroduction\nix\nbook is not concerned with travelling materials and shared material culture.\nShifting the focus from painting to the decorative arts, this book scrutinizes\nepistemic exchanges between producers of the arts of fire and alchemists.\nLaboratories and Workshops\nWhat can the evolution of the laboratory, and its shifting relation to the artisanal\nworkshop, tell us about epistemic exchanges between the arts and alchemy? In the\nfifteenth and sixteenth centuries, the term laboratorium uniquely referred to workplaces in which \u201cchemical\u201d operations were performed: smelting, combustion,\ndistillation, dissolution, and precipitation. Matteo Martelli has convincingly\nshown that no such term was available in Antiquity.5 The Papyri, containing recipes]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=16\nPages: 16,17\nKlein, \u201cChemical Experts.\u201d\n23\nOn hybrid experts, see Klein, \u201cArtisanal-Scientific Experts,\u201d and \u201cDepersonalizing the Arcanum.\u201d\n24\nFor glassmaking (not discussed here), see Beretta, Alchemy of Glass; and Dupre\u0301, \u201cValue of\nGlass.\u201d\n22\nxvi\nIntroduction\nSilver- and goldsmiths seem obvious candidates when we think of careers that\ncross artisan and alchemist. Silversmiths, goldsmiths and alchemists worked on the\nsame materials (silver and gold), and silver- and goldsmiths\u2019 expertise was called\nfor to assay the purported gold and silver transmuted by alchemists. Silver- and\ngoldsmiths could also become involved themselves in transmutational endeavours.\nIn his contribution to this book, Principe focuses on the brothers Anthoni and\nAndries Grill (1604\u20131655) as examples of such hybrid figures. They ran successful\nsilversmithing businesses in mid-seventeenth century Amsterdam and The Hague.\nAnthoni Grill\u2019s Amsterdam laboratory also produced work on transmutation for]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=200\nPages: 200,199\nApproaches and Divergent Deployments. In Rethinking the Scientific Revolution,\ned. Margaret J. Osler, 201\u2013220. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.\nPrincipe, Lawrence M. 2013a. The Secrets of Alchemy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.\nGoldsmiths and Chymists: The Activity of Artisans Within Alchemical Circles\n179\nPrincipe, Lawrence M. 2013b. Sir Kenelm Digby and His Alchemical Circle in 1650s Paris: Newly\nDiscovered Manuscripts. Ambix 60: 3\u201324.\nPrincipe, Lawrence M., and Lloyd DeWitt. 2002. Transmutations: Alchemy in Art. Philadelphia:\nChemical Heritage Foundation.\nSmith, Pamela H. 2000. Vital Spirits: Redemption, Artisanship, and the New Philosophy in Early\nModern Europe. In Rethinking the Scientific Revolution, ed. Margaret J. Osler, 119\u2013135.\nCambridge: Cambridge University Press.\nSmith, Pamela H. 2004. The Body of the Artisan: Art and Experience in the Scientific Revolution.\nChicago: University of Chicago Press.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=48\nPages: 48,47\n23\n24\nS. Neven\nwritings describe processes for the manufacture, preparation and application of\nvarious types of materials and substances. The majority are anonymous compilations of texts, which may originate from older or undetermined authorities.\nHundreds of such collections of recipes dealing both with alchemical and\nart-technological procedures were produced and disseminated in Northern Europe\nfrom the fourteenth century on, especially in German-speaking countries.\nDrawing on a delimited corpus of about 40 representative German manuscripts\ndated from the fourteenth to the sixteenth century, this paper investigates the\nconnections and similarities between these two fields and examines the various\nways alchemical and artistic instructions were embedded within recipe books.1 It\nargues that textual form and lexical proximities within recipes from these different\ndisciplines may lead to association, contamination and confusion within this textual]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=16\nPages: 16,15\nFireworks, 28.\n20\nSmith, Body of the Artisan. esp. 95\u2013127.\nIntroduction\nxv\nsermons to reveal conceptions of the origin and formation of ores for which\nMathesius drew equally on natural philosophy and alchemy and on the artisanal\nknowledge of the local miners and goldsmiths. Following one of the goldsmiths\u2019\nmost prized objects, a so-called Handstein, into the Kunstkammer, Haug shows that\nthis knowledge also reached elite collectors. They valued Handsteine for the\nmetallogenetic knowledge they embodied, thereby endorsing the shifting epistemic\nstatus of the arts.\nEpistemic Changes Between Artisans and Alchemists\nBiringuccio and Mathesius\u2019s St. Joachimsthal are examples of persons and places\nof exchange between scholarly cultures (in which learning is based on reading and\nwriting) and artisanal cultures (in which learning is based on doing).21 The laboratories created in Medici Florence, discussed in the chapters by Kieffer and]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=66\nPages: 66\n(collection(s) of) text(s). By displaying the various ways alchemical and artistic\nrecipes are embedded within the same manuscript, this study has highlighted the\npotential difficulties in localizing and distinguishing them.\nOn the other hand, it has been demonstrated that recipe books partly derived\nfrom the recording and transmission of (more or less) contemporaneous practices.\nThus, recipe books also reflect alchemical and artistic knowledge and interests of\nboth scribes and contemporary scholars, both of whom could be involved as readers\nor authorities. Recipe books also serve to define a more precise network in which\nthese types of knowledge circulated, delivering information about the \u2018actors\u2019\u2014\nwhether artisans, scholars, natural philosophers, (theoretical) alchemists or lay\nscribes\u2014and their interconnections, as well as the media (copy, oral source,\nexperiment) they used to exchange, share and communicate art and alchemy.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=47\nPages: 47\nfraught with difficulty. Alchemy can be defined as the \u2018art of transmutation\u2019,\nreferring to the perfection of base or impure matter (often metal or stone) into\nperfect substances. Alchemical procedures thus rely on artisanal/craft practices.\nAny overlap between alchemy and art-technological procedures can be explained\nby the use of identical materials and substances. Both are concerned with the\ndescription of colours\u2014especially in processes of change, the making of pigments,\nthe production of artificial gemstones, the imitation of gold and silver and the\ntransmutation of materials. Both require procedures involving precise and specifically defined actions, prescriptions and ingredients. So both ultimately use identical\nrhetorical formulations that reflect a \u2018step by step\u2019 procedure. Assuming that\nalchemical and artistic texts have the same textual format, raises the question: did\nthey also have the same types of production and dissemination? Using a corpus of]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=127\nPages: 127\nmuseums, they were built by Giorgio Vasari to cater for Cosimo I\u2019s public offices,\nand were later partly transformed into a gallery by Francesco I de\u2019 Medici (1541\u2013\n1587). Laboratories of art and alchemy were placed side by side by the Grand\nDukes Francesco I and Ferdinando I de\u2019 Medici (1587\u20131609) to facilitate collaboration between artists and scientists. Goldsmiths, jewellers, cabinetmakers, sculptors, painters, and cutters of semi-precious stones exchanged not only equipment,\nbut also theoretical and technical knowledge with the alchemists who worked in the\nUffizi. The pieces that survive demonstrate that the style of the objects created there\nwas a direct result of this collaboration. Thanks to the combined study of archival\ndocuments and unpublished maps, the artists\u2019 workshops and the alchemists\u2019\nfonderia (foundry) can now be located inside the building. Moreover, thanks to\nan unpublished inventory, we can easily visualise the organisation of the fonderia]"]}

{"result":["[Summary from page 198 to page 216 out of a total of 220:\nPages 198:\nGoldsmiths and Chymists: The Activity of Artisans Within Alchemical Circles\n177\nConclusion\nThe international network of alchemical correspondents and collaborators outlined\nin this paper contributes to our understanding of seventeenth-century alchemy\u2019s\ncontent and context in several ways. First, it is clear that several gold- and\nsilversmiths were active members of the network. Rather than merely being a\nsource of random observations made casually in the course of exercising their\ncraft, they initiated projects, conducted experiments, made innovations, read\nlearned treatises, and communicated or collaborated with more traditionallyeducated or more natural philosophically inclined members. While someone like\nAnthoni Grill was undoubtedly an exceptional figure, he nevertheless serves to\nillustrate one end of the spectrum of possible social and intellectual positions\noccupied by early modern gold- and silversmiths. His active participation and\neventual notoriety and success indicate the social boundaries that were crossed\nwithin the network, a situation that also existed with Caillart and Roussel and others\nin the French context as well. These examples thus begin to resituate the role of\nsuch artisan-chymists within the larger ambit of chymistry. While not erased, the\nneat division of artisan and natural philosopher emerges considerably blurred.\nThe diversity of characters within the network and their various connections and\ncollaborations revises still-prevalent views of alchemical laborers as characteristically solitary, secretive, and isolated. Indeed, when we consider the reports of\nGrill\u2019s multiple laboratories staffed with at least 16 operators, it is hard not to recall\nthe contemporaneous depictions of chymical laboratories in Netherlandish genre\npainting that almost always depict a foregrounded main experimenter with a group\nof other workers in the background tending various processes. While there are\ncertainly purely stylistic and iconographic motivations behind such depictions\n(similar layouts are used in other genre paintings not showing chymists), the\naccounts of Grill\u2019s workshop do add a level of verisimilitude to these artistic\nrepresentations that we might not otherwise have attributed to them. The image\nof a busy, and presumably compartmentalized and hierarchical, chymical workshop\npulls our understanding of these locales towards a comparison with contemporaneous artisanal ateliers, which, if the principals involved were themselves artisans,\nwould have been the obvious model upon which to draw virtually automatically.\n(Interestingly, a modern academic chemical research group retains much of this\ncharacter and structure.) The transconfessional and international character of the\nlarger network\u2014which included Catholics and assorted types of Protestants, as well\nas Dutch, French, English, Danes, Swedes, and Germans\u2014parallels the way in\nwhich it cut across social levels. This situation complicates some of the standard\nways in which historians are accustomed to draw reckoning lines, and recalls the\nideal of a respublica litterarum even in a subject as distant from traditional\nhumanism as sooty chymistry.\n\nPages 199:\n178\nL.M. Principe\nBibliography\n1855\u20131856. Archive de l\u2019art franc\u0327ais, 6 vols, ed. Anatole de Montaiglon. Paris: Dumoulin.\nAnrep, Gabriel. 1871\u20131875. Svenska Sl\u20ac\nagtboken, 3 vols. Stockholm: Haeggstro\u0308m.\nBimbenet-Privat, Miche\u0301le. 2002. Les Orfe\u0300vres et l\u2019orfe\u0300vrerie de Paris au XVIIe sie\u0300cle, 2 vols.\nParis: Commission des Travaux Historiques de la Ville de Paris.\nBorrichius, Olaus. 1983. Itinerarium 1660\u20131665, 4 vols. Copenhagen: Danish Society of\nLanguage and Literature.\nBrinkman, A.A.A.M. 1982. De Alchemist in de prentkunst. Amsterdam: Rodopi.\nBrown, Harcourt. 1934. Scientific Organizations in Seventeenth Century France. Baltimore:\nWilliams & Wilkins.\nCaillard, Jacques. 1627. Livre de toutes sortes de feuilles pour servir a\u0300 l\u2019art d\u2019 orfevrie de\nl\u2019invention de Jacques Caillard. Paris.\nEeghen, I.H van. 1970. Het Grill\u2019s Hofje. Jaarboek van het Genootschap Amstelodamum 62:\n49\u201386.\nGelder, H.E van. 1937. Een Haagsche bekerschroef van Andries Grill 1642. Mededeelingen van\nden Dienst voor Kunsten en Wetenschappen der Gemeente \u2018s\u2013Gravenhage 4: 113\u2013117.\nHartlib, Samuel. 2002. Hartlib Papers. Sheffield: HROnline, Humanities Research Institute,\nUniversity of Sheffield.\nHelvetius, Johann Friedrich. 1678. Vitulus aureus. In Musaeum hermeticum reformatum et\namplificatum, 815\u2013863. Frankfurt.\nKroes, Jochem. 2012. De Nederlands-Zweedse familie Grill en haar Chinese wapenserviezen.\nJaarboek van het Centraal Bureau voor Genealogie 66: 75\u2013101.\nLeng, Thomas. 2008. Benjamin Worsley (1618\u20131677): Trade, Interest and the Spirit in Revolutionary England. Woodbridge: Boydell Press.\nLennep, Jacques van. 1966. Art et alchimie. E\u00b4tude de l\u2019iconographie herme\u0301tique et de ses\ninfluences. Brussels: E\u0301ditions Meddens.\nLorm, Jan Rudolph de. 1999. Amsterdams goud en zilver. Amsterdam: Waanders Uitgevers.\nMarolles, Michel de. 1872. Le livre des peintres et graveurs. Paris: Daffis.\nMoran, Bruce T. 2005. Distilling Knowledge: Alchemy, Chemistry, and the Scientific Revolution.\nCambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.\nMu\u0308ller, Leos. 1998. The Merchant Houses of Stockholm c.1640\u20131800: A Comparative Study of\nEarly-Modern Entrepreneurial Behaviour. Uppsala: Uppsala University Library.\nNewman, William R. 1994. Gehennical Fire: The Lives of George Starkey an American Alchemist\nin the Scientific Revolution. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.\nNewman, William R., and Lawrence M. Principe. 1998. Alchemy vs. Chemistry: The Etymological Origins of a Historiographic Mistake. Early Science and Medicine 3: 32\u201365.\nNewman, William R., and Lawrence M. Principe. 2002. Alchemy Tried in the Fire: Starkey, Boyle,\nand the Fate of Helmontian Chymistry. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.\nNummedal, Tara E. 2007. Alchemy and Authority in the Holy Roman Empire. Chicago: University\nof Chicago Press.\nPijzel-Dommisse, Jet. 2005. Haags goud en zilver: Edelsmeedkunst uit de Hofstad. Zwolle:\nWaanders Uitgevers.\nPrincipe, Lawrence M. 1998a. Diversity in Alchemy: The Case of Gaston \u2018Claveus\u2019 DuClo, a\nScholastic Mercurialist Chrysopoeian. In Reading the Book of Nature: The Other Side of the\nScientific Revolution, eds. Allen G. Debus and Michael Walton, 181\u2013200. Kirksville: Sixteenth\nCentury Journal Publishers.\nPrincipe, Lawrence M. 1998b. The Aspiring Adept: Robert Boyle and His Alchemical Quest.\nPrinceton: Princeton University Press.\nPrincipe, Lawrence M. 2000. The Alchemies of Robert Boyle and Isaac Newton: Alternate\nApproaches and Divergent Deployments. In Rethinking the Scientific Revolution,\ned. Margaret J. Osler, 201\u2013220. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.\nPrincipe, Lawrence M. 2013a. The Secrets of Alchemy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.\n\nPages 200:\nGoldsmiths and Chymists: The Activity of Artisans Within Alchemical Circles\n179\nPrincipe, Lawrence M. 2013b. Sir Kenelm Digby and His Alchemical Circle in 1650s Paris: Newly\nDiscovered Manuscripts. Ambix 60: 3\u201324.\nPrincipe, Lawrence M., and Lloyd DeWitt. 2002. Transmutations: Alchemy in Art. Philadelphia:\nChemical Heritage Foundation.\nSmith, Pamela H. 2000. Vital Spirits: Redemption, Artisanship, and the New Philosophy in Early\nModern Europe. In Rethinking the Scientific Revolution, ed. Margaret J. Osler, 119\u2013135.\nCambridge: Cambridge University Press.\nSmith, Pamela H. 2004. The Body of the Artisan: Art and Experience in the Scientific Revolution.\nChicago: University of Chicago Press.\nSorbie\u0300re, Samuel J. 1660. Relations, lettres, et discours sur diverses matieres curieuses. Paris.\nStarkey, George [Eirenaeus Philalethes]. 1669. Secrets Reveal\u2019d, or an Open Entrance to the ShutPalace of the King. London.\nStarkey, George. 2004. The Alchemical Laboratory Notebooks and Correspondence, eds. and\ntrans. William R. Newman and Lawrence M. Principe. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.\nStroup, Alice. 1990. A Company of Scientists: Botany, Patronage, and Community at the\nSeventeenth-Century Parisian Royal Academy of Sciences. Berkeley: University of California\nPress.\nStroup, Alice. 2002. Censure ou querelles scientifiques: L\u2019affaire Duclos (1675\u20131685). In\nRe\u0300glement, usages et science dans la France de l\u2019absolutisme, eds. Christiane DemeulenaereDouye\u0300re and E\u0301ric Brian, 435\u2013452. Paris: Tec et Doc Lavoisier.\nSturdy, David. 1995. Science and Social Status: The Members of the Acade\u0301mie Royale des\nSciences, 1666\u20131750. New York: Boydell Press.\nTode\u0301riciu, Doru. 1974. Sur la vraie biographie de Samuel Duclos (Du Clos) Cotreau. Revue\nd\u2019histoire des sciences 27: 64\u201367.\nTurnbull, George Henry. 1947. Hartlib, Dury and Comenius: Gleanings from Hartlib\u2019s Papers.\nLondon: University Press of Liverpool.\nWebster, Charles. 1976. The Great Instauration: Science, Medicine and Reform, 1626\u20131660.\nNew York: Holmes & Maier Publishers.\nYoung, John T. 1998. Faith, Medical Alchemy and Natural Philosophy: Johann Moriaen,\nReformed Intelligencer, and the Hartlib Circle. Brookfield: Ashgate.\n\nPages 201:\nIgne refutata: Thermal Analysis\nin the Laboratory Practices of John Dwight\nand Ehrenfried Walther von Tschirnhaus\nMorgan Wesley\nAbstract The creation of European porcelain was long speculated to have originated from the flow of information from Chinese and Japanese sources; however,\nno substantive evidence of direct knowledge transfer has been discovered. This\npaper endeavors to shift the focus from an externally driven developmental process\nand relocate the principal method of innovation within the experimental framework\nestablished by early modern chymistry. Evidence for the use of thermal experimentation will be considered as a foundational element toward a chymical solution\nto the problem of porcelain production. Excavated material from the workshop of\nthe seventeenth century English arcanist John Dwight and the published experiments of the seventeenth century Silesian natural philosopher Ehrenfried Walther\nvon Tschirnhaus will provide the basis for this examination. This material, along\nwith the thermal elements unique to the successful Meissen porcelains will be used\nto frame the initial comparisons of the technological differences between the\nEuropean and Far Eastern productions, and serve to pose further questions regarding the impact of experimental techniques and limitations on European porcelain\narcanistry.\nUntil recently the study of early modern ceramics was principally the domain of art\nhistorians and archaeologists, limiting the scope of questions being posed by\nacademics. Increasingly the role of natural philosophy, medieval alchemy and\nnascent chemistry in ceramic evolution has been revealed, bringing with it the\nnecessity to align discourse on ceramic practice with the discipline of history of\nscience, as art history lacks the framework to pose questions that would advance the\ndiscussion. This paper is an exploratory work that builds the foundations to bridge\nthose separate traditions to expedite a more consilient examination of ceramic\ntechnology and innovation. The principal focus is on the adoption of specific\nM. Wesley (*)\nDepartment of History, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK\ne-mail: thenex@mac.com\nS. Dupre\u0301 (ed.), Laboratories of Art, Archimedes 37,\n181\nDOI 10.1007/978-3-319-05065-2_8, \u00a9 Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014\n\nPages 202:\n182\nM. Wesley\nchymical practices in early modern ceramic innovation that lead to a drastic\nreshaping of the experimental landscape. While many adopted practices flowed\nseamlessly between the two disciplines through shared tools and techniques developed by generations of practitioners working with fire, the specific nature of\nceramics forced adaptations on other practices. Elements borrowed from controversial chymical fire analysis found more specific application in investigating\nthermal qualities of ceramic bodies in laboratory experimentation. Used in ceramic\ninvestigations in England and Saxony during the late seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries, this hybrid approach was a defining moment in high-fire European\nceramic production.\nThe recent change in terminology surrounding medieval and early modern\ndistinctions between alchemy, chymistry and chemistry is particularly significant\nin informing the need for similar clarifications in discussions of historic porcelains.1\nAs a more extensive network of documentary sources related to early modern\nEuropean ceramics is assembled, the mercurial nature of the term \u2018porcelain\u2019 is\nincreasingly cast into the spotlight. From the traditionally ascribed basis in records\nof Marco Polo\u2019s (c.1254\u20131324) voyage, different interpretations have existed, and\nno substantial historic reconciliation has been attempted. It is beyond the scope of\nthis paper to attempt to do so, but establishing a basic set of terms is necessary. The\nterm \u2018porcelain\u2019 will be employed to denote white, translucent, high-firing ceramic\nbodies, consistent with the material described by Polo and exported from China into\nEurope.2 Two subdivisions will further be mentioned in this text; those objects\nmade through a combination of kaolinized clay and alkali salt rich stone will be\nreferred to as \u2018hard-paste\u2019, while objects made of a combination of clay and ground\nglass, sand, or quartz flux will be viewed as \u2018soft-paste\u2019. These are entirely modern\nseparations, used here for clarity, and specific examples given in the following\npaper will demonstrate they are not historic terms.\nThe seventeenth and eighteenth century quest to duplicate Chinese porcelain\nborrowed not only techniques from the chymical tradition, but even notions of\nhigher arcana. This notion of the adept\u2019s knowledge dovetails with the terminology\nemployed within the Saxon court of Augustus II the Strong (1670\u20131733) as\nprogress towards commercial European porcelain was made. The term arcanum\nis employed in court records and correspondence as it related to the porcelain\nsecret, and those individuals working to produce porcelain bodies were certainly\npossessed of substantial industrial secrets, making them, fittingly, arcanists.3 While\nscholars have pointed out that the term arcanum is not strictly limited to alchemical\npursuits, being widely employed within the book of secrets tradition during the later\n1\nNewman & Principe, \u201cAlchemy vs. Chemistry.\u201d\nOriginally composed as Livres des merveilles du monde, the original manuscript was purportedly\ncomposed by Rustichello while he shared imprisonment with Marco Polo after the latter\u2019s return to\nVenice in 1295 AD. A full discussion of Polo\u2019s references to porcelain can be found in Carswell,\nBlue and White, 52\u20134.\n3\nFor the full correspondence, see Tschirnhaus, Amtliche Schriften, ch. II.\n2\n\nPages 203:\nIgne refutata: Thermal Analysis in the Laboratory Practices of John Dwight. . .\n183\nmedieval and early modern periods, in the context of porcelain, strong arguments\ncan be made towards the artisanal-alchemical bridge. The correspondences that\nremain in the archives at Dresden, originate from that alchemical tradition, to the\nextent that arguments have been leveled to suggest that the correspondence was, in\nfact, about the creation of the Philosophers\u2019 Stone rather than a search for the\ncomposition of porcelain. While later arcanists cannot be seen to participate in\ntransmutational alchemy on more than an individual level, the origination of the\nterm in the late seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries is clearly linked to those\npursuits. Further, it should be noted that these first arcanists are entirely separate\nfrom communities and guilds of potters in their various regions, offering an entirely\nnovel actor class that appears at the end of the seventeenth century, chymists whose\nfocus was on the production of translucent ceramics rather than metallurgical,\nmedical, or other natural philosophical avenues.\nNo evidence towards production of a hard-paste porcelain body by European\npotters before the eighteenth century is extant, leaving the chymist\u2019s laboratory as\nthe principle space of ceramic innovation. Specific investigation of the physical\nproperties of Chinese porcelain undertaken by John Dwight (c.1633\u20131704) and\nEhrenfried Walther von Tschirnhaus (1651\u20131708) represent the first successful\nexamples of chymistry\u2019s methodological apparatus being directed toward porcelain\ninnovation. Thermal experiment was an important element in the practices of both\nindividuals and evidence presented in the archaeological record demonstrates\nDwight\u2019s re-firing of Chinese sherds while Tschirnhaus published results of the\nexperimental application of burning lenses to determine the physical properties of\nvaried ceramic bodies. Dwight was ultimately unsuccessful in his endeavors, likely\ndue to economic realities, while Tschirnhaus\u2019s work would lay the cornerstones for\nthe eventual production of Meissen porcelain.\nThe Potter\u2019s Art as Craft Practice\nTo understand why the shift from the intellectual space of the craft workshop to the\nchymical laboratory was critical to the advancement of European ceramic development, an examination of the awkward position of pottery within the hierarchy of\nthe decorative arts before the early modern period is worthwhile. Prior to its\ninteraction with chymistry, the relationship between the potter\u2019s craft and fire was\nprincipally of a mechanical, fixative nature. As the heat of the kiln was known to\nremove the water from earthen bodies, its ability to affect permanent transformation\non the materials placed in the kiln was its principal contribution to the success of\nceramic production. Those objects existed first as trade goods rather than artisanal\nobjects and only later became valued as aesthetic products. Vannoccio\nBiringuccio\u2019s (1480\u2013c.1539) introduction to his brief \u201cdiscourse on the art of the\npotter\u201d from his Pirotechnia of 1540, encapsulates both the recent recognition\nreceived by ceramic craft and its inseparability from fire:\n\nPages 204:\n184\nM. Wesley\nHaving started to tell you of working potter\u2019s clay for making crucibles and shells, the wish\ncame to me to tell you of the practice of this art also. Although it may seem at first glance to\nbe outside the order and purpose of my writing, he who considers well will see that it is not\nunrelated to it but proper, since it is wholly dependent on the agency and power of fire if it is\nto be brought to its perfection. Moreover, the potter\u2019s glazes and colors are all substances of\nvarious metals or impure minerals and therefore belong to fire. Since it is my intention to\ntreat of fire, minerals, and metals for you, I surely should not have omitted this, particularly\nbecause it is a necessary art which enriches and is greatly praised both for its ingenuity and\nits beauty.4\nLike the other arts treated in the Pirotechnia, the action of the fire on base earths\nand minerals provided integral transformation in the objects shaped by the potter\u2019s\nhands. At the time of Biringuccio\u2019s writing, the potter\u2019s art was on the threshold of a\nparadigm shift that would create a marked division between craft knowledge and\ntheory based practice, setting two separate courses for ceramic innovation in the\nlater sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. His citation of alchemy as one of \u201ctwo\nsources as [pottery\u2019s] principal basis,\u201d is referential to the provision of purified\nminerals and \u201celemental mixtures.\u201d5 However, it also foreshadowed the intellectual\nengagement of chymists in the quest for the production of European porcelain,\nbringing the weight of the older alchemical tradition to bear.\nPrior to the fourteenth century, European pottery was external to the hierarchy of\nthe esteemed arts, such as metallurgy, glassmaking, painting, and dyeing. The\nextensively copied treatise De diversis artibus, composed in the thirteenth century\nby the Benedictine monk Theophilus, thoroughly introduces the full range of\nartisanal productions valued in Europe in its first book.6 Pottery is entirely absent\nfrom this discussion of laudable arts and only appears once in the text as a canvas\nfor enameling.7 This is a continuation of pottery\u2019s position in the classical period,\nwhen earthen objects were valued as trade goods, everyday wares, or a medium for\nother decoration, not for their individual aesthetic form.8\nIt was not until advancements in the production of luxury quality European\npottery during the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries that the cultural perception of\nthe material changed significantly, driving engagement by the upper classes and\nnatural philosophers. An example can be found in a letter from Lorenzo de Medici\n(1449\u20131492) to the Malatesta family in 1490, favorably comparing their gift of\nmaiolica to silver objects, which is one of the earliest pieces of documentary\n4\nBiringuccio, Pirotechnia (1942), 392.\nBiringuccio, Pirotechnia (1942), 392.\n6\nFor various editions of the treatise, see Theophilus, Essay Upon Various Arts (1847), The Various\nArts (1961), and On Diverse Arts (1963).\n7\n\u201cQuam si diligentius perscruteris, illic inuenies quicquid in diuersorum colorum generibus et\nmixturis habet Graecia, quicquid in electrorum operositate seu nigelli uarietate nouit Ruscia,\nquicquid ductili uel fusili seu interrasili opere distinguit Arabia, quicquid in uasorum diuersitate\nseu gemmarum ossiumue sculptura auro decorat Italia, quicquid in fenestrarum pretiosa uarietate\ndiligit Francia, quicquid in auri, argenti, cupri et ferri lignorum lapidumque subtilitate sollers\nlaudat Germania.\u201d (Theophilus, The Various Arts (1961), 4).\n8\nOn the relative value of the potter\u2019s work, see Boardman, \u201cTrade in Greek Decorated Pottery.\u201d\n5\n\nPages 205:\nIgne refutata: Thermal Analysis in the Laboratory Practices of John Dwight. . .\n185\nevidence demonstrating the elevation of pottery into the canon of decorative arts.9\nWithin the next two decades, the production of new types of earthenware spread\nacross Italy rapidly replacing vernacular wares, such as those traditionally produced\nin Orvieto and Montelupo.\nAs the sixteenth century progressed the demand for porcelain, introduced in\nsmall quantities during the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, exploded alongside a\nburgeoning maritime trade. While the first successful efforts to produce a ceramic\nbody that replicated some of porcelain\u2019s qualities were those of the Medici workshops between 1575 and 1587, they failed to produce hard paste porcelain that was\nsimultaneously durable and heat resistant.10 Medici porcelain has long been\nconnected to the alchemical interests of Francesco I de Medici (1541\u20131587) though\nit required external aid. This outside knowledge was provided by an unknown\nLevantine leading to the production of a glassy porcelain body that is closely\nrelated to Islamic fritwares, but not Chinese material.11\nIt would take another 130 years before the commercialization of a hard paste\nporcelain body at the Meissen factory in Saxony. The reason for this significant lag\nin production cannot be connected to a lack of proper resources or technology, as\nhighly kaolinized clay sources, identical to the China clay that the Jesuit priest Pe\u0300re\nFrancois Xavier d\u2019Entrecolles (1664\u20131741) would write about in 1712, were\nexploited for the production of Hessian crucibles for laboratories across Europe\nas early as the fourteenth century.12 Arguments that the recipes and manufacturing\nprocesses of crucibles, such as those produced at Hesse, would have been closely\nguarded secrets must be considered a contributing factor in the reduced awareness\nof European potters as to the suitability of such clay for the production of a high\nfiring body. Those arguments can only be validated by assuming that ceramics did\nindeed exist apart from the other arts of fire at this period; for observations by\nchymists, metallurgists and glassmakers on the properties of the crucibles, and\nindeed the entire basis for the valuable export trade of Hessian crucibles, was of\ntheir highly refractory, hard firing nature.\nThe situation again suggests that the lack of a craft practice-based solution to the\nproduction of porcelain hindered progress in European investigations, in contrast to\nthe gradual evolution of the Far Eastern wares through extended refinement within\npottery communities in China and later Korea and Japan.13 Potters in those regions,\nthrough wider access to materials and support were able to utilize the full range of\n9\nFor a specific discussion of the social standing of this material, see Wilson, \u201cLe maioliche.\u201d\nKingery & Vandiver, Masterpieces, 141.\n11\nLiverani, Porcellane dei Medici, 8, 47, discusses the mysterious Levantine, while referring to\nKingery & Vandiver, Masterpieces, 141, for related material analyses and comparisons with\ncontemporary examples Islamic fritwares and Chinese porcelains. Further material can be found\nin Kingery & Vandiver, \u201cMedici Porcelain.\u201d\n12\nd\u2019Entrecolles, \u201cLettres.\u201d Regarding the use of kaolinized clay for the production of Hessian\nwares, see Martino\u0301n-Torres, Rehren & Freestone, \u201cMystery of Hessian wares.\u201d\n13\nFor the various avenues of incremental development of Chinese porcelains, see Kerr & Wood,\nCeramic Technology, 146\u201363.\n10\n\nPages 206:\n186\nM. Wesley\nclay native to the region, slowly perfecting what was considered an important art\nform. The long period of development in the Far East allowed incremental refinements necessary for successful innovations through craft practice. With a limited\ntime span driven by the demand for the material in Europe, the interrogative\ntechniques of the chymist\u2019s laboratory were necessary to circumvent the slower,\nless focused workshop process.\nExperiment and Fire Analysis\nAs discussed, the primary hindrance on the production of a porcelain body was the\nlack of identified materials that could be combined to produce these translucent,\nhigh fire, ceramic objects. The production of material at Hesse and the later\ndiscovery of kaolinic clay in Cornwall, England, again demonstrate that Europe\ndid not lack the raw materials, but rather that potters were unaware of the properties\nof those materials, even though other artisans were making use of them. The failure\nwas thus not connected to any form of geological predetermination, but entirely by\nsocial constraints limiting the application of knowledge to the problem.\nThe speculation that porcelain was comprised of either special clay, fermented\nfor generations, or of crushed shell incorporated in its manufacture, was a direct\nindication that similar materials were outside the realm of contemporary craft\nknowledge.14 In order to successfully move past these limitations, the experimental\ntechniques of the natural philosophers allowed objects from China to serve as\nprototypes for interrogation towards their properties and composition. It is at this\npoint that the techniques employed by chymistry, some borrowed from metallurgical assaying and the furnaces of the glassmakers in the centuries-long discourse\nbetween the disciplines, came into full application in the pursuit of ceramic\ninnovation.\nDue to the highly resistant nature of porcelain to analysis via distillation, the\napplication of direct heat was the recourse of both Dwight and Tschirnhaus. While\ntheir techniques were radically different, applying the heat of the furnace and the\nenergy of the sun respectively, the basic principles of this thermal experiment was\nclosely linked to the long-standing application of chymical fire analysis.\nThe exposure of both Dwight and Tschirnhaus to fire analysis during their\nstudies at university can be situated within a larger debate regarding the legitimacy\nof the process during the seventeenth century. The ultimate goal of separating\nbodies into their constituent components and, ideally, recombining them through\nthe application of fire, was assailed on a methodological and philosophical level in\n14\nThe speculation regarding the extended fermentation of clay and the addition of \u2018artificial\nminerals\u2019 to Chinese porcelain comes from Bacon, New Organon, Book II, Aph. 50.\n\nPages 207:\nIgne refutata: Thermal Analysis in the Laboratory Practices of John Dwight. . .\n187\nthe writings of the chymists.15 Supporters, such as Daniel Sennert (1572\u20131637),\nargued that it presented the most effective means of resolution, provided that\nviolent reactions were avoided in favor of distillation and more subtle applications\nof heat. While Francis Bacon (1561\u20131626) described the action of fire on the\nprinciples of a body as something that \u201cconfounds\u201d in that \u201cmany natures which\nare in fact newly brought out and superinduced by fire and heat.\u201d16 Similarly Robert\nBoyle (1627\u20131691) questioned the role of fire in analysis, based on the uncertainty\nof its ability to alter rather than separate substances.17 This position of Boyle\u2019s can\nbe viewed as somewhat problematic, considering the American chymist George\nStarkey\u2019s (1628\u20131665) extensive influence on his early research. Starkey\u2019s notebooks contain extensive application of fire analysis to test various experiments,\nwith the notation refutata per ignem appearing multiple times.18\nDebus clearly argues that the debate over the acceptability of fire analysis was\nclosely linked to the ongoing conflict being waged against Aristotelian thought in\nthe seventeenth century.19 As such many of the arguments against, from an empirical standpoint, must be viewed as couched within that particular political rhetoric.\nWithin the practices of Dwight and Tschirnhaus, their education in chymistry points\nto a profound awareness of the controlled application of fire in laboratory practice,\nbut more practical demands circumvented their full engagement within the Aristotelian debate and records of their work support the notion that fire became a critical\ntool for interrogation of material, but as commentators have pointed out, no true fire\nanalysis could occur.\nConsidering the context of ceramics, the limiting factor of fire analysis must\nnecessarily be in its inability to undo changes in crystalline structure during the\ninitial firing of an object. Because of these phase shifts, the specific components of a\nceramic body resist resolution by thermal or chemical means, making the original\nmaterials inscrutable. Even with modern scanning electron microscopy only an\nanalysis of the volumes of base elements is available (though insight into crystalline\nstructure is provided); establishing a definitive source or recipe for the ware prior to\nfiring is frequently impossible. Dwight and Tschirnhaus were subject to substantially greater limitations, with the possible attributes available for their analysis\nrestricted to: temperature of vitrification, point of liquefaction and failure of the\nbody, separation of glaze and body material in phases, and reaction of any applied\ndecorations in a manner different to the body or glaze. This limited access to deeper\nstructures would demand that any speculation as to source or recipe would have to\n15\nThe essay by Debus, \u201cFire Analysis,\u201d encapsulates much of the instability related to fire analysis\nas it appears in the major texts of the seventeenth century, while Newman, Promethean Ambitions,\n251\u201362, revisits and furthers the discussion as it relates to the art-nature debate.\n16\nBacon, New Organon, Book II, Aph. 7.\n17\nBoyle, The Sceptical Chymist.\n18\nFor more on Boyle and Starkey\u2019s relationship and the work of Starkey as an experimentalist, see\nNewman & Principe, Alchemy Tried in the Fire, 92\u2013128; and Newman, Gehennical Fire.\n19\nDebus, \u201cFire Analysis,\u201d 128\u201330.\n\nPages 208:\n188\nM. Wesley\nbe made with comparative data from other experiments on local raw materials, a\nroute that both men pursued aggressively, as discussed below.\nThat Bacon and Boyle were key figures in the debate regarding fire analysis had\na corollary impact on the advancement of ceramic innovation, and perhaps on the\nultimate failure to discover the arcanum in England. As the evidence of Dwight\u2019s\nexperimentation is considered, his links to Boyle and the influence of Bacon\u2019s\nwritings become increasingly important. Due to the restrictions of his fire analysis,\nhe was unable to disprove Bacon\u2019s speculation that there was an \u2018artificial mineral\u2019\nemployed in the production of porcelain, and his later experiments and workbooks\ndemonstrate that while he became intimately aware of the firing temperatures\nconnected to the Chinese prototypes he was able to secure, he never gave up on\nthe idea of a synthetic additive that would make clay into porcelain.\nJohn Dwight\u2019s Fulham Pottery: Chymical Beginnings\nDwight was the first individual to record limited success at producing porcelain in\nEngland. Born sometime between 1633 and 1635 in Gloucestershire, he was able to\nsecure a place at Oxford around 1655, leaving by 1660/1.20 Although officially\nreading for a Bachelor\u2019s of Ecclesiastical Law during this period, Dwight was\nemployed in the laboratory of Boyle.21 The influence of this period crucially shaped\nthe course of the young Dwight\u2019s life, as seen in his admission as an old man to Sir\nJohn Lowther, F.R.S. (1642\u20131706), who recounted in a letter to William Gilpen,\ndated 12 March 1697/8: \u201c[Dwight] gives this acct of himself yt he was bred at ye\nUniversity studyed Civil Law & Physick a little, but most Chymistry [. . .].\u201d22\nThis period in Boyle\u2019s laboratory corresponds with Robert Hooke\u2019s (1635\u20131703)\nemployment there as an assistant and Dwight and Hooke remained friends throughout\ntheir lives. It also corresponds with the period that saw the influence of Johann\nRudolph Glauber\u2019s (c.1604\u20131670) Furni novi philosophici on Boyle and the employment of various analytical techniques shared between Boyle and Starkey.23 Dwight\nwas fluent in both Latin and English and would have had access to the full variety of\ntexts moving through the laboratory. It is reasonable to speculate that, as this period\ncoincided with Boyle\u2019s increasing blindness, Dwight may have been asked to deal\nwith this material critically as a reader given his facility with the language.\nAfter his time in Oxford, Dwight held an Ecclesiastical and Legal appointment to\nsuccessive Bishops of Chester, until a deteriorating relationship with the fourth to\nhold the title led to him leaving the post to open the Fulham Pottery in 1670/1. During\n20\nHaselgrove & Murray, \u201cDwight\u2019s Fulham Pottery,\u201d 22\u20138.\nFoster, Alumni Oxonienses; and Boyle, Will, 11/408/169.\n22\nReproduced in Haselgrove & Murray, \u201cDwight\u2019s Fulham Pottery,\u201d 142.\n23\nNewman & Principe, Alchemy Tried in the Fire, 211\u20132.\n21\n\nPages 209:\nIgne refutata: Thermal Analysis in the Laboratory Practices of John Dwight. . .\n189\nthis period between 1661 and 1670, no records connecting Dwight to chymistry or\nceramics of any kind are extant. This lack of documentary evidence as to Dwight\u2019s\nendeavors suggests that he was able to spend very little time in these pursuits, as\nwithin the same period his marriage was brought to fruition and a plethora of\ndocuments connected to this and his legal post remain. Some progress must have\nbeen made, as he was able to secure a royal patent for the production of porcelain for\nthe factory almost immediately in 1672 supported by Hooke and Boyle.24\nDespite the support of the Crown in the production of his wares, and the\nendorsements of individuals such as Hooke, the absence of any porcelain produced\nat the Fulham factory frustrated scholarship on Dwight for the majority of the\nnineteenth and twentieth centuries turning the focus primarily to his stoneware\nproduction. Fortunately, the role of the factory in the history of English ceramics,\nand its continued operation until the twentieth century provided both the interest\nand possibility of substantial archaeological excavations undertaken by the Archaeological Section of the Fulham and Hammersmith Historical Society between 1971\nand 1979.25\nThese excavations revealed substantial information about many of Dwight\u2019s\nworking practices, the composition of both his finished and unfinished ceramics,\nand substantiated the claims that he had been actively working on producing\nporcelain in the Chinese style. Various strata were excavated, and unearthed\nmaterial covered virtually the entire operation of the pottery throughout its existence. The earliest period of experimentation and production, covering the years\n1671/2\u201374 was found \u201cconfined to a few Features in the south-east of the site (K15,\nK23, N1, and D3)\u201d with only very fragmentary material found in other areas.26\nIn these areas of early experimentation, a substantial sample of material of\nporcelaneous nature was discovered, all of which was fragmentary. Of this material,\nGreen notes that less than \u201cOne kilo in total weight was recovered but [represents] a\nlarge number of individual vessels.\u201d The dating is connected to its location, relative\nto other excavations, with important finds coming from the aforementioned southeast corner circa 1673 and a pair of soak ways that were filled circa 1676 (Fig. 1).27\nThese sherds represent a systematic, sustained, and varied approach towards\nporcelain experimentation, one that resulted in many failures, but there were other\nsmall successes towards a production of porcelain. They provide a wealth of\ntechnical evidence towards the experimentation conducted by Dwight during the\nearly period of the pottery, informing us specifically on the composition of his\n\u201cporcelane\u201d bodies, attempts and decoration, problems in glazing, and finally a\nvariety of firing issues.\n24\nThe patent was issued towards the protected manufacture of \u2018transparent Earthenware\u2019 and\n\u2018stone ware\u2019 by Charles the Second, on 17 April 1672, at Whitehall. See Charles the Second,\nTransparent Earthenware, P.R.O. C. 82 2425 Cal. S.P. Dom Entry Book 34, fol. 155.\n25\nThe findings and details were published in Green, Excavations, ch. I\u2013V.\n26\nGreen, Excavations, 11.\n27\nGreen, Excavations, 65.\n\nPages 210:\n190\nM. Wesley\nFig. 1 Fragmentary\nporcelain material\nrecovered at the Fulham site\nattributed to John Dwight,\n1672\u20131673 (Photograph by\nthe author)\nTwo groups of these sherds are particularly demonstrative. First, the chips\nintentionally produced to test a combination of bodies and surface solutions.\nThese represent varying degrees of success, with a combination of the vapour\nglazes and dipped finishes (both slip and glaze) seen in the test pieces. Figure 2\nillustrates pieces 33 (slip), and 34 (demonstrably dipped in a glaze, with crazing,\nand yellowing visible though with good transparency overall), and one of a number\nof sherds not illustrated in Green (vapour glazed).\nThe system for marking the test chips shows sophistication in Dwight\u2019s methodology, incorporating not only distinct numbers for various colors and finishes, but\nincluding descriptions of where each was applied. For example the fragment\nrepresented by type 36 clearly shows a division between the front and back of the\ntest chip (Green speculates that it is divided as \u2018iq r[ecto]/ iq v[erso]\u2019), as do types\n32, 34, and 48. It is a reasonable assumption, based on his later workbooks, that the\nvarious notations correspond to a notebook kept during the process of experimentation. This hypothesis is supported by the survival of two of Dwight\u2019s notebooks,\ncontaining various recipes and refinements. These two notebooks were of much\nlater date than the excavated material, written between 1689 and 1695. It is likely\nthat the latter was completed to hand down to his son Samuel Dwight, as an aid\ntowards the operation of the factory. While Samuel\u2019s later ownership of the\nnotebooks can only be speculated, the books themselves contained the signature\nof Lydia Dwight, claiming them as her own.\nModern knowledge of the two notebooks is due to the transcriptions by three\nindividuals. The primary transcription was executed by Lady Charlotte Schreiber\n(1812\u20131895), who discovered these two books during a visit to the pottery in 1870,\npainstakingly recording their contents in her own notebook. Excerpts were also\ncopied by William Chaffers (1811\u20131892) and Llewellyn Jewitt (1816\u20131886) for\npublication.28 While these two transcriptions lack the recipes for porcelain recorded\nby Lady Schreiber, they corroborate the rest of her transcription.\n28\nChaffers, Marks and Monograms; and Jewitt, Ceramic Art.\n\nPages 211:\nIgne refutata: Thermal Analysis in the Laboratory Practices of John Dwight. . .\n191\nFig. 2 Porcelain sherds,\ntwo identified as Green\u2019s\ntype 33 and 34 the other\nunrecorded, attributed to\nJohn Dwight, 1672\u20131673\n(Photograph by the author)\nThe current whereabouts of the two notebooks is unknown; they were sold\nthrough Christie\u2019s, likely in 1888 or 1889. Notices seeking their recovery have\nbeen remarked on as early as 30 June, 1894, but no indication as to their location has\nsurfaced.29\nWhile no contemporary records of the tests conducted between 1672 and 1675\nare known to exist, laboratory testing of the composition of the sherds found from\nthis period coincide broadly with the recipes given for porcelain in the later texts.\nThis methodology demonstrates the connection between Dwight\u2019s laboratory practice to that employed by Boyle in the late 1650s, and echoes the laboratory books of\nStarkey.30 Similar to the annotations and refinements demonstrated in Starkey\u2019s\nlaboratory books, we see Dwight actively editing his working notebook with\ncommentary on the effectiveness of recipes and the striking through of less effective formula. Lady Schreiber was rigorous in her transcriptions, making note of\npages torn out, recipes struck through, and duplicating marginalia such as a \u201cnot\nvery good\u201d accompanying a struck through recipe for \u201ca dark red porcellane or\nChina Cley\u201d dated 14 November, 1693.31\nThe second, arguably more interesting, group discovered within the context of\nsoakway A18, and thus contemporary to the test chips, was a group of Chinese\nexport porcelain sherds (Fig. 3). Among this group of blue and white sherds,\nrepresenting at least five distinct objects, are cases where glaze running over\nfractured edges demonstrate clear evidence of re-firing, at a temperature hot enough\nto at least partially liquefy the glaze, without burning the cobalt. A final sherd from\nthis group contains evidence of cobalt over-painting by Dwight, before re-firing,\nperhaps as a test coinciding with the samples of his own work.\n29\nSchreiber, Charlotte Schreiber\u2019s Notebook, 31; and Haselgrove & Murray, \u201cDwight\u2019s Fulham\nPottery,\u201d 74.\n30\nFor the working practices, see Starkey, Alchemical Laboratory Notebooks.\n31\nReproduced in Haselgrove & Murray, \u201cDwight\u2019s Fulham Pottery,\u201d 73, ai\u2013bviii, 74.\n\nPages 212:\n192\nM. Wesley\nFig. 3 Sherds from the\nperiod of 1671/2\u20131674 with\nevidence of re-firing,\nincluding five sherds of\nChinese origin (center and\nright) (Photograph by\nEdwin Baker, Museum of\nLondon; Reproduced\ncourtesy of English\nHeritage)\nWhile the source of these sherds is unknown, whether they were Dwight\u2019s\npersonal property, donations by an interested party, or the possessions of a funding\npatron, their role within Dwight\u2019s active search for the key to making porcelain is\nclear. These fragments provided a tangible outcome for Dwight\u2019s experimentation,\nsources that could be used for active comparison in the laboratory. His test bodies\nand colors worked directly towards the production of material that mimicked the\nobservable qualities of the Chinese porcelain in his possession even though its\nchemical composition remained unknown.\nThose qualities clarify his distinct use of \u201ctransparent porcelane or China cley\u201d\nto describe certain recipes in his notebooks. While he employed \u201cporcelane\u201d as a\nwider term applicable to many finewares, it was transparency and whiteness that he\npursued through experimentation, as key properties of the sherds available to him.\nThe re-firing of Chinese material revealed the use of a distinct glaze layer over the\ncobalt itself, which demonstrated a distinct thermal response from the Chinese body\npaste. There may have been more sherds whose surfaces were destroyed by overfiring in a test furnace, but the remaining pieces show care taken to affect changes in\nthe glaze without damaging the fabric or the decoration, suggesting that, on a\nsmaller scale, Dwight had keen control over the temperatures of his experimentation. The bright, transparent nature of the Chinese glaze, combined with its excellent fit to the fabric of the ware, may have further influenced Dwight towards an\nessay discussing a theoretical lead China glaze, as it appears in his notebook,\ndemonstrating that his attempts to create an alkali glaze had failed, or if successful,\nhis solution remains one of the best kept secrets of European ceramics.\nHis application of thermal experimentation, as noted, was limited in its scope,\nbut still formed a critical point of departure for his investigation into the properties\nnecessary to replicate the Chinese materials. He combined these inquiries with\nknowledge of a wide range of raw materials available to potters in England.\n\nPages 213:\nIgne refutata: Thermal Analysis in the Laboratory Practices of John Dwight. . .\n193\nIn conversations recorded by Hooke in his diary, and referenced in at least one\nmeeting of the Royal Society on 5th December 1678, Dwight was vocal about the\nsuitability of various English clays for the production of \u201cporcelane.\u201d32 Further,\nCharles Leigh published a second hand account of the clays local to Wigan that\nwere being employed by potters that Dwight \u201cmade his first Discovery\u201d upon.33\nDwight was thus actively pursuing a synthetic solution to the problems facing\nporcelain production using local materials in a methodical manner, the firing and\nre-firing of sherds being fundamental to his process.\nEhrenfried Walther Von Tschirnhaus: Harnessing the Sun\nIn contrast to the limited contemporary information regarding Dwight\u2019s activities\nand a lack of autograph material besides the two slender workbooks, an increasing\namount of attention paid to Tschirnhaus since 1990 has provided numerous contemporaneous sources.34 Tschirnhaus himself produced ample material as a longstanding contributor to the journal Acta Eruditorum, and various correspondences\nhave survived.35\nHistorically, the focus on Tschirnhaus prior to the later half of the twentieth\ncentury focused on his contributions to Mathematics and his intellectual relationships with leading natural philosophers, including Leibniz, Spinoza, Boyle, and\nAthanasius Kircher (c.1601\u20131680). The historic minimization of his role in discovering the porcelain arcanum can be linked to the use of considered propaganda, as\nearly as 1710\u20131720, in establishing a popular narrative around the Meissen Factory\nand Johann Friedrich Bo\u0308ttger (1682\u20131719), who was credited with the discovery\nafter Tschirnhaus\u2019s death in 1708.\nAs archives have been fully absorbed into the framework of modern knowledge,\nthis false historiography has eroded under the weight of documentary evidence.\nBased on the essays published in Acta Eruditorum between 1687 and 1697 and\nmaterial found in the Dresden archives, the full importance of Tschirnhaus in\nestablishing the foundations of Saxon porcelain is clear. These works confirm\n32\nBirch, Royal Society, vols. III\u2013IV.\nLeigh, Natural History of Lancashire, 56\u20137.\n34\nThe biographical details of Tschirnhaus can be found in numerous sources, including Winter,\n\u201cTschirnhaus\u201d; Watanabe-O\u2019Kelly, Court Culture, both include excellent work on Tschirnhaus\u2019s\nbiography and role within the industrial structure of Saxony. Further, the Staatliche\nKunstammlungen Dresden Mathematisch-Physikalischer Salon, through the Tschirnhaus Gesellschaft has extensively assembled materials relating to his work and experiments.\n35\nThe Acta Eruditorum represents what can be considered the first international science journal,\npublished during the period between 1682 and 1782, as founded by Otto Mencke (1644\u20131707) and\nGottfried Wilhelm Leibniz (1646\u20131716). Tschirnhaus was a frequent contributor to the journal,\nsubmitting no less than 15 letters or essays on mathematics, seven on burning lenses and one on\nastronomy over the course of 17 years.\n33\n\nPages 214:\n194\nM. Wesley\nthat not only did the elder chymist act as the principal investigator into the arcanum\nfrom the 1690s until his death in 1708, but that the success of experimentation in\nSaxony hinged upon his refinement of the application of directed heat energy via\nburning lenses. Tschirnhaus\u2019s commitment to burning lenses can be traced to a\nmeeting with Franc\u0327ois Villete (1621\u20131698) in Lyons in 1676, that marks the\nbeginning of more than 20 years of focused experimentation involving them.36\nThe aim of this section is not to dive into the melee surrounding the credit for the\nfinal recipe for porcelain production as presented to Augustus the Strong in 1708\u2013\n1709. However, the slow dissemination of Tschirnhaus scholarship outside Germany remains connected to that historiography, and so it must be touched upon.\nUltimately the death of Tschirnhaus in 1708 combined with the period of refinement before the production of early commercial test wares is proof enough that\nBo\u0308ttger was possessed of the skill set necessary to further the research. Rather, the\nfocus must be on what contributions can be unquestionably linked to the work of\nTschirnhaus, prior to Bo\u0308ttger\u2019s historic collision with the courts of Europe.37\nActa Eruditorum 1687\u20131695\nThe most direct evidence for Tschirnhaus\u2019s application of thermal analysis in the\nquest for porcelain is contained in a series of contributions he made to Acta\nEruditorum explaining the construction and use of increasingly sophisticated burning lenses. By combining the manufacturing prowess of his native region with the\nfundamental principles communicated to him by Villette, Tschirnhaus was able to\nfocus the sun\u2019s energy to achieve temperatures hitherto unknown in Europe. While\nmany of his major findings were communicated directly to individuals across the\ncontinent, he felt that the discoveries were significant enough to submit for\npublication.\nThe first of these papers appears in the January 1687 issue of the journal and\nincludes a cursory list of experimental observations of the reaction of a variety of\nmetals, including lead, copper and gold, and related observations based on the time\nof focused exposure to the lens.38 During this phase of experimentation, his test\n36\nThe most extensive discussion of these experiments can be found in Plassmeyer, Sonnenfeuer,\nwhich presents an extensive discussion of the wider reception of his endeavours, refinements\nconnected to the burning lenses, and a complete catalogue of the lenses in the collections of\nDresden.\n37\nPietsch, \u201cTschirnhaus,\u201d summarizes the current state of scholarship on the matter, including\nvarious visits and investigations by Tschirnhaus prior to the involvement of Bo\u0308ttger. It does\nhowever fail to discuss the comments made by Tschirnhaus in Acta Eruditorum during this period.\n38\nTschirnhaus, \u201cSpeculi ustorii.\u201d\n\nPages 215:\nIgne refutata: Thermal Analysis in the Laboratory Practices of John Dwight. . .\n195\nobjects included crucibles that would withstand the heat until past the eight-minute\npoint.39 Based on the times given for copper and gold before liquefying the data\nwould suggest that these were likely the Hessian crucibles mentioned above.40\nThe following three works to appear in the pages of Acta, in April 1688,\nNovember 1691, and August 1696 respectively were significant contributions to\nthe knowledge of thermal properties of a range of substances, but reveal no distinct\nexperimentation on ceramic materials.41 The essay from April of 1688 records the\nsuccessful use of a burning mirror towards the liquefaction of asbestos. He goes on\nfurther to discuss the effect of the time of year on the power of the lenses, specifying\nthat material that would melt in 8 or 9 min in the summer would take as long as\n12 min in the frigid cold of January.42\nThe extended essay of November of 1691 included detailed instructions on the\nconstruction of the lenses with an accompanying figure presenting a schematic for\nthe angles involved in correctly aligning their focus. Tschirnhaus presents an\nextended discussion of experimental results in this volume, before posing larger\nphilosophical questions.\nA period of 5 years separates the appearance of the schematics in the journal\nuntil publication of technical refinements and corrections in August of 1696.\nTschirnhaus then followed quickly with a list of results in September of 1697. It\nis in this, the last of his works published on burning lenses that the direction of his\nresearch towards ceramics specifically appears.43 While correspondence with Leibniz suggests that Tschirnhaus could claim a limited success in the production of\nporcelain as early as 1694, no material evidence has appeared.44 However, in the\npages of Acta, he includes the results of the application of burning lenses on\ncombinations of material with porcellana Hollandica (Dutch earthenware) and\nporcellana Chinensi.\nTschirnhaus observed that the material combined with porcellana Hollandica\nburst immediately into flames at the temperature of experiment, while that made\nwith Chinese porcelain formed spherical glass and asbestos became entirely\ntranslucent.45\nWhen measured against the long list of other substances included in the 10 years\nof published experiments, it is evident that Tschirnhaus had a large amount of\nrelative thermal data to use as a metric for his porcelain experiments. While other\n39\nTschirnhaus, \u201cSpeculi ustorii,\u201d 53.\nMartino\u0301n-Torres, Rehren & Freestone, \u201cMystery of Hessian Wares.\u201d\n41\nTschirnhaus, \u201cParalipomenon,\u201d \u201cSingularia effecta,\u201d and \u201cArtis vitriariae.\u201d\n42\nTschirnhaus, \u201cSpeculi ustorii,\u201d 52.\n43\nTschirnhaus, \u201cDe magnis lentibus.\u201d\n44\nReinhardt, \u201cEhrenfried Walther von Tschirnhaus,\u201d 13, and \u201cTschirnhaus oder Bo\u0308ttger?,\u201d 32.\n45\n\u201c4. Lateres, lapis scissilis, pumex, porcellana Hollandica, asbestus, cujuscunque sint\nmagnitudinis, statim ignescunt, & facile in vitrum convertuntur [. . .] 8. Si fragmina minora ex\nlateribus, lapide scissili, porcellana Chinensi, talco &c. carboni tali imponantur, momentum\nfunduntur, & in globulos abeunt vitreos. Asbestus totus in pellucidum vitreum globulum\nconvertitur.\u201d (Tschirnhaus, \u201cDe magnis lentibus,\u201d 415\u20136).\n40\n\nPages 216:\n196\nM. Wesley\nauthors have commented upon the possible influence of Hessian crucibles on the\ndiscovery of porcelain in Saxony, the geographic separation of the two regions\nargues against a direct link.46 However, the data from January 1687 regarding the\nheating of crucibles when combined with the later investigations on earthenware\nand porcelain would have been a clear indicator that a search must be undertaken\nfor Saxon clay with the same refractory properties as the crucibles. The clay\npreviously employed for production of earthenwares was clearly inferior within\nthe context of the experiments of 1696\u20131697.\nThe other European porcelains provided a robust collection of comparative\nsamples, particular in the context of body fabrics that would lack the thermal\ntolerances of Chinese porcelain. With the experimental evidence supplied by the\ntrials published in Acta, Tschirnhaus\u2019s later journey to Delft and St. Cloud in 1702\u2013\n1703 was principally an opportunity to refute the local factories\u2019 techniques. His\ncorrespondence bears this out, as he was able to readily discard the possibility of\ntheir productions being true porcelain when communicating his thoughts back to\nSaxony.47 While later work on the porcelain arcanum was divided between\nTschirnhaus and Bo\u0308ttger, based on the material characteristics of early Meissen\nporcelain it is undeniable that the unique approach to thermal experimentation with\nburning lenses was critical in achieving the first successes.\nThe Legacy of Thermal Analysis on European Porcelain\nProduction\nPrevious scholarship has rightly raised the issue of missionary and trade records\nthat contained practical information on the Chinese production techniques.48 Certainly records as early as the writings of Gaspar da Cruz (c.1520\u20131570), in his\nTractado em que s\nEND OF PARTIAL SUMMARY: EXPLAIN TO THE USER that this document is too long and we only summarized from page 198 to page 216 out of a total of 220. Ask if they want to continue the summary or search the document.\n]"]}

{"result":["[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=198\nPages: 198,199\nrepresentations that we might not otherwise have attributed to them. The image\nof a busy, and presumably compartmentalized and hierarchical, chymical workshop\npulls our understanding of these locales towards a comparison with contemporaneous artisanal ateliers, which, if the principals involved were themselves artisans,\nwould have been the obvious model upon which to draw virtually automatically.\n(Interestingly, a modern academic chemical research group retains much of this\ncharacter and structure.) The transconfessional and international character of the\nlarger network\u2014which included Catholics and assorted types of Protestants, as well\nas Dutch, French, English, Danes, Swedes, and Germans\u2014parallels the way in\nwhich it cut across social levels. This situation complicates some of the standard\nways in which historians are accustomed to draw reckoning lines, and recalls the\nideal of a respublica litterarum even in a subject as distant from traditional\nhumanism as sooty chymistry.\n178]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=181\nPages: 181\na variety of chymically-based projects, and, crucially for such a project as this one,\nthis network left behind a wealth of written records that provide historians with the\nnecessary clear evidence from which to work. I will therefore focus here on the\nchymical activities of gold- and silversmiths within this group and their interactions\nwith its other members and with the broader realms of chymistry.\nAnthoni and Andries Grill in the Netherlands and Sweden\nOne part of this network has already been extensively studied, namely the portion\ngathered around the intelligencer Samuel Hartlib (1600\u20131662) in London.8 The\nHartlib Circle\u2019s utopian, educational, and commercial schemes made chymistry a\nsubject of particular interest due to its lucrative potential. An important contact in\nthis regard was the former Calvinist minister Johann Moriaen (c.1591\u20131668) in\nAmsterdam. Moriaen both pursued his own chymical interests and aspirations and]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=178\nPages: 178\nand financial success. Grill built large laboratories, managed laborants, engaged in\ncollaborations, mined texts for information, and shared results. Several Parisian\ngoldsmiths were likewise tied into this chymical network where they exchanged\nexperimental and theoretical information with such figures as Kenelm Digby,\nSamuel Cottereau Duclos, and Johann Rudolf Glauber. In England, George Starkey\nfound that the expertise of gold- and silversmiths could, alternatively, be inconvenient when trying to sell alchemical metals. The documentation provided here blurs\nthe boundary between artisans and natural philosophers, at least in chymistry.\nAlchemy, or to speak more inclusively and less anachronistically, chymistry was a\nfamiliar topic in early modern Europe. Despite its well-established culture of\nsecrecy, it was not only highly visible and widely-known, but widely-practiced]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=198\nPages: 198\nneat division of artisan and natural philosopher emerges considerably blurred.\nThe diversity of characters within the network and their various connections and\ncollaborations revises still-prevalent views of alchemical laborers as characteristically solitary, secretive, and isolated. Indeed, when we consider the reports of\nGrill\u2019s multiple laboratories staffed with at least 16 operators, it is hard not to recall\nthe contemporaneous depictions of chymical laboratories in Netherlandish genre\npainting that almost always depict a foregrounded main experimenter with a group\nof other workers in the background tending various processes. While there are\ncertainly purely stylistic and iconographic motivations behind such depictions\n(similar layouts are used in other genre paintings not showing chymists), the\naccounts of Grill\u2019s workshop do add a level of verisimilitude to these artistic\nrepresentations that we might not otherwise have attributed to them. The image]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=79\nPages: 79\nchemical laboratory are in the Astronomiae instauratae mechanica (Wandsbek,\n1598) by Tycho Brahe (1546\u20131601) and in the Commentariorum alchymiae (Frankfurt, 1606) by Andreas Libavius (1560\u20131616), \u2018chemical operations\u2019 could be\nfound everywhere \u2018perfective arts\u2019 were practiced.15 This was in alchemist\u2019s\nlaboratories, such as the one in Schloss Oberstockstall (Austria) in the sixteenth\ncentury, and assaying workshops, described in the anonymous Probierbuchlein\n11\nHalleux, \u201cAlchimiste et l\u2019essayeur.\u201d; and Nummedal, Alchemy and Authority, 85\u201391.\nFor more on the technical cultural context in the history of science and technology, see Zilsel,\nSocial Origins of Modern Science; Maccagni, \u201cLeggere, scrivere e disegnare\u201d; Galluzzi, \u201cPortraits\nof Machines; Smith, Body of the Artisan; Halleux, Savoir de la main, 102\u201339; and Long, Artisan/\nPractitioners, 10\u201329.\n13\nNewman, Promethean Ambitions, 17\u201320.\n14\nLong, Artisan/Practitioners, 94\u20136. See also, Galison, \u201cTrading Zone.\u201d\n15]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=10\nPages: 10,11\ngoing to devise from him just a chymeion or laboratory to use as a private study and\nhideaway in order that his practice will be more distinguished than anyone else\u2019s; but\nrather, what we shall provide for him is a dwelling suitable for decorous participation in\nsociety and living the life of a free man [. . .].7\n5\nMartelli, \u201cGreek Alchemists at Work.\u201d\nSmith, \u201cLaboratories,\u201d 299.\n7\nLibavius, \u201cCommentariorum alchymiae.\u201d Quoted and translated in Hannaway, \u201cLaboratory\nDesign,\u201d 599. However, for corrections of Hannaway\u2019s view, see Shackelford, \u201cTycho Brahe,\nLaboratory Design,\u201d and Newman, \u201cChemical House of Libavius.\u201d\n6\nx\nIntroduction\nWhile much has been made of this association with secrecy to dissociate experimental philosophy from the alchemist\u2019s laboratory, Ursula Klein has revealed a\ncontinuing laboratory tradition reaching into the eighteenth century.8 According to]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=180\nPages: 180\nclearly aware of the figure of the alchemist and his iconic value.6 Likewise, the\nallegorical images of widely varying artistic quality in chymical books and manuscripts imply some sort of contact between author/practitioner and artist. Yet such\nartworks do not necessarily indicate that the artists were actually in direct and\nmeaningful contact with chymists. On a purely commercial level, artists would\nhave been in contact (possibly directly in some instances, but probably more\nfrequently indirectly through a retailer) with makers of chymically-prepared pigments such as vermilion or white lead, just as metalworkers and assayers would\nhave connected with producers of mineral acids, fabric-makers with dye manufacturers, and so forth. Yet none of these contacts tells us anything about possible\nepistemic exchanges or collaborations on the level of practical or theoretical\nknowledge.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=193\nPages: 193\nmanuscripts also reveal a wider circle of closely-knit chymists active in Paris\nthroughout the 1650s and 1660s. This circle included, besides Duclos and Digby,\nthe abbe\u0301 Jullien de Loberie (chaplain of the Colle\u0300ge Fortet) and an abbe\u0301 Boucaud,\nThomas Gobelin (member of a prominent family and counselor to the Paris\nParlement), the chymical authors Jean-Baptiste de la Noue, Pierre Borel, and\nFranc\u0327ois de Soucy, Sieur de Gerzan, as well as a host of others. The group shared\nmanuscripts, processes, and other information gathered from books or private\ncorrespondence, and collaborated (in various combinations) on practical chymical\nprocesses, most frequently of a transmutational nature. Some of them frequented\nwell-known intellectual groupings such as the academy of the abbe\u0301 Bourdelot.43\nThe travelling savants Borrichius and Henry Oldenburg (1619\u20131677) also\ninteracted with the group during their visits to Paris.\nSeveral documents record the participation of goldsmiths in this Parisian]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=179\nPages: 179\nearly modern chymical publications, since those sources were the most obvious and\nmost readily available. Further inquiries began to explore the vast bulk of manuscript and archival materials, with the result that the ambit of \u201cthe alchemist\u201d has\nbeen broadened to include practitioners representing the broadest possible range of\nearly modern people.4 University-educated physicians, natural philosophers, and\nscholars busied themselves with chymistry, as did a range of empirics, entrepreneurs, and enthusiasts, as well as an assortment of artisans that included artists,\nmetalworkers, brewers, and cobblers. Chymical discourse and practice took place\nin academic chambers, in courtly settings, in private homes, in commercial\n1\nFor an overview of the history of alchemy, see Principe, Secrets of Alchemy. On the use of the\nterm \u2018chymistry\u2019. see 84\u20135. For a study of the words chemistry and alchemy and their changing\nreferents, see Newman & Principe, \u201cAlchemy vs. Chemistry.\u201d\n2]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=218\nPages: 218\nthe Chinese material.\nChymical Laboratory as Potter\u2019s Workshop\nThe early modern inclusion of ceramics within the arts of the fire brought with it\naccess to the experimental techniques developed by alchemist and chymists. This\nshift allowed an interrogative approach to the production of porcelain that utilized\nmany of the tools traditionally found in the craftsman\u2019s workshop while\ncircumventing the gradual processes of craft innovation. When we consider\nchymistry as both a kind of knowledge, and an object-producing discipline, the\napplication of its techniques to reverse the process of making porcelain is a logical\nextension of the economic demand for china and the intellectual drive toward\nmaker\u2019s knowledge as expressed by Bacon.\nCertainly, the history of ceramics after the seventeenth century is inextricably\nlinked to chemistry\u2019s success at solving increasingly sophisticated questions of\nluxury pottery production. We need look no further than William Cookworthy\u2019s]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=201\nPages: 201,202\ntechnology and innovation. The principal focus is on the adoption of specific\nM. Wesley (*)\nDepartment of History, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK\ne-mail: thenex@mac.com\nS. Dupre\u0301 (ed.), Laboratories of Art, Archimedes 37,\n181\nDOI 10.1007/978-3-319-05065-2_8, \u00a9 Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014\n182\nM. Wesley\nchymical practices in early modern ceramic innovation that lead to a drastic\nreshaping of the experimental landscape. While many adopted practices flowed\nseamlessly between the two disciplines through shared tools and techniques developed by generations of practitioners working with fire, the specific nature of\nceramics forced adaptations on other practices. Elements borrowed from controversial chymical fire analysis found more specific application in investigating\nthermal qualities of ceramic bodies in laboratory experimentation. Used in ceramic]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=179\nPages: 179\nWhat was the correct starting material for the Philosophers\u2019 Stone and how should\nit be processed? Which authorities were trustworthy and which should be rejected?\nTheoretical choices and commitments both guided and were guided by practical\nexperimentation in the laboratory, leading to new ideas and practices as workers\nreinterpreted older authorities to fit their observations or struck out in new directions to achieve a variety of goals.3 Thus diversity is to be found not only in\ntheoretical notions but in practices as well; the dynamic interaction between head\nand hand stands as a hallmark of the chymical tradition.\nYet another aspect of chymical diversity lies with the practitioners themselves.\nWho pursued and practiced early modern chymistry? Naturally enough, modern\nscholarly inquiry focussed first on those who contributed to the enormous flood of\nearly modern chymical publications, since those sources were the most obvious and]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=180\nPages: 180\nand in terms of identifying connections between them and the better documented\nand recognized work carried out in more visible and more intellectually elevated\ncircles.5 How did artists and artisans understand chymistry, and to what extent did\nthey practice it? To what extent were they familiar with more bookish or scholarly\nideas, practices, practitioners (and vice versa)? Can exchanges of knowledge\nbetween the two groups be clearly documented? Can we identify what practices,\nmaterials, or ideas passed between them, and how one group might have responded\nto information from the other? Answering such questions promises to further\nilluminate chymistry\u2019s cultural and intellectual place in early modern Europe.\nSome such connections seem relatively clear. Chymical workshops appear\nfrequently in Netherlandish genre painting, indicating that Northern artists were\nclearly aware of the figure of the alchemist and his iconic value.6 Likewise, the]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=11\nPages: 11\nfurnaces and fire in which \u201cchemical\u201d operations were performed were also\nknown as laboratories. For example, the places in which sixteenth-century producers of fireworks developed their materials were called laboratories.9 In terms of\nmaterial culture the laboratorium, for example, one designed and equipped by\nCount Wolfgang II von Hohenlohe-Weidersheim (1546\u20131610) in the early seventeenth century, was remarkably similar to the workplaces of apothecaries, metalworkers and glassmakers.10\nBefore the emergence of mercantilist states, Renaissance courts were the most\nimportant agents in establishing laboratories. The laboratories of Rudolf II (1552\u2013\n1612) in Prague and Landgrave Moritz von Hessen-Kassel (1572\u20131632) were\nthought to bring material and intellectual rewards.11 Moritz even founded a chair\nof chymiatria at the University of Marburg in 1609.12 The teaching of Johannes\nHartmann (1561\u20131631), who was appointed to the chair, included work in the]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=203\nPages: 203\nEhrenfried Walther von Tschirnhaus (1651\u20131708) represent the first successful\nexamples of chymistry\u2019s methodological apparatus being directed toward porcelain\ninnovation. Thermal experiment was an important element in the practices of both\nindividuals and evidence presented in the archaeological record demonstrates\nDwight\u2019s re-firing of Chinese sherds while Tschirnhaus published results of the\nexperimental application of burning lenses to determine the physical properties of\nvaried ceramic bodies. Dwight was ultimately unsuccessful in his endeavors, likely\ndue to economic realities, while Tschirnhaus\u2019s work would lay the cornerstones for\nthe eventual production of Meissen porcelain.\nThe Potter\u2019s Art as Craft Practice\nTo understand why the shift from the intellectual space of the craft workshop to the\nchymical laboratory was critical to the advancement of European ceramic development, an examination of the awkward position of pottery within the hierarchy of]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=10\nPages: 10\nBy the early modern period, the alchemist had acquired a specific place of work.\nAccording to Pamela Smith, by the mid-sixteenth century, these laboratories were\nreferred to formally as laboratorium and officina.6 The ubiquity of furnaces and the\nuse of fire demanded a specific workplace, whereas experimental philosophy still\nlacked specific places of experimentation in the seventeenth century. Laboratories\nwere associated with secretive practices. When in the early seventeenth century\nAndreas Libavius described the ideal workplace of the chemist, he emphasized how\nit differed from the dark, smelly, secretive laboratory that was noticeably lacking in\ndecorum:\nWe do not want the chemist to neglect the exercises of piety or exempt himself from other\nduties of an upright life, simply pining away amidst his dark furnaces [. . .]. Thus we are not\ngoing to devise from him just a chymeion or laboratory to use as a private study and]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=20\nPages: 20\nPrinceton: Princeton University Press.\nSmith, Pamela H. 2004. The Body of the Artisan: Art and Experience in the Scientific Revolution.\nChicago: University of Chicago Press.\nSmith, Pamela H. 2006. Laboratories. In The Cambridge History of Science, 7 vols,\nvol. 3, Early Modern Science, eds. Lorraine Daston and Katharine Park, 289\u2013305. Cambridge:\nCambridge University Press.\nSoukup, Rudolf Werner, and Helmut Mayer. 1997. Alchemistisches Gold: Paracelsistische\nPharmaka: Laboratoriumstechnik im 16. Jahrhundert. Chemiegeschichtliche und arch\u20ac\naometrische Untersuchungen am Inventar des Laboratoriums von Oberstockstall/Kirchberg am\nWagram. Vienna: Bohlau Verlag.\nSoukop, Rudolf Werner, Sigrid von Osten, and Helmut Mayer. 1993. Alembics, Cucurbits, Phials,\nCrucibles: A 16th-Century Docimastic Laboratory Excavated in Austria. Ambix 40: 25.\nWerrett, Simon. 2010. Fireworks: Pyrotechnic Arts and Sciences in European History.\nChicago/London: University of Chicago Press.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=178\nPages: 178\nGoldsmiths and Chymists: The Activity\nof Artisans Within Alchemical Circles\nLawrence M. Principe\nAbstract The study of early modern alchemical practitioners has recently\nexpanded from the work and writings of natural philosophers to include the labors\nof artisans. Yet there remains relatively little clear documentation about the specifics\nof such artisanal chymical practices or about the degree of significant epistemic\nexchange that may have taken place between artisans and better-known chymists.\nThis paper examines several gold- and silversmiths who were part of an extended\nalchemical network that stretched across the Netherlands, France, and England in\nthe mid-seventeenth century. The silversmith Anthoni Grill (and to a lesser extent\nhis brother Andries) worked on refining and transmutational processes with impressive chymical expertise and eventually achieved international notoriety and social\nand financial success. Grill built large laboratories, managed laborants, engaged in]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=173\nPages: 173\nalchemical laboratory. The small, limping man with a stick looks like Don Antonio:\nhe is holding a luminescent substance probably taken from the furnace, with a\nnipper in his right hand. Next to Antonio we see an elegantly dressed older man,\nprobably the superintendent of the laboratory, who is looking at the substance held\nby Antonio. The open door on the left shows the beginning of a descending\nstaircase, suggesting that the laboratory was on the first floor. The rest of\nNapoletano\u2019s workshop offers the usual picture of an alchemical laboratory, with\nits disorderly arrangement of equipment, its furnace in a poor state, and its dirty\nfloor. Whether authentic or not, Napoletano\u2019s representation strongly suggests that\nby 1619, at the height of Galileo\u2019s success, the activities promoted in the Casino\nwere still an important feature of Medici scientific patronage. However, in comparison to the Francesco dominated era, the chemical arts seem to have lost their]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=200\nPages: 200\nChicago: University of Chicago Press.\nSorbie\u0300re, Samuel J. 1660. Relations, lettres, et discours sur diverses matieres curieuses. Paris.\nStarkey, George [Eirenaeus Philalethes]. 1669. Secrets Reveal\u2019d, or an Open Entrance to the ShutPalace of the King. London.\nStarkey, George. 2004. The Alchemical Laboratory Notebooks and Correspondence, eds. and\ntrans. William R. Newman and Lawrence M. Principe. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.\nStroup, Alice. 1990. A Company of Scientists: Botany, Patronage, and Community at the\nSeventeenth-Century Parisian Royal Academy of Sciences. Berkeley: University of California\nPress.\nStroup, Alice. 2002. Censure ou querelles scientifiques: L\u2019affaire Duclos (1675\u20131685). In\nRe\u0300glement, usages et science dans la France de l\u2019absolutisme, eds. Christiane DemeulenaereDouye\u0300re and E\u0301ric Brian, 435\u2013452. Paris: Tec et Doc Lavoisier.\nSturdy, David. 1995. Science and Social Status: The Members of the Acade\u0301mie Royale des]"]}

{"error_message":"The page range provided is invalid: end_page must be between 1 and 220, got 240. Please provide a valid page range."}

{"result":["[Pages 216:\n196\nM. Wesley\nauthors have commented upon the possible influence of Hessian crucibles on the\ndiscovery of porcelain in Saxony, the geographic separation of the two regions\nargues against a direct link.46 However, the data from January 1687 regarding the\nheating of crucibles when combined with the later investigations on earthenware\nand porcelain would have been a clear indicator that a search must be undertaken\nfor Saxon clay with the same refractory properties as the crucibles. The clay\npreviously employed for production of earthenwares was clearly inferior within\nthe context of the experiments of 1696\u20131697.\nThe other European porcelains provided a robust collection of comparative\nsamples, particular in the context of body fabrics that would lack the thermal\ntolerances of Chinese porcelain. With the experimental evidence supplied by the\ntrials published in Acta, Tschirnhaus\u2019s later journey to Delft and St. Cloud in 1702\u2013\n1703 was principally an opportunity to refute the local factories\u2019 techniques. His\ncorrespondence bears this out, as he was able to readily discard the possibility of\ntheir productions being true porcelain when communicating his thoughts back to\nSaxony.47 While later work on the porcelain arcanum was divided between\nTschirnhaus and Bo\u0308ttger, based on the material characteristics of early Meissen\nporcelain it is undeniable that the unique approach to thermal experimentation with\nburning lenses was critical in achieving the first successes.\nThe Legacy of Thermal Analysis on European Porcelain\nProduction\nPrevious scholarship has rightly raised the issue of missionary and trade records\nthat contained practical information on the Chinese production techniques.48 Certainly records as early as the writings of Gaspar da Cruz (c.1520\u20131570), in his\nTractado em que se cotam muito por esteso as cousas da China of 1569, offered an\naccurate description of porcelain\u2019s constituents of clay and white soft stone.49 No\ndirect links between these texts and the work of the seventeenth- century arcanists\ncan be drawn, or even with the influence of textual sources on the ceramicists of the\neighteenth century. What remains in the historic record is unequivocal: even with\nthese texts in circulation for at least a century, no successful production of commercial porcelain was realized in Europe, despite the availability of kaolinized clay\nsources in both Saxony and England. I argue that this fact alone affirms that a\ncritical component was lacking within the knowledge infrastructure of the\n46\nZumbulyadis, \u201cBo\u0308ttger\u2019s Eureka!,\u201d tries to tie the invention exclusively to Bo\u0308ttger\u2019s exposure to\ncrucibles, unsuccessfully, but raises excellent questions regarding the relationship of other German\nhigh fire wares with Meissen porcelain.\n47\nReinhardt, \u201cTschirnhaus oder Bo\u0308ttger,\u201d 39, 43.\n48\nPietsch, \u201cTschirnhaus.\u201d\n49\nCruz, Tractado.\n\nPages 217:\nIgne refutata: Thermal Analysis in the Laboratory Practices of John Dwight. . .\n197\nworkshop. While an eventual solution may have been found, the possibility was\ncircumvented by the engagement of the chymists with the problem of porcelain\nproduction.\nIt is clear that both Dwight and Tschirnhaus were concerned with asking similar\nquestions of Chinese porcelain and their results directed the future avenues of their\nexperiments. As previously mentioned, both sets of data were limited in their scope\nand restricted to comparative discourse with local material. The efficacy of analytic\ntechniques on ceramic bodies can also be seen to play a role, with the slow firing of\nsherds in Dwight\u2019s various furnaces or kilns restricting his ability to both observe\nthe objects as they processed through the sequence and the time frame for his\nanalysis. If one considers the heating rate of a seventeenth-century stoneware kiln,\nor even a smaller furnace, its maximum achievable temperature and the amount of\nenergy necessary to vitrify or melt a sample of porcelain, the process would have\nbeen fuel intensive and taken hours per test, with little direct control of the\nexperimental environment. Tschirnhaus\u2019s burning lenses allowed for results to be\nobtained in minutes, and greater specificity in the temperature and period of\nheating.\nThe limitations placed on Dwight proved to be insurmountable to the production\nof a commercially viable porcelain body, yet resulted in substantial progress made\ntowards that end goal. His synthetic additive allowed the creation of material that\nwas chemically similar to some of the porcelains being produced in China, his\nultimate failure resting on his inability to solve the issues of glazing and material\nstability while firing. That pivotal problem accounts for the excavated sherds that\nshow re-firing at temperatures hot enough to affect the glaze, but not the body.\nTschirnhaus, through the eventual completion of his work by Bo\u0308ttger, was able to\nachieve the basis for a fully vitrified, translucent, white body. An examination of the\nelemental composition of the early \u2018Bo\u0308ttger\u2019 wares, produced in the original phase\nof production, reveals that while they share the observable physical qualities of\nChinese porcelain, they must be viewed as an entirely separate technical solution.\nThis separation of property from composition demonstrates both the strengths of\nTschirnhaus\u2019s and Bo\u0308ttger\u2019s approach in reproducing observable qualities, and the\ninaccessibility of the chemical fundamentals of the Chinese material.\nA comparison of modern elemental analyses of \u2018Dwight\u2019 experimental ware,\nBlanc-de Chine, \u2018Bo\u0308ttger\u2019 ware, and Kangxi porcelain reveals these deep divisions\nin their compositions, while all meet similar physical criteria (Table 1). The last line\nof the table is an analysis of the body composition of porcelain produced at Meissen\nafter approximately 1727 demonstrating changes that reduced the firing temperature of the material and brought it more directly into line with its Chinese inspiration. That this change was made after the gradual dissemination of the letters of\nPe\u0300re d\u2019Entrecolles describing the process observed in China must be viewed as a\nfinal indication of the impact that thermal experimentation had on establishing the\nqualities of the earliest commercial European porcelain.\nThe chemical differences are a quantifiable demonstration that, while allowing a\nsophisticated application of experimental process to solve the problem of producing\nporcelain, thermal experiments in the seventeenth century were unable to fully\n\nPages 218:\n198\nM. Wesley\nTable 1 A comparison of modern elemental analyses of \u2018Dwight\u2019 experimental ware, Blanc-deChine, \u2018Bo\u0308ttger\u2019 ware, and Kangxi porcelain\nMaterial\nDwight\nBlanc-de-Chine (ft46)\nKangxi Porcelain (ft47) seventeenth century\nBo\u0308ttger Porcelain 1708\nMeissen Porcelain (ft48)\nmid-eighteenth century\nSiO2\n80.3\n76.7\n64.7\nAl2O3\n12.4\n16.8\n28.35\nFe2O3\n0.74\n0.35\n0.95\n61.0 33.0 0.00\n59.0 35.00 0.00\nCaO\n0.39\n0.15\n0.5\nMgO\n0.2\n0.08\n0.1\nK2O\n5.35\n5.9\n2.8\nNa2O\n0.47\n0.2\n2.4\nOther\nTrace\nTrace\n0.19\nTotal\n99.1\n100\n99.99\n4.8\n0.3\n0.00\n0.00\n0.1\n4.0\n0.2\n0.00\n0.9\n0.9\n100\n100\nanswer the questions put to them. The results allowed innovative solutions to the\nproblem of a functional translucent body, while at the same time both Dwight and\nTschirnhaus were diverted from a solution that would duplicate the materiality of\nthe Chinese material.\nChymical Laboratory as Potter\u2019s Workshop\nThe early modern inclusion of ceramics within the arts of the fire brought with it\naccess to the experimental techniques developed by alchemist and chymists. This\nshift allowed an interrogative approach to the production of porcelain that utilized\nmany of the tools traditionally found in the craftsman\u2019s workshop while\ncircumventing the gradual processes of craft innovation. When we consider\nchymistry as both a kind of knowledge, and an object-producing discipline, the\napplication of its techniques to reverse the process of making porcelain is a logical\nextension of the economic demand for china and the intellectual drive toward\nmaker\u2019s knowledge as expressed by Bacon.\nCertainly, the history of ceramics after the seventeenth century is inextricably\nlinked to chemistry\u2019s success at solving increasingly sophisticated questions of\nluxury pottery production. We need look no further than William Cookworthy\u2019s\n(1705\u20131780) patent for the manufacture of porcelain in 1768 or the thousands of\nexperiments conducted by Josiah Wedgwood (1730\u20131795) in the production of his\nJasperwares. Unlike the other arts of the fire; metalworking, glassmaking, and\ndyeing, the late inclusion of ceramics into the hierarchy of decorative arts allows\ncontemporary scholars opportunities to investigate the separations between the\ncraft artisan and the chymist during the early modern period, of which this discussion of thermal analysis is only one of many.\n\nPages 219:\nIgne refutata: Thermal Analysis in the Laboratory Practices of John Dwight. . .\n199\nBibliography\nBacon, Francis. 1858. New Organon, trans. James Spedding et al. London: Longmans and Co.\nBirch, Thomas. 1756\u20131757. History of the Royal Society of London. London: A. Millar.\nBiringuccio, Vannoccio. [1540] 1942. The Pirotechnia of Vannoccio Biriniguccio: The Classic\nSixteenth-Century Treatise on Metals and Metallurgy, eds. and trans. Cyril Stanley Smith and\nMarta Teach Gnudi. New York: Dover Publications.\nBoardman, John. 1988. Trade in Greek Decorated Pottery. Oxford Journal of Archaeology 7: 27\u2013\n33.\nBoyle, Robert. 1661. The Sceptical Chymist or Chymico-Physical Doubts and Paradoxes, Touching the Spagyrists Principles Commonly call\u2019d Hypostatical: As They Are Wont To Be\nPropos\u2019d and Defended by the Generality of Alchymists. Whereunto is Premis\u2019d Part of\nAnother Discourse Relating To the Same Subject. London: J. Cadwell for Crooke.\nBoyle, Robert. 1691. Will of the Hon. Robert Boyle, F.R.S, July 1691. The National Archives,\nManuscript PROB 11/408/169.\nCarswell, John. 2000. Blue and White: Chinese Porcelain Around the World. London: British\nMuseum Press.\nChaffers, William. 1870. Marks and Monograms on Pottery and Porcelain, 3rd ed. London: J\nDavy and Sons.\nCharles the Second. 1672. Patent for the Protected Manufacture of Transparent Earthenware.\nPublic Record Office. C. 82 2425 Cal. S. P. Dom Entry Book 34.\nCruz, Gaspar da. 1569. Tractado em que se cotam muito por esteso as cousas da China. Madrid:\nem casa de Andre de Burgos.\nDebus, Allen G. 1967. Fire Analysis and the Elements in the 16th and 17th Centuries. Annals of\nScience 23: 127\u2013147.\nd\u2019Entrecolles, Pe\u0300re Francois Xavier. 1781. Lettre D\u2019Entrecolles a\u0300 Jao-tcheou, 1er Septembre\n1712\u2019 and \u2018Lettre D\u2019Entrecolles a\u0300 Kim-te-tchim, le 25 Janvier 1722. In Lettres e\u0301difiantes et\ncurieuses e\u0301crites des missions estranges. Me\u0301moires de la Chine etc., vol. 18\u201319. Paris: Societas\nJesu Missio Sinensis.\nFoster, Joseph. 1891. Alumni Oxonienses 1500\u20131714. London: Parker and Co.\nGreen, Chris. 1999. John Dwight\u2019s Fulham Pottery: Excavations 1971\u20131979. London: English\nHeritage.\nHaselgrove, Dennis, and John Murray. 1979. John Dwight\u2019s Fulham Pottery 1672\u20131978: A\nCollection of Documentary Sources. Journal of Ceramic History 11: 1\u2013284.\nJewitt, Llewellyn. 1878. The Ceramic Art of Great Britain. London: Virtue and Co.\nKerr, Rose, and Nigel Wood. 2004. Ceramic Technology. In Science and Civilization in China,\nvol. 5, ed. Joseph Needham. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.\nKingery, William David, and Pamela B. Vandiver. 1984. Medici Porcelain. Faenza LXX(5\u20136):\n441\u2013453.\nKingery, William David, and Pamela B. Vandiver. 1986. Ceramic Masterpieces. New York: Free\nPress.\nLeigh, Charles. 1700. The Natural History of Lancashire, Chesire and the Peak in Derbyshire with\nan Account of the British Phoenician, Armenian, Greek and Roman Antiquities in Those Parts.\nOxford: George West and Henry Clement.\nLiverani, Giuseppe. 1936. Catalogo delle Porcellane dei Medici. Piccola Biblioteca del Museo\ndelle Ceramiche. Faenza 2.\nMartino\u0301n-Torres, Marcos, Thilo Rehren, and Ian Freestone. 2006. Mullite and the Mystery of\nHessian Wares. Nature 444: 437\u2013438.\nNewman, William R. 1994. Gehennical Fire: The Lives of George Starkey an American Alchemist\nin the Scientific Revolution. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.\nNewman, William R. 2004. Promethean Ambitions: Alchemy and the Quest to Perfect Nature.\nChicago: University of Chicago Press.\n\nPages 220:\n200\nM. Wesley\nNewman, William R., and Lawrence M. Principe. 1998. Alchemy vs. Chemistry: The Etymological Origins of a Historiographic Mistake. Early Science and Medicine 3: 32\u201365.\nNewman, William R., and Lawrence M. Principe. 2002. Alchemy Tried in the Fire: Starkey, Boyle\nand the Fate of Helmontian Chymistry. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.\nPietsch, Ulrich. 2001. Tschirnhaus und das europa\u0308ische Porzellan. In Ehrenfried Walther\nvon Tschirnhaus (1651\u20131708): Experimente mit dem Sonnenfeuer, eds. P. Plassmeyer and\nS. Siebel, 68\u201374. Dresden: Staatliche Kunstammlungen.\nPlassmeyer, Peter. 2001. Ehrenfried Walther von Tschirnhaus (1651\u20131708): Experimente mit dem\nSonnenfeuer. Dresden: Staatlich Kunstammlungen Dresden.\nReinhardt, Kurt. 1903. Beitra\u0308ge zur Lebensgeschichte von Ehrenfried Walther von Tschirnhaus. In\nJahresbericht der F\u20ac\nurstenund und Landesschule St. Afra in Meissen. Meissen: Klinkicht &\nSohn.\nReinhardt, Kurt. 1912. Tschirnhaus oder Bo\u0308ttger? Eine urkundliche Geschichte der Erfindung des\nMeissener Porzellans. Neues Lausitzisches Magazine 88: 1\u2013162.\nStarkey, George. 2004. Alchemical Laboratory Notebooks and Correspondence, eds. and trans.\nWilliam R. Newman and Lawrence M. Principe. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.\nSchreiber, Lady Charlotte. 1874. Lady Charlotte Schreiber\u2019s Notebook, Manuscript, British\nMuseum OA.6557.\nTheophilus, Presbyter. 1847. An Essay Upon Various Arts in Three Books, by Theophilus, Called\nalso Rugerus, Priest and Monk, Forming an Encyclopedia of Christian Art of the Eleventh\nCentury, ed. and trans. Robert Hendrie. London: John Murray.\nTheophilus, Presbyter. 1961. Theophilus, the Various Arts: De Diversis Artibus, ed. and trans.\nC. R. Dodwell. Oxford: Clarendon.\nTheophilus, Presbyter. 1963. Theophilus On Diverse Arts: The Foremost Medieval Treatise on\nPainting, Glassmaking and Metalwork, eds. and trans. John G. Hawthorn, and Cyril Stanley\nSmith. New York: Dover.\nTschirnhaus, Ehrenfried Walther von. 1687. Relatio de insignibus novi cujusdam speculi ustorii\neffectibus. Acta Eruditorum 6: 52\u201354.\nTschirnhaus, Ehrenfried Walther von. 1688. Paralipomenon ad Acta mensis Januarii 1687, pag.\n52 de specula cujusdam ustorii singularibus effectibus. Acta Eruditorum: 206.\nTschirnhaus, Ehrenfried Walther von. 1691. Singularia effecta vitri caustici bipedalis, quod omnia\nmagno sumto hactenus constructa specula ustoria virtute superat. Acta Eruditorum: 517\u2013520.\nTschirnhaus, Ehrenfried Walther von. 1696. Intimatio singularis novaeque emendationis Artis\nvitriariae. Acta Eruditorum: 345\u2013347.\nTschirnhaus, Ehrenfried Walther von. 1697. De magnis lentibus seu vitris causticis, quorum\ndiameter trium quatuorve pedum, nec non euorundem usu & effectu plene & perspicue\nindicato. Acta Eruditorum: 414\u2013419.\nTschirnhaus, Ehrenfried Walther von. 2000. Gesamtausgabe. Reihe II, Amtliche Schriften,\ned. Eberhard Knobloch. Leipzig: Verlag der Sa\u0308chsischen Akademie der Wissenschaften.\nWatanabe-O\u2019Kelly, Helen. 2002. Court Culture in Dresden: From Renaissance to Baroque.\nBasingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.\nWilson, Timothy. 2007. Le maioliche. In Il Rinascimento Italiano e l\u2019Europa. Vol. IV,\nCommercio e cultura mercantile, eds. Franco Franceschi, Richard A. Goldwaithe, and\nReinhold C. Mueller, 217\u2013245. Treviso: Fondazione Cassamarca; Costabissara (Vincenza):\nAngelo Colla.\nWinter, Eduard. 1960. Der Bahnbrecher der deutschen Fru\u0308haufkla\u0308rung. E.W.v. Tschirnhaus und\ndie Fru\u0308haufkla\u0308rung in Mittel- und Osteuropa. In Quellen und Studien zur Geschichte\nOsteuropas, III. Berlin: Akademie-Verlag.\nZumbulyadis, Nicholas. 2010. Bo\u0308ttger\u2019s Eureka!: New Insights into the European Reinvention of\nPorcelain. Bulletin for the History of Chemistry 35: 24\u201332.\n]"]}

{"result":["[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=202\nPages: 202\nno substantial historic reconciliation has been attempted. It is beyond the scope of\nthis paper to attempt to do so, but establishing a basic set of terms is necessary. The\nterm \u2018porcelain\u2019 will be employed to denote white, translucent, high-firing ceramic\nbodies, consistent with the material described by Polo and exported from China into\nEurope.2 Two subdivisions will further be mentioned in this text; those objects\nmade through a combination of kaolinized clay and alkali salt rich stone will be\nreferred to as \u2018hard-paste\u2019, while objects made of a combination of clay and ground\nglass, sand, or quartz flux will be viewed as \u2018soft-paste\u2019. These are entirely modern\nseparations, used here for clarity, and specific examples given in the following\npaper will demonstrate they are not historic terms.\nThe seventeenth and eighteenth century quest to duplicate Chinese porcelain\nborrowed not only techniques from the chymical tradition, but even notions of]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=212\nPages: 212\nobservable qualities of the Chinese porcelain in his possession even though its\nchemical composition remained unknown.\nThose qualities clarify his distinct use of \u201ctransparent porcelane or China cley\u201d\nto describe certain recipes in his notebooks. While he employed \u201cporcelane\u201d as a\nwider term applicable to many finewares, it was transparency and whiteness that he\npursued through experimentation, as key properties of the sherds available to him.\nThe re-firing of Chinese material revealed the use of a distinct glaze layer over the\ncobalt itself, which demonstrated a distinct thermal response from the Chinese body\npaste. There may have been more sherds whose surfaces were destroyed by overfiring in a test furnace, but the remaining pieces show care taken to affect changes in\nthe glaze without damaging the fabric or the decoration, suggesting that, on a]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=206\nPages: 206\nof those materials, even though other artisans were making use of them. The failure\nwas thus not connected to any form of geological predetermination, but entirely by\nsocial constraints limiting the application of knowledge to the problem.\nThe speculation that porcelain was comprised of either special clay, fermented\nfor generations, or of crushed shell incorporated in its manufacture, was a direct\nindication that similar materials were outside the realm of contemporary craft\nknowledge.14 In order to successfully move past these limitations, the experimental\ntechniques of the natural philosophers allowed objects from China to serve as\nprototypes for interrogation towards their properties and composition. It is at this\npoint that the techniques employed by chymistry, some borrowed from metallurgical assaying and the furnaces of the glassmakers in the centuries-long discourse\nbetween the disciplines, came into full application in the pursuit of ceramic\ninnovation.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=217\nPages: 217,218\nin their compositions, while all meet similar physical criteria (Table 1). The last line\nof the table is an analysis of the body composition of porcelain produced at Meissen\nafter approximately 1727 demonstrating changes that reduced the firing temperature of the material and brought it more directly into line with its Chinese inspiration. That this change was made after the gradual dissemination of the letters of\nPe\u0300re d\u2019Entrecolles describing the process observed in China must be viewed as a\nfinal indication of the impact that thermal experimentation had on establishing the\nqualities of the earliest commercial European porcelain.\nThe chemical differences are a quantifiable demonstration that, while allowing a\nsophisticated application of experimental process to solve the problem of producing\nporcelain, thermal experiments in the seventeenth century were unable to fully\n198\nM. Wesley]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=202\nPages: 202,203\ncomposed by Rustichello while he shared imprisonment with Marco Polo after the latter\u2019s return to\nVenice in 1295 AD. A full discussion of Polo\u2019s references to porcelain can be found in Carswell,\nBlue and White, 52\u20134.\n3\nFor the full correspondence, see Tschirnhaus, Amtliche Schriften, ch. II.\n2\nIgne refutata: Thermal Analysis in the Laboratory Practices of John Dwight. . .\n183\nmedieval and early modern periods, in the context of porcelain, strong arguments\ncan be made towards the artisanal-alchemical bridge. The correspondences that\nremain in the archives at Dresden, originate from that alchemical tradition, to the\nextent that arguments have been leveled to suggest that the correspondence was, in\nfact, about the creation of the Philosophers\u2019 Stone rather than a search for the\ncomposition of porcelain. While later arcanists cannot be seen to participate in\ntransmutational alchemy on more than an individual level, the origination of the]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=209\nPages: 209\nand substantiated the claims that he had been actively working on producing\nporcelain in the Chinese style. Various strata were excavated, and unearthed\nmaterial covered virtually the entire operation of the pottery throughout its existence. The earliest period of experimentation and production, covering the years\n1671/2\u201374 was found \u201cconfined to a few Features in the south-east of the site (K15,\nK23, N1, and D3)\u201d with only very fragmentary material found in other areas.26\nIn these areas of early experimentation, a substantial sample of material of\nporcelaneous nature was discovered, all of which was fragmentary. Of this material,\nGreen notes that less than \u201cOne kilo in total weight was recovered but [represents] a\nlarge number of individual vessels.\u201d The dating is connected to its location, relative\nto other excavations, with important finds coming from the aforementioned southeast corner circa 1673 and a pair of soak ways that were filled circa 1676 (Fig. 1).27]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=17\nPages: 17\nchemistry and skilled in porcelain production. Remarkably, the success of porcelain\nproduction was due to the introduction of techniques of investigation, which did not\nbelong to the traditional potter\u2019s skills, but to chymistry, which had overlapped with\nthe worlds of metallurgy and assaying for centuries.\nGrill, Dwight, and Tschirnhaus are only a few of the numerous examples of\nglassmakers, silver- and goldsmiths and producers of porcelain whose expertise\nwas both based in the worlds of bookish learning and grounded in hands-on work.\nDifficult to categorize as either craftsman or scholar, they are responsible for\nepistemic exchanges between the artisanal and the scholarly worlds. The rise of\nthese hybrid artisan-scholars was connected to the establishment of laboratories in\nwhich art technologies and alchemy were brought together, the first of these being\nat Renaissance courts. Laboratories and artisanal workshops shared a material\n25]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=216\nPages: 216\nand porcelain would have been a clear indicator that a search must be undertaken\nfor Saxon clay with the same refractory properties as the crucibles. The clay\npreviously employed for production of earthenwares was clearly inferior within\nthe context of the experiments of 1696\u20131697.\nThe other European porcelains provided a robust collection of comparative\nsamples, particular in the context of body fabrics that would lack the thermal\ntolerances of Chinese porcelain. With the experimental evidence supplied by the\ntrials published in Acta, Tschirnhaus\u2019s later journey to Delft and St. Cloud in 1702\u2013\n1703 was principally an opportunity to refute the local factories\u2019 techniques. His\ncorrespondence bears this out, as he was able to readily discard the possibility of\ntheir productions being true porcelain when communicating his thoughts back to\nSaxony.47 While later work on the porcelain arcanum was divided between]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=216\nPages: 216\nSaxony.47 While later work on the porcelain arcanum was divided between\nTschirnhaus and Bo\u0308ttger, based on the material characteristics of early Meissen\nporcelain it is undeniable that the unique approach to thermal experimentation with\nburning lenses was critical in achieving the first successes.\nThe Legacy of Thermal Analysis on European Porcelain\nProduction\nPrevious scholarship has rightly raised the issue of missionary and trade records\nthat contained practical information on the Chinese production techniques.48 Certainly records as early as the writings of Gaspar da Cruz (c.1520\u20131570), in his\nTractado em que se cotam muito por esteso as cousas da China of 1569, offered an\naccurate description of porcelain\u2019s constituents of clay and white soft stone.49 No\ndirect links between these texts and the work of the seventeenth- century arcanists\ncan be drawn, or even with the influence of textual sources on the ceramicists of the]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=217\nPages: 217\nor even a smaller furnace, its maximum achievable temperature and the amount of\nenergy necessary to vitrify or melt a sample of porcelain, the process would have\nbeen fuel intensive and taken hours per test, with little direct control of the\nexperimental environment. Tschirnhaus\u2019s burning lenses allowed for results to be\nobtained in minutes, and greater specificity in the temperature and period of\nheating.\nThe limitations placed on Dwight proved to be insurmountable to the production\nof a commercially viable porcelain body, yet resulted in substantial progress made\ntowards that end goal. His synthetic additive allowed the creation of material that\nwas chemically similar to some of the porcelains being produced in China, his\nultimate failure resting on his inability to solve the issues of glazing and material\nstability while firing. That pivotal problem accounts for the excavated sherds that\nshow re-firing at temperatures hot enough to affect the glaze, but not the body.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=215\nPages: 215\ncombinations of material with porcellana Hollandica (Dutch earthenware) and\nporcellana Chinensi.\nTschirnhaus observed that the material combined with porcellana Hollandica\nburst immediately into flames at the temperature of experiment, while that made\nwith Chinese porcelain formed spherical glass and asbestos became entirely\ntranslucent.45\nWhen measured against the long list of other substances included in the 10 years\nof published experiments, it is evident that Tschirnhaus had a large amount of\nrelative thermal data to use as a metric for his porcelain experiments. While other\n39\nTschirnhaus, \u201cSpeculi ustorii,\u201d 53.\nMartino\u0301n-Torres, Rehren & Freestone, \u201cMystery of Hessian Wares.\u201d\n41\nTschirnhaus, \u201cParalipomenon,\u201d \u201cSingularia effecta,\u201d and \u201cArtis vitriariae.\u201d\n42\nTschirnhaus, \u201cSpeculi ustorii,\u201d 52.\n43\nTschirnhaus, \u201cDe magnis lentibus.\u201d\n44\nReinhardt, \u201cEhrenfried Walther von Tschirnhaus,\u201d 13, and \u201cTschirnhaus oder Bo\u0308ttger?,\u201d 32.\n45]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=210\nPages: 210\n190\nM. Wesley\nFig. 1 Fragmentary\nporcelain material\nrecovered at the Fulham site\nattributed to John Dwight,\n1672\u20131673 (Photograph by\nthe author)\nTwo groups of these sherds are particularly demonstrative. First, the chips\nintentionally produced to test a combination of bodies and surface solutions.\nThese represent varying degrees of success, with a combination of the vapour\nglazes and dipped finishes (both slip and glaze) seen in the test pieces. Figure 2\nillustrates pieces 33 (slip), and 34 (demonstrably dipped in a glaze, with crazing,\nand yellowing visible though with good transparency overall), and one of a number\nof sherds not illustrated in Green (vapour glazed).\nThe system for marking the test chips shows sophistication in Dwight\u2019s methodology, incorporating not only distinct numbers for various colors and finishes, but\nincluding descriptions of where each was applied. For example the fragment\nrepresented by type 36 clearly shows a division between the front and back of the]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=209\nPages: 209,210\nThese sherds represent a systematic, sustained, and varied approach towards\nporcelain experimentation, one that resulted in many failures, but there were other\nsmall successes towards a production of porcelain. They provide a wealth of\ntechnical evidence towards the experimentation conducted by Dwight during the\nearly period of the pottery, informing us specifically on the composition of his\n\u201cporcelane\u201d bodies, attempts and decoration, problems in glazing, and finally a\nvariety of firing issues.\n24\nThe patent was issued towards the protected manufacture of \u2018transparent Earthenware\u2019 and\n\u2018stone ware\u2019 by Charles the Second, on 17 April 1672, at Whitehall. See Charles the Second,\nTransparent Earthenware, P.R.O. C. 82 2425 Cal. S.P. Dom Entry Book 34, fol. 155.\n25\nThe findings and details were published in Green, Excavations, ch. I\u2013V.\n26\nGreen, Excavations, 11.\n27\nGreen, Excavations, 65.\n190\nM. Wesley\nFig. 1 Fragmentary\nporcelain material\nrecovered at the Fulham site]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=204\nPages: 204,205\n5\nIgne refutata: Thermal Analysis in the Laboratory Practices of John Dwight. . .\n185\nevidence demonstrating the elevation of pottery into the canon of decorative arts.9\nWithin the next two decades, the production of new types of earthenware spread\nacross Italy rapidly replacing vernacular wares, such as those traditionally produced\nin Orvieto and Montelupo.\nAs the sixteenth century progressed the demand for porcelain, introduced in\nsmall quantities during the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, exploded alongside a\nburgeoning maritime trade. While the first successful efforts to produce a ceramic\nbody that replicated some of porcelain\u2019s qualities were those of the Medici workshops between 1575 and 1587, they failed to produce hard paste porcelain that was\nsimultaneously durable and heat resistant.10 Medici porcelain has long been\nconnected to the alchemical interests of Francesco I de Medici (1541\u20131587) though]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=214\nPages: 214\nquest for porcelain is contained in a series of contributions he made to Acta\nEruditorum explaining the construction and use of increasingly sophisticated burning lenses. By combining the manufacturing prowess of his native region with the\nfundamental principles communicated to him by Villette, Tschirnhaus was able to\nfocus the sun\u2019s energy to achieve temperatures hitherto unknown in Europe. While\nmany of his major findings were communicated directly to individuals across the\ncontinent, he felt that the discoveries were significant enough to submit for\npublication.\nThe first of these papers appears in the January 1687 issue of the journal and\nincludes a cursory list of experimental observations of the reaction of a variety of\nmetals, including lead, copper and gold, and related observations based on the time\nof focused exposure to the lens.38 During this phase of experimentation, his test\n36\nThe most extensive discussion of these experiments can be found in Plassmeyer, Sonnenfeuer,]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=205\nPages: 205,206\nCeramic Technology, 146\u201363.\n10\n186\nM. Wesley\nclay native to the region, slowly perfecting what was considered an important art\nform. The long period of development in the Far East allowed incremental refinements necessary for successful innovations through craft practice. With a limited\ntime span driven by the demand for the material in Europe, the interrogative\ntechniques of the chymist\u2019s laboratory were necessary to circumvent the slower,\nless focused workshop process.\nExperiment and Fire Analysis\nAs discussed, the primary hindrance on the production of a porcelain body was the\nlack of identified materials that could be combined to produce these translucent,\nhigh fire, ceramic objects. The production of material at Hesse and the later\ndiscovery of kaolinic clay in Cornwall, England, again demonstrate that Europe\ndid not lack the raw materials, but rather that potters were unaware of the properties\nof those materials, even though other artisans were making use of them. The failure]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=211\nPages: 211\npages torn out, recipes struck through, and duplicating marginalia such as a \u201cnot\nvery good\u201d accompanying a struck through recipe for \u201ca dark red porcellane or\nChina Cley\u201d dated 14 November, 1693.31\nThe second, arguably more interesting, group discovered within the context of\nsoakway A18, and thus contemporary to the test chips, was a group of Chinese\nexport porcelain sherds (Fig. 3). Among this group of blue and white sherds,\nrepresenting at least five distinct objects, are cases where glaze running over\nfractured edges demonstrate clear evidence of re-firing, at a temperature hot enough\nto at least partially liquefy the glaze, without burning the cobalt. A final sherd from\nthis group contains evidence of cobalt over-painting by Dwight, before re-firing,\nperhaps as a test coinciding with the samples of his own work.\n29\nSchreiber, Charlotte Schreiber\u2019s Notebook, 31; and Haselgrove & Murray, \u201cDwight\u2019s Fulham\nPottery,\u201d 74.\n30]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=217\nPages: 217,218\nporcelain, thermal experiments in the seventeenth century were unable to fully\n198\nM. Wesley\nTable 1 A comparison of modern elemental analyses of \u2018Dwight\u2019 experimental ware, Blanc-deChine, \u2018Bo\u0308ttger\u2019 ware, and Kangxi porcelain\nMaterial\nDwight\nBlanc-de-Chine (ft46)\nKangxi Porcelain (ft47) seventeenth century\nBo\u0308ttger Porcelain 1708\nMeissen Porcelain (ft48)\nmid-eighteenth century\nSiO2\n80.3\n76.7\n64.7\nAl2O3\n12.4\n16.8\n28.35\nFe2O3\n0.74\n0.35\n0.95\n61.0 33.0 0.00\n59.0 35.00 0.00\nCaO\n0.39\n0.15\n0.5\nMgO\n0.2\n0.08\n0.1\nK2O\n5.35\n5.9\n2.8\nNa2O\n0.47\n0.2\n2.4\nOther\nTrace\nTrace\n0.19\nTotal\n99.1\n100\n99.99\n4.8\n0.3\n0.00\n0.00\n0.1\n4.0\n0.2\n0.00\n0.9\n0.9\n100\n100\nanswer the questions put to them. The results allowed innovative solutions to the\nproblem of a functional translucent body, while at the same time both Dwight and\nTschirnhaus were diverted from a solution that would duplicate the materiality of\nthe Chinese material.\nChymical Laboratory as Potter\u2019s Workshop]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=17\nPages: 17\nAnthoni Grill\u2019s Amsterdam laboratory also produced work on transmutation for\nwhich he gained some notoriety. Moreover, Grill\u2019s work on chymistry was not only\nbased on learning by doing; he is reported to have read Paracelsus and Glauber.\nGrill moved between artisanal and scholarly worlds and between learning by doing\nand by reading. Both came together in his laboratory in Amsterdam.\nIn the final chapter of this book, Wesley investigates the production of porcelain\nin the seventeenth century. The potter\u2019s art remained outside the canon of the\ndecorative arts until the emergence of the trade of luxury pottery ware in the\nfifteenth century and Biringuccio\u2019s inclusion of pottery among the arts of fire in\nthe sixteenth century. Although (as already mentioned) the Medici sought to imitate\nthe porcelain imported from China in the Casino, European hard-paste porcelain,\nalmost identical to that of China, was due to the efforts of seventeenth-century]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=205\nPages: 205\nconnected to the alchemical interests of Francesco I de Medici (1541\u20131587) though\nit required external aid. This outside knowledge was provided by an unknown\nLevantine leading to the production of a glassy porcelain body that is closely\nrelated to Islamic fritwares, but not Chinese material.11\nIt would take another 130 years before the commercialization of a hard paste\nporcelain body at the Meissen factory in Saxony. The reason for this significant lag\nin production cannot be connected to a lack of proper resources or technology, as\nhighly kaolinized clay sources, identical to the China clay that the Jesuit priest Pe\u0300re\nFrancois Xavier d\u2019Entrecolles (1664\u20131741) would write about in 1712, were\nexploited for the production of Hessian crucibles for laboratories across Europe\nas early as the fourteenth century.12 Arguments that the recipes and manufacturing\nprocesses of crucibles, such as those produced at Hesse, would have been closely]"]}

{"result":["[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=218\nPages: 218\nthe Chinese material.\nChymical Laboratory as Potter\u2019s Workshop\nThe early modern inclusion of ceramics within the arts of the fire brought with it\naccess to the experimental techniques developed by alchemist and chymists. This\nshift allowed an interrogative approach to the production of porcelain that utilized\nmany of the tools traditionally found in the craftsman\u2019s workshop while\ncircumventing the gradual processes of craft innovation. When we consider\nchymistry as both a kind of knowledge, and an object-producing discipline, the\napplication of its techniques to reverse the process of making porcelain is a logical\nextension of the economic demand for china and the intellectual drive toward\nmaker\u2019s knowledge as expressed by Bacon.\nCertainly, the history of ceramics after the seventeenth century is inextricably\nlinked to chemistry\u2019s success at solving increasingly sophisticated questions of\nluxury pottery production. We need look no further than William Cookworthy\u2019s]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=203\nPages: 203\nEhrenfried Walther von Tschirnhaus (1651\u20131708) represent the first successful\nexamples of chymistry\u2019s methodological apparatus being directed toward porcelain\ninnovation. Thermal experiment was an important element in the practices of both\nindividuals and evidence presented in the archaeological record demonstrates\nDwight\u2019s re-firing of Chinese sherds while Tschirnhaus published results of the\nexperimental application of burning lenses to determine the physical properties of\nvaried ceramic bodies. Dwight was ultimately unsuccessful in his endeavors, likely\ndue to economic realities, while Tschirnhaus\u2019s work would lay the cornerstones for\nthe eventual production of Meissen porcelain.\nThe Potter\u2019s Art as Craft Practice\nTo understand why the shift from the intellectual space of the craft workshop to the\nchymical laboratory was critical to the advancement of European ceramic development, an examination of the awkward position of pottery within the hierarchy of]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=198\nPages: 198\nneat division of artisan and natural philosopher emerges considerably blurred.\nThe diversity of characters within the network and their various connections and\ncollaborations revises still-prevalent views of alchemical laborers as characteristically solitary, secretive, and isolated. Indeed, when we consider the reports of\nGrill\u2019s multiple laboratories staffed with at least 16 operators, it is hard not to recall\nthe contemporaneous depictions of chymical laboratories in Netherlandish genre\npainting that almost always depict a foregrounded main experimenter with a group\nof other workers in the background tending various processes. While there are\ncertainly purely stylistic and iconographic motivations behind such depictions\n(similar layouts are used in other genre paintings not showing chymists), the\naccounts of Grill\u2019s workshop do add a level of verisimilitude to these artistic\nrepresentations that we might not otherwise have attributed to them. The image]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=198\nPages: 198,199\nrepresentations that we might not otherwise have attributed to them. The image\nof a busy, and presumably compartmentalized and hierarchical, chymical workshop\npulls our understanding of these locales towards a comparison with contemporaneous artisanal ateliers, which, if the principals involved were themselves artisans,\nwould have been the obvious model upon which to draw virtually automatically.\n(Interestingly, a modern academic chemical research group retains much of this\ncharacter and structure.) The transconfessional and international character of the\nlarger network\u2014which included Catholics and assorted types of Protestants, as well\nas Dutch, French, English, Danes, Swedes, and Germans\u2014parallels the way in\nwhich it cut across social levels. This situation complicates some of the standard\nways in which historians are accustomed to draw reckoning lines, and recalls the\nideal of a respublica litterarum even in a subject as distant from traditional\nhumanism as sooty chymistry.\n178]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=211\nPages: 211,212\nPottery,\u201d 74.\n30\nFor the working practices, see Starkey, Alchemical Laboratory Notebooks.\n31\nReproduced in Haselgrove & Murray, \u201cDwight\u2019s Fulham Pottery,\u201d 73, ai\u2013bviii, 74.\n192\nM. Wesley\nFig. 3 Sherds from the\nperiod of 1671/2\u20131674 with\nevidence of re-firing,\nincluding five sherds of\nChinese origin (center and\nright) (Photograph by\nEdwin Baker, Museum of\nLondon; Reproduced\ncourtesy of English\nHeritage)\nWhile the source of these sherds is unknown, whether they were Dwight\u2019s\npersonal property, donations by an interested party, or the possessions of a funding\npatron, their role within Dwight\u2019s active search for the key to making porcelain is\nclear. These fragments provided a tangible outcome for Dwight\u2019s experimentation,\nsources that could be used for active comparison in the laboratory. His test bodies\nand colors worked directly towards the production of material that mimicked the\nobservable qualities of the Chinese porcelain in his possession even though its]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=17\nPages: 17,18\nat Renaissance courts. Laboratories and artisanal workshops shared a material\n25\nSee also Pietsch, \u201cTschirnhaus,\u201d and Klein, \u201cChemical Experts.\u201d\nIntroduction\nxvii\nculture. In fact, in the early modern period, they were often so similar in terms of the\ninstruments they contained that they carried the same name. This material culture\nremained largely the same. A change took place at another level: the increasing\npresence of books and texts in laboratories and workshops populated by figures who\nmerged artisanal and scholarly cultures. This book suggests that this shift in\nworkshop culture facilitated the epistemic exchanges between alchemists and producers of the decorative arts.\nAcknowledgements\nThis book was conceived and written in dialogue with an exhibition project \u201cArt\nand Alchemy. The Mystery of Transformation.\u201d The exhibition is on view at the\nMuseum Kunstpalast in Du\u0308sseldorf from April to August 2014. I would like to]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=10\nPages: 10\nBy the early modern period, the alchemist had acquired a specific place of work.\nAccording to Pamela Smith, by the mid-sixteenth century, these laboratories were\nreferred to formally as laboratorium and officina.6 The ubiquity of furnaces and the\nuse of fire demanded a specific workplace, whereas experimental philosophy still\nlacked specific places of experimentation in the seventeenth century. Laboratories\nwere associated with secretive practices. When in the early seventeenth century\nAndreas Libavius described the ideal workplace of the chemist, he emphasized how\nit differed from the dark, smelly, secretive laboratory that was noticeably lacking in\ndecorum:\nWe do not want the chemist to neglect the exercises of piety or exempt himself from other\nduties of an upright life, simply pining away amidst his dark furnaces [. . .]. Thus we are not\ngoing to devise from him just a chymeion or laboratory to use as a private study and]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=11\nPages: 11\nHartmann (1561\u20131631), who was appointed to the chair, included work in the\nlaboratory, likewise established at the university. Courts also developed workplaces\nin which the work of artisans could be tested. Most famously, in the 1670s, Johann\nJoachim Becher (1635\u20131682) proposed the establishment of a Kunst- und\nWerckhaus at the court in Vienna.13 It would have included several different sorts\nof manufactures: porcelain making, silk and wool weaving, the production of\nmedicines and glassmaking. Chemical laboratories were to form the core of the\n8\nKlein, \u201cLaboratory Challenge,\u201d and \u201cApothecary Shops.\u201d For the dissociation of experimental\nphilosophy from the alchemical laboratory, see Shapin, \u201cHouse of Experiment.\u201d\n9\nWerrett, Fireworks, 29\u201330.\n10\nWeyer, Graf Wolfgang II. von Hohenlohe. For material culture of laboratories, see also Osten,\nAlchemistenlaboratorium Oberstockstall; Soukup & Mayer, Alchemistisches Gold, and the shorter]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=17\nPages: 17\nchemistry and skilled in porcelain production. Remarkably, the success of porcelain\nproduction was due to the introduction of techniques of investigation, which did not\nbelong to the traditional potter\u2019s skills, but to chymistry, which had overlapped with\nthe worlds of metallurgy and assaying for centuries.\nGrill, Dwight, and Tschirnhaus are only a few of the numerous examples of\nglassmakers, silver- and goldsmiths and producers of porcelain whose expertise\nwas both based in the worlds of bookish learning and grounded in hands-on work.\nDifficult to categorize as either craftsman or scholar, they are responsible for\nepistemic exchanges between the artisanal and the scholarly worlds. The rise of\nthese hybrid artisan-scholars was connected to the establishment of laboratories in\nwhich art technologies and alchemy were brought together, the first of these being\nat Renaissance courts. Laboratories and artisanal workshops shared a material\n25]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=17\nPages: 17\nalmost identical to that of China, was due to the efforts of seventeenth-century\nchymists who were both at home in the artisanal world of pottery and in the learned\nworld, according to Wesley. His chapter highlights John Dwight (1633\u20131704),\ntrained in Robert Boyle\u2019s (1627\u20131691) laboratory and apt with excellent language\nskills, and Ehrenfried Walther von Tschirnhaus (1651\u20131708), mathematician and\ndirector of the Dresden court laboratory of the Saxon Elector Friedrich August I\n(1670\u20131733).25 Tschirnhaus collaborated with the alchemist and apothecary Johann\nFriedrich Bo\u0308ttger (1682\u20131719), also involved in transmutational endeavors at the\nDresden court, towards the production of porcelain. In the first porcelain manufactory in Meissen, established by the Elector in his castle Albrechtsburg in 1710,\nBo\u0308ttger was the expert overseeing the manufacturing process, knowledgeable in\nchemistry and skilled in porcelain production. Remarkably, the success of porcelain]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=208\nPages: 208\nthe idea of a synthetic additive that would make clay into porcelain.\nJohn Dwight\u2019s Fulham Pottery: Chymical Beginnings\nDwight was the first individual to record limited success at producing porcelain in\nEngland. Born sometime between 1633 and 1635 in Gloucestershire, he was able to\nsecure a place at Oxford around 1655, leaving by 1660/1.20 Although officially\nreading for a Bachelor\u2019s of Ecclesiastical Law during this period, Dwight was\nemployed in the laboratory of Boyle.21 The influence of this period crucially shaped\nthe course of the young Dwight\u2019s life, as seen in his admission as an old man to Sir\nJohn Lowther, F.R.S. (1642\u20131706), who recounted in a letter to William Gilpen,\ndated 12 March 1697/8: \u201c[Dwight] gives this acct of himself yt he was bred at ye\nUniversity studyed Civil Law & Physick a little, but most Chymistry [. . .].\u201d22\nThis period in Boyle\u2019s laboratory corresponds with Robert Hooke\u2019s (1635\u20131703)]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=203\nPages: 203\ntransmutational alchemy on more than an individual level, the origination of the\nterm in the late seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries is clearly linked to those\npursuits. Further, it should be noted that these first arcanists are entirely separate\nfrom communities and guilds of potters in their various regions, offering an entirely\nnovel actor class that appears at the end of the seventeenth century, chymists whose\nfocus was on the production of translucent ceramics rather than metallurgical,\nmedical, or other natural philosophical avenues.\nNo evidence towards production of a hard-paste porcelain body by European\npotters before the eighteenth century is extant, leaving the chymist\u2019s laboratory as\nthe principle space of ceramic innovation. Specific investigation of the physical\nproperties of Chinese porcelain undertaken by John Dwight (c.1633\u20131704) and\nEhrenfried Walther von Tschirnhaus (1651\u20131708) represent the first successful]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=16\nPages: 16\nof scholarly culture, played an increasingly important role in laboratories and\nworkshops. In these workplaces, a sort of hybrid figure was at work, with one\nfoot in artisanal culture and another in scholarly culture and impossible to categorize in mutually exclusive categories of the scholar and the craftsman.23 Certain\ntypes of crafts\u2014glassmaking, gold- and silversmithing, and porcelain production\u2014\nseem to have been particularly prone to exchanges between artisanal and scholarly\nalchemical cultures. By the seventeenth century, the expertise of some glassmakers,\nsilver- and goldsmiths and producers of porcelain was just as based in the worlds of\nalchemical and bookish learning as it was grounded in hands-on work in the\nlaboratory.24 Lawrence Principe and Morgan Wesley discuss two examples of\nsuch arts: silversmithing and porcelain production, respectively.\n21\nFor \u2018trading zones\u2019 between artisanal and scholarly cultures, see Long, Artisan/Practitioners.\nKlein, \u201cChemical Experts.\u201d\n23]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=178\nPages: 178\nGoldsmiths and Chymists: The Activity\nof Artisans Within Alchemical Circles\nLawrence M. Principe\nAbstract The study of early modern alchemical practitioners has recently\nexpanded from the work and writings of natural philosophers to include the labors\nof artisans. Yet there remains relatively little clear documentation about the specifics\nof such artisanal chymical practices or about the degree of significant epistemic\nexchange that may have taken place between artisans and better-known chymists.\nThis paper examines several gold- and silversmiths who were part of an extended\nalchemical network that stretched across the Netherlands, France, and England in\nthe mid-seventeenth century. The silversmith Anthoni Grill (and to a lesser extent\nhis brother Andries) worked on refining and transmutational processes with impressive chymical expertise and eventually achieved international notoriety and social\nand financial success. Grill built large laboratories, managed laborants, engaged in]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=20\nPages: 20\nPrinceton: Princeton University Press.\nSmith, Pamela H. 2004. The Body of the Artisan: Art and Experience in the Scientific Revolution.\nChicago: University of Chicago Press.\nSmith, Pamela H. 2006. Laboratories. In The Cambridge History of Science, 7 vols,\nvol. 3, Early Modern Science, eds. Lorraine Daston and Katharine Park, 289\u2013305. Cambridge:\nCambridge University Press.\nSoukup, Rudolf Werner, and Helmut Mayer. 1997. Alchemistisches Gold: Paracelsistische\nPharmaka: Laboratoriumstechnik im 16. Jahrhundert. Chemiegeschichtliche und arch\u20ac\naometrische Untersuchungen am Inventar des Laboratoriums von Oberstockstall/Kirchberg am\nWagram. Vienna: Bohlau Verlag.\nSoukop, Rudolf Werner, Sigrid von Osten, and Helmut Mayer. 1993. Alembics, Cucurbits, Phials,\nCrucibles: A 16th-Century Docimastic Laboratory Excavated in Austria. Ambix 40: 25.\nWerrett, Simon. 2010. Fireworks: Pyrotechnic Arts and Sciences in European History.\nChicago/London: University of Chicago Press.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=201\nPages: 201,202\ntechnology and innovation. The principal focus is on the adoption of specific\nM. Wesley (*)\nDepartment of History, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK\ne-mail: thenex@mac.com\nS. Dupre\u0301 (ed.), Laboratories of Art, Archimedes 37,\n181\nDOI 10.1007/978-3-319-05065-2_8, \u00a9 Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014\n182\nM. Wesley\nchymical practices in early modern ceramic innovation that lead to a drastic\nreshaping of the experimental landscape. While many adopted practices flowed\nseamlessly between the two disciplines through shared tools and techniques developed by generations of practitioners working with fire, the specific nature of\nceramics forced adaptations on other practices. Elements borrowed from controversial chymical fire analysis found more specific application in investigating\nthermal qualities of ceramic bodies in laboratory experimentation. Used in ceramic]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=204\nPages: 204\nhands. At the time of Biringuccio\u2019s writing, the potter\u2019s art was on the threshold of a\nparadigm shift that would create a marked division between craft knowledge and\ntheory based practice, setting two separate courses for ceramic innovation in the\nlater sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. His citation of alchemy as one of \u201ctwo\nsources as [pottery\u2019s] principal basis,\u201d is referential to the provision of purified\nminerals and \u201celemental mixtures.\u201d5 However, it also foreshadowed the intellectual\nengagement of chymists in the quest for the production of European porcelain,\nbringing the weight of the older alchemical tradition to bear.\nPrior to the fourteenth century, European pottery was external to the hierarchy of\nthe esteemed arts, such as metallurgy, glassmaking, painting, and dyeing. The\nextensively copied treatise De diversis artibus, composed in the thirteenth century\nby the Benedictine monk Theophilus, thoroughly introduces the full range of]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=8\nPages: 8,9\nporcelain? The difference between workshops and laboratories during this period is\nambiguous, not only in Van Utrecht\u2019s depiction, and the line between the two\nspaces is as difficult to draw as that between the arts of fire and alchemy. This book\nis concerned with the interconnections and differentiations between foreground and\n1\nMy discussion of Van Utrecht\u2019s painting in this and the next paragraph is based on Go\u0308ttler,\n\u201cThe Alchemist, the Painter.\u201d\n2\nFor Biringuccio\u2019s attitude towards alchemy, see Newman, Promethean Ambitions, 128\u201332.\nvii\nviii\nIntroduction\nFig. 1 Adriaen van Utrecht, Allegory of Fire, 1636 (Courtesy of Royal Museums of Fine Arts of\nBelgium, Brussels (Photo: J. Geleyns))\nbackground in Van Utrecht\u2019s painting, between artisanal workshops and alchemical\nlaboratories, between the material arts and alchemy.\nVan Utrecht is one of the heirs of Van Eyck (c.1390\u20131441). Following Giorgio\nVasari (1511\u20131574), Karel van Mander (1548\u20131606) portrayed Van Eyck as an]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=11\nPages: 11\nfurnaces and fire in which \u201cchemical\u201d operations were performed were also\nknown as laboratories. For example, the places in which sixteenth-century producers of fireworks developed their materials were called laboratories.9 In terms of\nmaterial culture the laboratorium, for example, one designed and equipped by\nCount Wolfgang II von Hohenlohe-Weidersheim (1546\u20131610) in the early seventeenth century, was remarkably similar to the workplaces of apothecaries, metalworkers and glassmakers.10\nBefore the emergence of mercantilist states, Renaissance courts were the most\nimportant agents in establishing laboratories. The laboratories of Rudolf II (1552\u2013\n1612) in Prague and Landgrave Moritz von Hessen-Kassel (1572\u20131632) were\nthought to bring material and intellectual rewards.11 Moritz even founded a chair\nof chymiatria at the University of Marburg in 1609.12 The teaching of Johannes\nHartmann (1561\u20131631), who was appointed to the chair, included work in the]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=157\nPages: 157\npatron a keen interest in alchemy, was meant to have taken part\u2014but his premature\ndeath prevented his involvement. In the Studiolo the connection between alchemy\nand the chemical arts was exalted. The iconographic itinerary conceived by\nBorghini was situated in a sequence on the upper part of the wall where paintings\ndevoted to thermal baths, the discovery of gun powder, a glass works, a goldsmith\u2019s\nworkshop, alchemists and a bronze foundry were located; at the room\u2019s two ends\nwere two statues, portraying Vulcan and Apollo. On the lower part of the wall a\nmythological scene recalled Francesco I\u2019s alchemical and artistic interests.27 I\nwould like to stress the importance of a few elements directly or indirectly related\nto the chemical arts. What first strikes you in this particular arrangement is the\nproximity of Stradano\u2019s famous painting of Francesco I\u2019s alchemical laboratory and\nGiovanni Maria Butteri\u2019s (1540\u20131606) painting illustrating the glass works (Figs. 3\nand 4).]"]}

{"result":["[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=212\nPages: 212\nobservable qualities of the Chinese porcelain in his possession even though its\nchemical composition remained unknown.\nThose qualities clarify his distinct use of \u201ctransparent porcelane or China cley\u201d\nto describe certain recipes in his notebooks. While he employed \u201cporcelane\u201d as a\nwider term applicable to many finewares, it was transparency and whiteness that he\npursued through experimentation, as key properties of the sherds available to him.\nThe re-firing of Chinese material revealed the use of a distinct glaze layer over the\ncobalt itself, which demonstrated a distinct thermal response from the Chinese body\npaste. There may have been more sherds whose surfaces were destroyed by overfiring in a test furnace, but the remaining pieces show care taken to affect changes in\nthe glaze without damaging the fabric or the decoration, suggesting that, on a]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=209\nPages: 209\nand substantiated the claims that he had been actively working on producing\nporcelain in the Chinese style. Various strata were excavated, and unearthed\nmaterial covered virtually the entire operation of the pottery throughout its existence. The earliest period of experimentation and production, covering the years\n1671/2\u201374 was found \u201cconfined to a few Features in the south-east of the site (K15,\nK23, N1, and D3)\u201d with only very fragmentary material found in other areas.26\nIn these areas of early experimentation, a substantial sample of material of\nporcelaneous nature was discovered, all of which was fragmentary. Of this material,\nGreen notes that less than \u201cOne kilo in total weight was recovered but [represents] a\nlarge number of individual vessels.\u201d The dating is connected to its location, relative\nto other excavations, with important finds coming from the aforementioned southeast corner circa 1673 and a pair of soak ways that were filled circa 1676 (Fig. 1).27]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=202\nPages: 202\nno substantial historic reconciliation has been attempted. It is beyond the scope of\nthis paper to attempt to do so, but establishing a basic set of terms is necessary. The\nterm \u2018porcelain\u2019 will be employed to denote white, translucent, high-firing ceramic\nbodies, consistent with the material described by Polo and exported from China into\nEurope.2 Two subdivisions will further be mentioned in this text; those objects\nmade through a combination of kaolinized clay and alkali salt rich stone will be\nreferred to as \u2018hard-paste\u2019, while objects made of a combination of clay and ground\nglass, sand, or quartz flux will be viewed as \u2018soft-paste\u2019. These are entirely modern\nseparations, used here for clarity, and specific examples given in the following\npaper will demonstrate they are not historic terms.\nThe seventeenth and eighteenth century quest to duplicate Chinese porcelain\nborrowed not only techniques from the chymical tradition, but even notions of]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=206\nPages: 206\nof those materials, even though other artisans were making use of them. The failure\nwas thus not connected to any form of geological predetermination, but entirely by\nsocial constraints limiting the application of knowledge to the problem.\nThe speculation that porcelain was comprised of either special clay, fermented\nfor generations, or of crushed shell incorporated in its manufacture, was a direct\nindication that similar materials were outside the realm of contemporary craft\nknowledge.14 In order to successfully move past these limitations, the experimental\ntechniques of the natural philosophers allowed objects from China to serve as\nprototypes for interrogation towards their properties and composition. It is at this\npoint that the techniques employed by chymistry, some borrowed from metallurgical assaying and the furnaces of the glassmakers in the centuries-long discourse\nbetween the disciplines, came into full application in the pursuit of ceramic\ninnovation.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=202\nPages: 202,203\ncomposed by Rustichello while he shared imprisonment with Marco Polo after the latter\u2019s return to\nVenice in 1295 AD. A full discussion of Polo\u2019s references to porcelain can be found in Carswell,\nBlue and White, 52\u20134.\n3\nFor the full correspondence, see Tschirnhaus, Amtliche Schriften, ch. II.\n2\nIgne refutata: Thermal Analysis in the Laboratory Practices of John Dwight. . .\n183\nmedieval and early modern periods, in the context of porcelain, strong arguments\ncan be made towards the artisanal-alchemical bridge. The correspondences that\nremain in the archives at Dresden, originate from that alchemical tradition, to the\nextent that arguments have been leveled to suggest that the correspondence was, in\nfact, about the creation of the Philosophers\u2019 Stone rather than a search for the\ncomposition of porcelain. While later arcanists cannot be seen to participate in\ntransmutational alchemy on more than an individual level, the origination of the]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=211\nPages: 211\npages torn out, recipes struck through, and duplicating marginalia such as a \u201cnot\nvery good\u201d accompanying a struck through recipe for \u201ca dark red porcellane or\nChina Cley\u201d dated 14 November, 1693.31\nThe second, arguably more interesting, group discovered within the context of\nsoakway A18, and thus contemporary to the test chips, was a group of Chinese\nexport porcelain sherds (Fig. 3). Among this group of blue and white sherds,\nrepresenting at least five distinct objects, are cases where glaze running over\nfractured edges demonstrate clear evidence of re-firing, at a temperature hot enough\nto at least partially liquefy the glaze, without burning the cobalt. A final sherd from\nthis group contains evidence of cobalt over-painting by Dwight, before re-firing,\nperhaps as a test coinciding with the samples of his own work.\n29\nSchreiber, Charlotte Schreiber\u2019s Notebook, 31; and Haselgrove & Murray, \u201cDwight\u2019s Fulham\nPottery,\u201d 74.\n30]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=205\nPages: 205,206\npottery communities in China and later Korea and Japan.13 Potters in those regions,\nthrough wider access to materials and support were able to utilize the full range of\n9\nFor a specific discussion of the social standing of this material, see Wilson, \u201cLe maioliche.\u201d\nKingery & Vandiver, Masterpieces, 141.\n11\nLiverani, Porcellane dei Medici, 8, 47, discusses the mysterious Levantine, while referring to\nKingery & Vandiver, Masterpieces, 141, for related material analyses and comparisons with\ncontemporary examples Islamic fritwares and Chinese porcelains. Further material can be found\nin Kingery & Vandiver, \u201cMedici Porcelain.\u201d\n12\nd\u2019Entrecolles, \u201cLettres.\u201d Regarding the use of kaolinized clay for the production of Hessian\nwares, see Martino\u0301n-Torres, Rehren & Freestone, \u201cMystery of Hessian wares.\u201d\n13\nFor the various avenues of incremental development of Chinese porcelains, see Kerr & Wood,\nCeramic Technology, 146\u201363.\n10\n186\nM. Wesley]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=211\nPages: 211,212\nPottery,\u201d 74.\n30\nFor the working practices, see Starkey, Alchemical Laboratory Notebooks.\n31\nReproduced in Haselgrove & Murray, \u201cDwight\u2019s Fulham Pottery,\u201d 73, ai\u2013bviii, 74.\n192\nM. Wesley\nFig. 3 Sherds from the\nperiod of 1671/2\u20131674 with\nevidence of re-firing,\nincluding five sherds of\nChinese origin (center and\nright) (Photograph by\nEdwin Baker, Museum of\nLondon; Reproduced\ncourtesy of English\nHeritage)\nWhile the source of these sherds is unknown, whether they were Dwight\u2019s\npersonal property, donations by an interested party, or the possessions of a funding\npatron, their role within Dwight\u2019s active search for the key to making porcelain is\nclear. These fragments provided a tangible outcome for Dwight\u2019s experimentation,\nsources that could be used for active comparison in the laboratory. His test bodies\nand colors worked directly towards the production of material that mimicked the\nobservable qualities of the Chinese porcelain in his possession even though its]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=210\nPages: 210\n190\nM. Wesley\nFig. 1 Fragmentary\nporcelain material\nrecovered at the Fulham site\nattributed to John Dwight,\n1672\u20131673 (Photograph by\nthe author)\nTwo groups of these sherds are particularly demonstrative. First, the chips\nintentionally produced to test a combination of bodies and surface solutions.\nThese represent varying degrees of success, with a combination of the vapour\nglazes and dipped finishes (both slip and glaze) seen in the test pieces. Figure 2\nillustrates pieces 33 (slip), and 34 (demonstrably dipped in a glaze, with crazing,\nand yellowing visible though with good transparency overall), and one of a number\nof sherds not illustrated in Green (vapour glazed).\nThe system for marking the test chips shows sophistication in Dwight\u2019s methodology, incorporating not only distinct numbers for various colors and finishes, but\nincluding descriptions of where each was applied. For example the fragment\nrepresented by type 36 clearly shows a division between the front and back of the]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=218\nPages: 218\nthe Chinese material.\nChymical Laboratory as Potter\u2019s Workshop\nThe early modern inclusion of ceramics within the arts of the fire brought with it\naccess to the experimental techniques developed by alchemist and chymists. This\nshift allowed an interrogative approach to the production of porcelain that utilized\nmany of the tools traditionally found in the craftsman\u2019s workshop while\ncircumventing the gradual processes of craft innovation. When we consider\nchymistry as both a kind of knowledge, and an object-producing discipline, the\napplication of its techniques to reverse the process of making porcelain is a logical\nextension of the economic demand for china and the intellectual drive toward\nmaker\u2019s knowledge as expressed by Bacon.\nCertainly, the history of ceramics after the seventeenth century is inextricably\nlinked to chemistry\u2019s success at solving increasingly sophisticated questions of\nluxury pottery production. We need look no further than William Cookworthy\u2019s]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=217\nPages: 217,218\nporcelain, thermal experiments in the seventeenth century were unable to fully\n198\nM. Wesley\nTable 1 A comparison of modern elemental analyses of \u2018Dwight\u2019 experimental ware, Blanc-deChine, \u2018Bo\u0308ttger\u2019 ware, and Kangxi porcelain\nMaterial\nDwight\nBlanc-de-Chine (ft46)\nKangxi Porcelain (ft47) seventeenth century\nBo\u0308ttger Porcelain 1708\nMeissen Porcelain (ft48)\nmid-eighteenth century\nSiO2\n80.3\n76.7\n64.7\nAl2O3\n12.4\n16.8\n28.35\nFe2O3\n0.74\n0.35\n0.95\n61.0 33.0 0.00\n59.0 35.00 0.00\nCaO\n0.39\n0.15\n0.5\nMgO\n0.2\n0.08\n0.1\nK2O\n5.35\n5.9\n2.8\nNa2O\n0.47\n0.2\n2.4\nOther\nTrace\nTrace\n0.19\nTotal\n99.1\n100\n99.99\n4.8\n0.3\n0.00\n0.00\n0.1\n4.0\n0.2\n0.00\n0.9\n0.9\n100\n100\nanswer the questions put to them. The results allowed innovative solutions to the\nproblem of a functional translucent body, while at the same time both Dwight and\nTschirnhaus were diverted from a solution that would duplicate the materiality of\nthe Chinese material.\nChymical Laboratory as Potter\u2019s Workshop]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=217\nPages: 217\n197\nworkshop. While an eventual solution may have been found, the possibility was\ncircumvented by the engagement of the chymists with the problem of porcelain\nproduction.\nIt is clear that both Dwight and Tschirnhaus were concerned with asking similar\nquestions of Chinese porcelain and their results directed the future avenues of their\nexperiments. As previously mentioned, both sets of data were limited in their scope\nand restricted to comparative discourse with local material. The efficacy of analytic\ntechniques on ceramic bodies can also be seen to play a role, with the slow firing of\nsherds in Dwight\u2019s various furnaces or kilns restricting his ability to both observe\nthe objects as they processed through the sequence and the time frame for his\nanalysis. If one considers the heating rate of a seventeenth-century stoneware kiln,\nor even a smaller furnace, its maximum achievable temperature and the amount of]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=201\nPages: 201\nto frame the initial comparisons of the technological differences between the\nEuropean and Far Eastern productions, and serve to pose further questions regarding the impact of experimental techniques and limitations on European porcelain\narcanistry.\nUntil recently the study of early modern ceramics was principally the domain of art\nhistorians and archaeologists, limiting the scope of questions being posed by\nacademics. Increasingly the role of natural philosophy, medieval alchemy and\nnascent chemistry in ceramic evolution has been revealed, bringing with it the\nnecessity to align discourse on ceramic practice with the discipline of history of\nscience, as art history lacks the framework to pose questions that would advance the\ndiscussion. This paper is an exploratory work that builds the foundations to bridge\nthose separate traditions to expedite a more consilient examination of ceramic\ntechnology and innovation. The principal focus is on the adoption of specific\nM. Wesley (*)]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=209\nPages: 209,210\nThese sherds represent a systematic, sustained, and varied approach towards\nporcelain experimentation, one that resulted in many failures, but there were other\nsmall successes towards a production of porcelain. They provide a wealth of\ntechnical evidence towards the experimentation conducted by Dwight during the\nearly period of the pottery, informing us specifically on the composition of his\n\u201cporcelane\u201d bodies, attempts and decoration, problems in glazing, and finally a\nvariety of firing issues.\n24\nThe patent was issued towards the protected manufacture of \u2018transparent Earthenware\u2019 and\n\u2018stone ware\u2019 by Charles the Second, on 17 April 1672, at Whitehall. See Charles the Second,\nTransparent Earthenware, P.R.O. C. 82 2425 Cal. S.P. Dom Entry Book 34, fol. 155.\n25\nThe findings and details were published in Green, Excavations, ch. I\u2013V.\n26\nGreen, Excavations, 11.\n27\nGreen, Excavations, 65.\n190\nM. Wesley\nFig. 1 Fragmentary\nporcelain material\nrecovered at the Fulham site]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=205\nPages: 205,206\nCeramic Technology, 146\u201363.\n10\n186\nM. Wesley\nclay native to the region, slowly perfecting what was considered an important art\nform. The long period of development in the Far East allowed incremental refinements necessary for successful innovations through craft practice. With a limited\ntime span driven by the demand for the material in Europe, the interrogative\ntechniques of the chymist\u2019s laboratory were necessary to circumvent the slower,\nless focused workshop process.\nExperiment and Fire Analysis\nAs discussed, the primary hindrance on the production of a porcelain body was the\nlack of identified materials that could be combined to produce these translucent,\nhigh fire, ceramic objects. The production of material at Hesse and the later\ndiscovery of kaolinic clay in Cornwall, England, again demonstrate that Europe\ndid not lack the raw materials, but rather that potters were unaware of the properties\nof those materials, even though other artisans were making use of them. The failure]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=217\nPages: 217,218\nin their compositions, while all meet similar physical criteria (Table 1). The last line\nof the table is an analysis of the body composition of porcelain produced at Meissen\nafter approximately 1727 demonstrating changes that reduced the firing temperature of the material and brought it more directly into line with its Chinese inspiration. That this change was made after the gradual dissemination of the letters of\nPe\u0300re d\u2019Entrecolles describing the process observed in China must be viewed as a\nfinal indication of the impact that thermal experimentation had on establishing the\nqualities of the earliest commercial European porcelain.\nThe chemical differences are a quantifiable demonstration that, while allowing a\nsophisticated application of experimental process to solve the problem of producing\nporcelain, thermal experiments in the seventeenth century were unable to fully\n198\nM. Wesley]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=215\nPages: 215\ncombinations of material with porcellana Hollandica (Dutch earthenware) and\nporcellana Chinensi.\nTschirnhaus observed that the material combined with porcellana Hollandica\nburst immediately into flames at the temperature of experiment, while that made\nwith Chinese porcelain formed spherical glass and asbestos became entirely\ntranslucent.45\nWhen measured against the long list of other substances included in the 10 years\nof published experiments, it is evident that Tschirnhaus had a large amount of\nrelative thermal data to use as a metric for his porcelain experiments. While other\n39\nTschirnhaus, \u201cSpeculi ustorii,\u201d 53.\nMartino\u0301n-Torres, Rehren & Freestone, \u201cMystery of Hessian Wares.\u201d\n41\nTschirnhaus, \u201cParalipomenon,\u201d \u201cSingularia effecta,\u201d and \u201cArtis vitriariae.\u201d\n42\nTschirnhaus, \u201cSpeculi ustorii,\u201d 52.\n43\nTschirnhaus, \u201cDe magnis lentibus.\u201d\n44\nReinhardt, \u201cEhrenfried Walther von Tschirnhaus,\u201d 13, and \u201cTschirnhaus oder Bo\u0308ttger?,\u201d 32.\n45]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=204\nPages: 204,205\n5\nIgne refutata: Thermal Analysis in the Laboratory Practices of John Dwight. . .\n185\nevidence demonstrating the elevation of pottery into the canon of decorative arts.9\nWithin the next two decades, the production of new types of earthenware spread\nacross Italy rapidly replacing vernacular wares, such as those traditionally produced\nin Orvieto and Montelupo.\nAs the sixteenth century progressed the demand for porcelain, introduced in\nsmall quantities during the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, exploded alongside a\nburgeoning maritime trade. While the first successful efforts to produce a ceramic\nbody that replicated some of porcelain\u2019s qualities were those of the Medici workshops between 1575 and 1587, they failed to produce hard paste porcelain that was\nsimultaneously durable and heat resistant.10 Medici porcelain has long been\nconnected to the alchemical interests of Francesco I de Medici (1541\u20131587) though]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=212\nPages: 212,213\nthe glaze without damaging the fabric or the decoration, suggesting that, on a\nsmaller scale, Dwight had keen control over the temperatures of his experimentation. The bright, transparent nature of the Chinese glaze, combined with its excellent fit to the fabric of the ware, may have further influenced Dwight towards an\nessay discussing a theoretical lead China glaze, as it appears in his notebook,\ndemonstrating that his attempts to create an alkali glaze had failed, or if successful,\nhis solution remains one of the best kept secrets of European ceramics.\nHis application of thermal experimentation, as noted, was limited in its scope,\nbut still formed a critical point of departure for his investigation into the properties\nnecessary to replicate the Chinese materials. He combined these inquiries with\nknowledge of a wide range of raw materials available to potters in England.\nIgne refutata: Thermal Analysis in the Laboratory Practices of John Dwight. . .\n193]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=216\nPages: 216\nand porcelain would have been a clear indicator that a search must be undertaken\nfor Saxon clay with the same refractory properties as the crucibles. The clay\npreviously employed for production of earthenwares was clearly inferior within\nthe context of the experiments of 1696\u20131697.\nThe other European porcelains provided a robust collection of comparative\nsamples, particular in the context of body fabrics that would lack the thermal\ntolerances of Chinese porcelain. With the experimental evidence supplied by the\ntrials published in Acta, Tschirnhaus\u2019s later journey to Delft and St. Cloud in 1702\u2013\n1703 was principally an opportunity to refute the local factories\u2019 techniques. His\ncorrespondence bears this out, as he was able to readily discard the possibility of\ntheir productions being true porcelain when communicating his thoughts back to\nSaxony.47 While later work on the porcelain arcanum was divided between]"]}

{"result":["[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=204\nPages: 204\ncame to me to tell you of the practice of this art also. Although it may seem at first glance to\nbe outside the order and purpose of my writing, he who considers well will see that it is not\nunrelated to it but proper, since it is wholly dependent on the agency and power of fire if it is\nto be brought to its perfection. Moreover, the potter\u2019s glazes and colors are all substances of\nvarious metals or impure minerals and therefore belong to fire. Since it is my intention to\ntreat of fire, minerals, and metals for you, I surely should not have omitted this, particularly\nbecause it is a necessary art which enriches and is greatly praised both for its ingenuity and\nits beauty.4\nLike the other arts treated in the Pirotechnia, the action of the fire on base earths\nand minerals provided integral transformation in the objects shaped by the potter\u2019s\nhands. At the time of Biringuccio\u2019s writing, the potter\u2019s art was on the threshold of a]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=93\nPages: 93,94\nBiringuccio\u2019s original approach to the arts of fire emerges and that distinguishes\nhim, for instance, from Georg Agricola who, at almost the same time, wrote his De\nre metallica in which he outlined the general arts of metals related to mining and\nmetallurgy. Biringuccio expanded his perspective to include all the arts of fire,\nincluding, artillery, making gunpowder, acids preparation, pottery, goldsmithing,\nfireworks, generic distillation arts, as well as alchemy.44 If we accept his conditions,\n43\nSee Biringuccio, De la pirotechnia (1914), 27\u201340; Perifano, \u201cAlchimie\u201d; Smith, Body of the\nArtisan, 143\u20134; and Bernardoni, La conoscenza del fare, 669.\n44\nBiringuccio, De la pirotechnia (1977), fol. 123r\u20134r.\nArtisanal Processes and Epistemological Debate in the Works of Leonardo. . .\n71\nalchemy and pyrotechnics are not in contradiction, rather, in so far as they are used\nin the same philosophical concepts and the same operational practices, alchemy]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=8\nPages: 8\npainting celebrates Antwerp\u2019s economic power and the productive ingenuity of its\ncraftsmen and artists as much as it praises the transformative force of fire turning\nrelatively cheap and humble materials into highly valued objects of art. These\nobjects were all products of the arts of fire, which according to Vannoccio\nBiringuccio (1480\u2013c.1539) included alchemy, and excluded \u201cfalse alchemy\u201d\nconcerned with pretentious transmutation.2\nIn the background of Van Utrecht\u2019s painting, a window opens on to a space in\nwhich a man stands working at a stove with an open fire. Stirring a cauldron, the\nman is shown in the material company of bellows, an anvil, a melting and a\ndistilling furnace, and other equipment related to the worlds of assaying and\nmetallurgy. Van Utrecht\u2019s background refers to the spaces in which the objects in\nthe foreground were produced. Were these spaces laboratories or artisanal workshops? Were they home to gold- and silversmiths, glassmakers or producers of]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=84\nPages: 84,85\n14.\n28\n62\nA. Bernardoni\nFig. 2 Leonardo, artillery moulding process for the barrel, Codex Atlanticus, fol. 46br, Biblioteca\nAmbrosiana, Milan (Image taken from Codex Atlanticus, Hoepli edition, Milan, 1894\u20131904)\nair into the chamber from below. The note under the drawing helps us interpret the\ndevice as a study for amplifying the penetrative action of fire: \u201cThe greater the\nnatural motion of the fire or the greater its weight, the greater its impulsive force\u201d\n(Fig. 3).29 Leonardo talks about fire in the same terms as the weight of bodies, so he\ninterprets it as a hard material particulate flow, able to penetrate the body and break\nthe link of its particles. In Aristotelian matter theory, fire is the lightest element that\nfinds its natural place at the most peripheral region of the sub-lunar world. Just as a\nstone falls towards the earth to reach its natural place, fire goes in the opposite\ndirection, rising to the far reaches of the sky; the longer the distance, the quicker it]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=16\nPages: 16,15\ncarved out space for true alchemy as one of the arts of fire. Artisanal workshops,\nsuch as Andrea Verrocchio\u2019s (c.1435\u20131488) in which Leonardo da Vinci (1452\u2013\n1519) apprenticed or Leonardo\u2019s own workplace, shared a material culture with\nalchemical laboratories. As we have already pointed out, artisans used similar\nequipment and performed \u201cchemical\u201d operations. However, Bernardoni argues,\nBiringuccio made the claim that these artisans were the true experts on matter,\nmaterials and material transformation and that artisanal \u201cchemical\u201d operations were\nthe key to natural knowledge.\nOne of the readers of Biringuccio\u2019s Pirotechnia was Johannes Mathesius (1504\u2013\n1565), a Lutheran preacher in St. Joachimsthal, the center of an important mining\ndistrict. In her contribution to this volume, Henrike Haug analyzes Mathesius\u2019s\n19\nHassenstein, Das Feuerwerckbuch, 45\u20136. For translation and discussion, see Werrett,\nFireworks, 28.\n20\nSmith, Body of the Artisan. esp. 95\u2013127.\nIntroduction\nxv]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=203\nPages: 203,204\nthe decorative arts before the early modern period is worthwhile. Prior to its\ninteraction with chymistry, the relationship between the potter\u2019s craft and fire was\nprincipally of a mechanical, fixative nature. As the heat of the kiln was known to\nremove the water from earthen bodies, its ability to affect permanent transformation\non the materials placed in the kiln was its principal contribution to the success of\nceramic production. Those objects existed first as trade goods rather than artisanal\nobjects and only later became valued as aesthetic products. Vannoccio\nBiringuccio\u2019s (1480\u2013c.1539) introduction to his brief \u201cdiscourse on the art of the\npotter\u201d from his Pirotechnia of 1540, encapsulates both the recent recognition\nreceived by ceramic craft and its inseparability from fire:\n184\nM. Wesley\nHaving started to tell you of working potter\u2019s clay for making crucibles and shells, the wish\ncame to me to tell you of the practice of this art also. Although it may seem at first glance to]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=85\nPages: 85\ndirection, rising to the far reaches of the sky; the longer the distance, the quicker it\nrises. So towards the vertical ducts of these experimental furnaces, the particles of\nfire would have to increase their impact speed on the mass of metal inside the fusion\nchamber. The short sentence below the drawing of the furnace, along with many\nother observations of the physical status of the four elements and other natural\nsubstances, enables us to reconstruct Leonardo\u2019s theory of matter as a sort of a\n\u2018Aristotelian corpuscolarism\u2019 and a kinetic theory of heat/fire in which the melting\nof metal or the dissolution of a substance by fire depends on the percussion of a flow\nof particles.30 This interpretation finds confirmation in several reverberatory furnace drawings made with bent surfaces to drive the flow of fire into the middle of\nthe fusion chamber (Codex Atlanticus, fol. 1103r, 548r, 580v, 82v) (Fig. 4).\n29]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=26\nPages: 26,27\n2\nThe Alchemical Art of Dyeing: The Fourfold Division of Alchemy. . .\n3\nThe passage comes after a long introduction (\u00a7\u00a7 1\u20134) in which Psellos rhetorically\ndiscusses the philosophical framework within which chrysopoeia is to be understood and assessed. At the very beginning (\u00a7 1, ll. 5f.) the scholar identifies the main\ntopic of his letter with \u1f21 \u1f10\u03bc\u03c0\u03cd\u03c1\u03b9\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b5\u0002\u03c7\u03bd\u03b7 (the art of fire), whose first aim is said to be\nthe transformation of lead, tin, and any other metal into gold (\u00a7 1, ll. 12\u201315). The\nkey concept of transformation is framed and expanded in the following paragraphs\n(\u00a7\u00a7 2\u20134), where Psellos tries to set the basic principles guiding his \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u2019\u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03ae\u03bc\u03b7\u03c2\n(scientific) explanation of this art. He insists on the four elements that compose the\nphysical world, on their reciprocal changes, and on the alterations of the four\nqualities (namely wet, dry, hot, and cold). These changes are explained through]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=85\nPages: 85,86\nthe fusion chamber (Codex Atlanticus, fol. 1103r, 548r, 580v, 82v) (Fig. 4).\n29\n\u201cquanto piu\u0300 il moto natural del foco o del peso sia lungo, piu\u0300 vale la sua percussion.\u201d (Leonardo,\nCodex Atlanticus, fol. 87r).\n30\nBernardoni, \u201cElementi, sostanze naturali.\u201d\nArtisanal Processes and Epistemological Debate in the Works of Leonardo. . .\n63\nFig. 3 Leonardo, Technological application of the element of fire, Codex Atlanticus, fol. 87r,\nBiblioteca Ambrosiana, Milan (Image taken from Codex Atlanticus, Hoepli edition, Milan, 1894\u2013\n1904)\nFurnaces become Leonardo\u2019s instrument for studying and observing fire. A\ndrawing on a folio in the Codex Arundel representing a tower furnace, used in the\nMiddle Ages by alchemists for distillation, assumes a very important epistemological value (Fig. 5). The drawing presents an apparently accurate copy of this\nfurnace\u2019s vertical section and, when we read the note below, we understand that]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=92\nPages: 92\nBiringuccio\u2019s Pirotechnia and the Knowledge of Nature\nBiringuccio, like Leonardo, placed the focus of his consideration on the possibility\nof increasing knowledge and reproducing processes of nature through the technological codification emerging from alchemical tradition and from his professional\nactivity. In the Pirotechnia (Fig. 9), we again find the two traditional contradictory\nopinions on alchemy: negative towards the alchemists who hide their art behind\nesotericism, magic, alchemical authority and those who practice chemical process\nwithout ratio and empirical control, and positive in relation to the improvement of\nmankind:\nHow many alchemists have I heard lamenting, one because by some unfortunate chance he\nhad spilled his whole composition in the ashes; another because he had been deceived by\nthe excessive strength of the fire, so that the substance of his materials had been burned and\nthe spirits inadvertently allowed to escape; and yet another because he had poor and feeble]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=84\nPages: 84,85\ndemonstrate that his mental approach to technological problems went beyond the\ncreation of a specific process or device. His detailed drawings of furnaces based on\nvery close observation allowed him to let his curiosity take him beyond the\nimprovement of the technical apparatus towards some very interesting observations\nand considerations on the nature of fire and its penetrative power.\nFolio 87r of the Codex Atlanticus portrays several kinds of reverberatory furnaces and among them there is a drawing of a curious and obscure apparatus. The\ndrawing portrays a fusion chamber above a very tall platform connected to a firebox\nby two vertical ducts. On the left there is also another duct that probably conducts\n27\nBernardoni, \u201cLeonardo and the Equestrian Monument\u201d; and Brugnoli, \u201cScultura di Leonardo.\u201d\nBernardoni, Esplosioni, fusioni e trasmutazioni, 26\u201335; Brioist, Vinci, Homme de guerre, 105\u2013\n14.\n28\n62\nA. Bernardoni]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=157\nPages: 157\nthe chemical arts was visually displayed in the series of paintings hanging in the\nStudiolo of Palazzo Vecchio, a small dark room decorated with a complex iconographic narrative. Designed for the then Prince Francesco by Vincenzo Borghini\n(1515\u20131580) and Giorgio Vasari (1511\u20131574), its cabinets seem to have included\nsome of the most valuable treasures produced in the fonderia. In addition to all sorts\nof precious stones, glass and porcelain, they carefully stored the rarest natural\nspecimens and the products of alchemical experiments.26 The meaning of this\nroom and its intimate connection with Francesco I\u2019s interest in alchemy, has been\ndiscussed by many, and most recently reconstructed in the comprehensive work by\nValentina Conticelli. Thirty-two artists were employed and coordinated by Vasari\nto accomplish the work. Benvenuto Cellini (1500\u20131571), who shared with his\npatron a keen interest in alchemy, was meant to have taken part\u2014but his premature]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=94\nPages: 94\nin the same philosophical concepts and the same operational practices, alchemy\ncould be considered a continuity of the arts of fire. Biringuccio\u2019s Pirotechnia, in\nfact, could be interpreted as a sort of normalized alchemy, that is, an \u2018engineering\ndiscipline\u2019 founded on a general theory of matter and in codified operative practices\nto control the power of fire during matter transformation processes.\nThe importance of Biringuccio\u2019s book in the history of metallurgy and chemistry\nis well known. Along with Agricola\u2019s works, it was a most important source for\nmany chemical technology devices and processes.45 Although Pirotechnia was\nessentially a practical treatise, the author\u2019s intention was to go beyond the writing\ndown of know how towards a theoretical consideration about the nature and\ntransformation of substances. As can be seen in many passages of the book,\nBiringuccio developed independent ideas on these issues, combining different]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=80\nPages: 80\nvisited in Milan that discusses the organization of the workshop and the artisans\u2019\nawareness of the technological and epistemological value of their works:\n[. . .] So that whoever entered that shop and saw the activity of so many persons would, I\nthink, believe as I did that he had entered an Inferno, nay, on the contrary, a Paradise, where\nthere was a mirror in which sparkled all the beauty of genius and the power of art.19\nBiringuccio underlined the frenetic and very organized work in the workshop\nstressing the beauty of the mind of the artisans and the power of art. The harmonious cooperation between artisans and the plain consciousness of the processes of\nthe art transformed the hell of hard and dirty metallurgical work into the heaven of\nthe pursuit of the artistic goal. This oxymoron referred to the infernal and paradisiacal condition of art, exalting the extremely difficult process in which raw\nmaterial is transformed into artifact, giving back an important social value to]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=87\nPages: 87\ndrilling motion of fire. Leonardo\u2019s goals are both technological and scientific; the\nfire works as a drill. If this were to be verified, it could be used in some technological application but it could also assume a more general scientific and philosophical\nexplanation because the power of fire, like the power of the other elements (water,\nair and earth), manifests itself in the form of a spiral\u2014the natural screw. The power\nof the screw could be seen in the vortices of water and air, but also in Brunelleschi\u2019s\nbigger cranes and powerful technological elevator devices that become an analogic\nexplanation for the forces operating in nature.32\nAnother very interesting case involving the chemical equipment studied by\nLeonardo is the development of the alembic refrigerator system. In the Codex\nAtlanticus there are some drawings (fol. 912r, 1114r a\u2013b, 216r, 989r, 1118r)\n31\n\u201cTrattato che a\u0300i de\u2019 moti de\u2019 solidi gravi, trata de\u2019 gravi liquidi e dell\u2019aria e de\u2019 moti del foco, e]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=160\nPages: 160\njewelry were the arts most closely connected with alchemy. Their connections\ninspired Francesco to create a new decorative scenario, dominated by alchemy,\nby which illustrate the relation between arts and nature.\nFrancesco was extremely keen, even more than his father, to promote the study\nof the natural sciences and the arts related to them. His passion for the chemical arts\nwas so strong that in 1560, when he was only 19, he was told off by his brother\nGiovanni for attending the works of the fonderia all day long.33 It was Francesco\nwho, in September 1569, charged the architect, engineer and inventor Bernardo\nBuontalenti (1531\u20131608), who had been one of his teachers since 1550, to oversee\nthe construction of Bortolo\u2019s new glass furnace and a new fonderia.34 Francesco I\nalso exploited Buontalenti\u2019s versatile skills in the works of the fusion of precious]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=8\nPages: 8,6\nLawrence M. Principe\nIgne refutata: Thermal Analysis in the Laboratory Practices\nof John Dwight and Ehrenfried Walther von Tschirnhaus . . . . . . . . . . . 181\nMorgan Wesley\nv\nThiS is a FM Blank Page\nIntroduction\nThe Antwerp painter Adriaen van Utrecht (1599\u20131652) arranged Chinese porcelain, a goblet made of rock crystal and cristallo glasses a\u0300 la fac\u0327on de Venise, next to\na magnificent display of gold- and silversmiths\u2019 works on a table in the foreground\nof his 1636 \u201cAllegory of Fire\u201d (Fig. 1).1 Many of these objects have been identified\nas originating in Antwerp, and it is likely that Van Utrecht\u2019s painting celebrates\nthe manufacture and trade of luxury goods for which Antwerp gained fame in the\nearly seventeenth century. Van Utrecht\u2019s objects have another point in common:\none way or the other they are produced through the agency of fire. Van Utrecht\u2019s\npainting celebrates Antwerp\u2019s economic power and the productive ingenuity of its]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=201\nPages: 201,202\ntechnology and innovation. The principal focus is on the adoption of specific\nM. Wesley (*)\nDepartment of History, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK\ne-mail: thenex@mac.com\nS. Dupre\u0301 (ed.), Laboratories of Art, Archimedes 37,\n181\nDOI 10.1007/978-3-319-05065-2_8, \u00a9 Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014\n182\nM. Wesley\nchymical practices in early modern ceramic innovation that lead to a drastic\nreshaping of the experimental landscape. While many adopted practices flowed\nseamlessly between the two disciplines through shared tools and techniques developed by generations of practitioners working with fire, the specific nature of\nceramics forced adaptations on other practices. Elements borrowed from controversial chymical fire analysis found more specific application in investigating\nthermal qualities of ceramic bodies in laboratory experimentation. Used in ceramic]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=16\nPages: 16,15\nFireworks, 28.\n20\nSmith, Body of the Artisan. esp. 95\u2013127.\nIntroduction\nxv\nsermons to reveal conceptions of the origin and formation of ores for which\nMathesius drew equally on natural philosophy and alchemy and on the artisanal\nknowledge of the local miners and goldsmiths. Following one of the goldsmiths\u2019\nmost prized objects, a so-called Handstein, into the Kunstkammer, Haug shows that\nthis knowledge also reached elite collectors. They valued Handsteine for the\nmetallogenetic knowledge they embodied, thereby endorsing the shifting epistemic\nstatus of the arts.\nEpistemic Changes Between Artisans and Alchemists\nBiringuccio and Mathesius\u2019s St. Joachimsthal are examples of persons and places\nof exchange between scholarly cultures (in which learning is based on reading and\nwriting) and artisanal cultures (in which learning is based on doing).21 The laboratories created in Medici Florence, discussed in the chapters by Kieffer and]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=157\nPages: 157\npatron a keen interest in alchemy, was meant to have taken part\u2014but his premature\ndeath prevented his involvement. In the Studiolo the connection between alchemy\nand the chemical arts was exalted. The iconographic itinerary conceived by\nBorghini was situated in a sequence on the upper part of the wall where paintings\ndevoted to thermal baths, the discovery of gun powder, a glass works, a goldsmith\u2019s\nworkshop, alchemists and a bronze foundry were located; at the room\u2019s two ends\nwere two statues, portraying Vulcan and Apollo. On the lower part of the wall a\nmythological scene recalled Francesco I\u2019s alchemical and artistic interests.27 I\nwould like to stress the importance of a few elements directly or indirectly related\nto the chemical arts. What first strikes you in this particular arrangement is the\nproximity of Stradano\u2019s famous painting of Francesco I\u2019s alchemical laboratory and\nGiovanni Maria Butteri\u2019s (1540\u20131606) painting illustrating the glass works (Figs. 3\nand 4).]"]}

{"result":["[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=198\nPages: 198,199\nrepresentations that we might not otherwise have attributed to them. The image\nof a busy, and presumably compartmentalized and hierarchical, chymical workshop\npulls our understanding of these locales towards a comparison with contemporaneous artisanal ateliers, which, if the principals involved were themselves artisans,\nwould have been the obvious model upon which to draw virtually automatically.\n(Interestingly, a modern academic chemical research group retains much of this\ncharacter and structure.) The transconfessional and international character of the\nlarger network\u2014which included Catholics and assorted types of Protestants, as well\nas Dutch, French, English, Danes, Swedes, and Germans\u2014parallels the way in\nwhich it cut across social levels. This situation complicates some of the standard\nways in which historians are accustomed to draw reckoning lines, and recalls the\nideal of a respublica litterarum even in a subject as distant from traditional\nhumanism as sooty chymistry.\n178]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=181\nPages: 181\na variety of chymically-based projects, and, crucially for such a project as this one,\nthis network left behind a wealth of written records that provide historians with the\nnecessary clear evidence from which to work. I will therefore focus here on the\nchymical activities of gold- and silversmiths within this group and their interactions\nwith its other members and with the broader realms of chymistry.\nAnthoni and Andries Grill in the Netherlands and Sweden\nOne part of this network has already been extensively studied, namely the portion\ngathered around the intelligencer Samuel Hartlib (1600\u20131662) in London.8 The\nHartlib Circle\u2019s utopian, educational, and commercial schemes made chymistry a\nsubject of particular interest due to its lucrative potential. An important contact in\nthis regard was the former Calvinist minister Johann Moriaen (c.1591\u20131668) in\nAmsterdam. Moriaen both pursued his own chymical interests and aspirations and]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=178\nPages: 178\nand financial success. Grill built large laboratories, managed laborants, engaged in\ncollaborations, mined texts for information, and shared results. Several Parisian\ngoldsmiths were likewise tied into this chymical network where they exchanged\nexperimental and theoretical information with such figures as Kenelm Digby,\nSamuel Cottereau Duclos, and Johann Rudolf Glauber. In England, George Starkey\nfound that the expertise of gold- and silversmiths could, alternatively, be inconvenient when trying to sell alchemical metals. The documentation provided here blurs\nthe boundary between artisans and natural philosophers, at least in chymistry.\nAlchemy, or to speak more inclusively and less anachronistically, chymistry was a\nfamiliar topic in early modern Europe. Despite its well-established culture of\nsecrecy, it was not only highly visible and widely-known, but widely-practiced]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=180\nPages: 180\nclearly aware of the figure of the alchemist and his iconic value.6 Likewise, the\nallegorical images of widely varying artistic quality in chymical books and manuscripts imply some sort of contact between author/practitioner and artist. Yet such\nartworks do not necessarily indicate that the artists were actually in direct and\nmeaningful contact with chymists. On a purely commercial level, artists would\nhave been in contact (possibly directly in some instances, but probably more\nfrequently indirectly through a retailer) with makers of chymically-prepared pigments such as vermilion or white lead, just as metalworkers and assayers would\nhave connected with producers of mineral acids, fabric-makers with dye manufacturers, and so forth. Yet none of these contacts tells us anything about possible\nepistemic exchanges or collaborations on the level of practical or theoretical\nknowledge.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=180\nPages: 180\nand in terms of identifying connections between them and the better documented\nand recognized work carried out in more visible and more intellectually elevated\ncircles.5 How did artists and artisans understand chymistry, and to what extent did\nthey practice it? To what extent were they familiar with more bookish or scholarly\nideas, practices, practitioners (and vice versa)? Can exchanges of knowledge\nbetween the two groups be clearly documented? Can we identify what practices,\nmaterials, or ideas passed between them, and how one group might have responded\nto information from the other? Answering such questions promises to further\nilluminate chymistry\u2019s cultural and intellectual place in early modern Europe.\nSome such connections seem relatively clear. Chymical workshops appear\nfrequently in Netherlandish genre painting, indicating that Northern artists were\nclearly aware of the figure of the alchemist and his iconic value.6 Likewise, the]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=196\nPages: 196\nwho contributed actively to the chymical conversations of Hartlibians in London in\nways akin to what Grill did in the Netherlands, and Caillart, Roussel, and others did\nin Paris. Nevertheless, interactions of gold- and silversmiths with members of the\nLondon circle are not entirely absent, and serve to illustrate an alternate way in\nwhich goldsmiths were involved in the chymical world.\nProbably the most talented chymist of the English branch of this international\nnetwork was Starkey, the Bermuda-born and Harvard-educated emigre\u0301 who had\narrived in London from Massachusetts in 1650 and quickly became a celebrity\namong Hartlibians and a particular friend and teacher in chymical matters to\nBoyle. Starkey was a microcosm of the broad chymical world of the seventeenth\ncentury. He was talented in both theory and practice, and applied himself to\nvirtually every branch of chymistry: he sought the Philosophers\u2019 Stone and]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=179\nPages: 179\nWhat was the correct starting material for the Philosophers\u2019 Stone and how should\nit be processed? Which authorities were trustworthy and which should be rejected?\nTheoretical choices and commitments both guided and were guided by practical\nexperimentation in the laboratory, leading to new ideas and practices as workers\nreinterpreted older authorities to fit their observations or struck out in new directions to achieve a variety of goals.3 Thus diversity is to be found not only in\ntheoretical notions but in practices as well; the dynamic interaction between head\nand hand stands as a hallmark of the chymical tradition.\nYet another aspect of chymical diversity lies with the practitioners themselves.\nWho pursued and practiced early modern chymistry? Naturally enough, modern\nscholarly inquiry focussed first on those who contributed to the enormous flood of\nearly modern chymical publications, since those sources were the most obvious and]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=198\nPages: 198\nsource of random observations made casually in the course of exercising their\ncraft, they initiated projects, conducted experiments, made innovations, read\nlearned treatises, and communicated or collaborated with more traditionallyeducated or more natural philosophically inclined members. While someone like\nAnthoni Grill was undoubtedly an exceptional figure, he nevertheless serves to\nillustrate one end of the spectrum of possible social and intellectual positions\noccupied by early modern gold- and silversmiths. His active participation and\neventual notoriety and success indicate the social boundaries that were crossed\nwithin the network, a situation that also existed with Caillart and Roussel and others\nin the French context as well. These examples thus begin to resituate the role of\nsuch artisan-chymists within the larger ambit of chymistry. While not erased, the\nneat division of artisan and natural philosopher emerges considerably blurred.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=180\nPages: 180\nepistemic exchanges or collaborations on the level of practical or theoretical\nknowledge.\nDocumented examples of extended collaborations or exchanges between artisans and natural philosophers would be both more interesting and more informative\nfor mapping out the domains and dynamics of early modern alchemical practice. A\npromising locus for such study is to be found particularly among gold- and\nsilversmiths. On the one hand, their trade regularly involved chymical processes\nsuch as assaying, refining, and so forth, and they were thus more or less conversant\nwith chymical substances (acids, salts, metals, amalgams, etc.) and chymical\noperations (fusion, quartation, distillation, etc.) and would frequently have\nmaintained workshops equipped with the necessary equipment (furnaces, flues,\nfuel, retorts, crucibles, etc.) needed for chymical work generally. On the other\nhand, the basic materials of their artisanal labors\u2014gold and silver\u2014held a central\n5\nSee Smith, Body of the Artisan.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=179\nPages: 179\nauthors themselves would have us believe of their art, and what much of the earlier\nsecondary literature claimed, the sages did not \u201call say one thing.\u201d Moving beyond\nthe rhetorical representations of alchemy as a largely monolithic and static tradition, scholars now recognize that early modern chymical thought was both diverse\nand dynamic. Vigorous disagreements and successive innovations characterized\nvirtually its entire history, and most of all, its early modern existence. On the\nbroadest scale, opinions varied in regard to what chymistry\u2019s main goals should\ninclude\u2014chrysopoeia (metallic transmutation), chemiatria (medicinal applications), commercial production, and so on. Even within any one of these important\nbranches, both theoretical frameworks and practical approaches varied widely.\nWhat was the correct hidden composition of metals, and of matter more generally?\nWhat was the correct starting material for the Philosophers\u2019 Stone and how should]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=198\nPages: 198\nneat division of artisan and natural philosopher emerges considerably blurred.\nThe diversity of characters within the network and their various connections and\ncollaborations revises still-prevalent views of alchemical laborers as characteristically solitary, secretive, and isolated. Indeed, when we consider the reports of\nGrill\u2019s multiple laboratories staffed with at least 16 operators, it is hard not to recall\nthe contemporaneous depictions of chymical laboratories in Netherlandish genre\npainting that almost always depict a foregrounded main experimenter with a group\nof other workers in the background tending various processes. While there are\ncertainly purely stylistic and iconographic motivations behind such depictions\n(similar layouts are used in other genre paintings not showing chymists), the\naccounts of Grill\u2019s workshop do add a level of verisimilitude to these artistic\nrepresentations that we might not otherwise have attributed to them. The image]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=193\nPages: 193\nmanuscripts also reveal a wider circle of closely-knit chymists active in Paris\nthroughout the 1650s and 1660s. This circle included, besides Duclos and Digby,\nthe abbe\u0301 Jullien de Loberie (chaplain of the Colle\u0300ge Fortet) and an abbe\u0301 Boucaud,\nThomas Gobelin (member of a prominent family and counselor to the Paris\nParlement), the chymical authors Jean-Baptiste de la Noue, Pierre Borel, and\nFranc\u0327ois de Soucy, Sieur de Gerzan, as well as a host of others. The group shared\nmanuscripts, processes, and other information gathered from books or private\ncorrespondence, and collaborated (in various combinations) on practical chymical\nprocesses, most frequently of a transmutational nature. Some of them frequented\nwell-known intellectual groupings such as the academy of the abbe\u0301 Bourdelot.43\nThe travelling savants Borrichius and Henry Oldenburg (1619\u20131677) also\ninteracted with the group during their visits to Paris.\nSeveral documents record the participation of goldsmiths in this Parisian]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=179\nPages: 179\nearly modern chymical publications, since those sources were the most obvious and\nmost readily available. Further inquiries began to explore the vast bulk of manuscript and archival materials, with the result that the ambit of \u201cthe alchemist\u201d has\nbeen broadened to include practitioners representing the broadest possible range of\nearly modern people.4 University-educated physicians, natural philosophers, and\nscholars busied themselves with chymistry, as did a range of empirics, entrepreneurs, and enthusiasts, as well as an assortment of artisans that included artists,\nmetalworkers, brewers, and cobblers. Chymical discourse and practice took place\nin academic chambers, in courtly settings, in private homes, in commercial\n1\nFor an overview of the history of alchemy, see Principe, Secrets of Alchemy. On the use of the\nterm \u2018chymistry\u2019. see 84\u20135. For a study of the words chemistry and alchemy and their changing\nreferents, see Newman & Principe, \u201cAlchemy vs. Chemistry.\u201d\n2]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=203\nPages: 203\nEhrenfried Walther von Tschirnhaus (1651\u20131708) represent the first successful\nexamples of chymistry\u2019s methodological apparatus being directed toward porcelain\ninnovation. Thermal experiment was an important element in the practices of both\nindividuals and evidence presented in the archaeological record demonstrates\nDwight\u2019s re-firing of Chinese sherds while Tschirnhaus published results of the\nexperimental application of burning lenses to determine the physical properties of\nvaried ceramic bodies. Dwight was ultimately unsuccessful in his endeavors, likely\ndue to economic realities, while Tschirnhaus\u2019s work would lay the cornerstones for\nthe eventual production of Meissen porcelain.\nThe Potter\u2019s Art as Craft Practice\nTo understand why the shift from the intellectual space of the craft workshop to the\nchymical laboratory was critical to the advancement of European ceramic development, an examination of the awkward position of pottery within the hierarchy of]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=179\nPages: 179,180\nreferents, see Newman & Principe, \u201cAlchemy vs. Chemistry.\u201d\n2\nPrincipe, \u201cDiversity in Alchemy,\u201d and \u201cRobert Boyle and Isaac Newton.\u201d\n3\nOn the interplay of theory and practice in alchemy, see Newman & Principe, Alchemy Tried in the\nFire, esp. 92\u2013206.\n4\nFor example, see Nummedal, Alchemy and Authority, which details the roles and status of\n\u2018entrepreneurial\u2019 chymists in German courts. For a sense of the broad sweep of early modern\nalchemical practice, see Moran, Distilling Knowledge.\nGoldsmiths and Chymists: The Activity of Artisans Within Alchemical Circles\n159\nestablishments, and in noisy workshops. Most recently there has been particular\ninterest in exploring alchemy\u2019s place among artists and artisans, an investigation\nthat rightly reflects the crucial position of material production within chymistry\nthroughout its history. Important questions remain however in regard to demonstrating the specific theoretical and practical content of such artisanal endeavors,]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=201\nPages: 201\nno substantive evidence of direct knowledge transfer has been discovered. This\npaper endeavors to shift the focus from an externally driven developmental process\nand relocate the principal method of innovation within the experimental framework\nestablished by early modern chymistry. Evidence for the use of thermal experimentation will be considered as a foundational element toward a chymical solution\nto the problem of porcelain production. Excavated material from the workshop of\nthe seventeenth century English arcanist John Dwight and the published experiments of the seventeenth century Silesian natural philosopher Ehrenfried Walther\nvon Tschirnhaus will provide the basis for this examination. This material, along\nwith the thermal elements unique to the successful Meissen porcelains will be used\nto frame the initial comparisons of the technological differences between the]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=13\nPages: 13\nusing materials and chemical procedures to make both everyday items and objects\nof the visual and decorative arts, the activity known as alchemy encompassed more\nthan attempts to make gold.14 Transmutational alchemy was about the transmutation of all base metals into more noble ones, but chrysopoeia was only one\naspect of alchemy. Alchemy also touched on medicine and chemical manufacture.\nIt was about the chemical production of things\u2014medicines, porcelain, dyes, and\nother products as well as the precious metals\u2014and about the knowledge of how to\nproduce them. In this sense, \u201cart technologies\u201d\u2014materials and techniques to make\nart and knowledge of these materials and techniques\u2014overlapped with alchemy.\nAlchemy has deep roots in writings on material transformation from Antiquity.\nThe productive knowledge associated with material transformation was written\ndown in recipe books. The Leiden and Stockholm Papyri date to the third century]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=112\nPages: 112\nfaith of the scholars sulphur and quicksilver. Several believe, that due to the orbit and\ninfluence of the heaven, exhalations and vapour of sulphur and quicksilver\u2014called\nexhalationes minerales\u2014were drawn up and, during their ascent under the influence of\nthe planets, connected in the chasms and gaps and were made into ores.25\nThe whole range of early modern competing ideas of metallogenesis is revealed\nwhen Ru\u0308lein of Calw in the very next sentence introduces a Ghur (also discussed in\nthe \u201cThird Sermon\u201d of Mathesius) as a kind of \u201chumid, cold, mucous, completely\nsulphur-free matter, which is extracted virtually as sweat of the earth\u201d as an equally\nvalid theory, a humid and mucilaginous element able to transmute under the\n24\n\u201cAstrologorum autem sententia est, errantes stellas influxu & viribus, quas exercent in materia,\nad id in terrae visceribus aptata, efficere metella: inerrantes vero gemmas. Quod figmentum]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=218\nPages: 218\nthe Chinese material.\nChymical Laboratory as Potter\u2019s Workshop\nThe early modern inclusion of ceramics within the arts of the fire brought with it\naccess to the experimental techniques developed by alchemist and chymists. This\nshift allowed an interrogative approach to the production of porcelain that utilized\nmany of the tools traditionally found in the craftsman\u2019s workshop while\ncircumventing the gradual processes of craft innovation. When we consider\nchymistry as both a kind of knowledge, and an object-producing discipline, the\napplication of its techniques to reverse the process of making porcelain is a logical\nextension of the economic demand for china and the intellectual drive toward\nmaker\u2019s knowledge as expressed by Bacon.\nCertainly, the history of ceramics after the seventeenth century is inextricably\nlinked to chemistry\u2019s success at solving increasingly sophisticated questions of\nluxury pottery production. We need look no further than William Cookworthy\u2019s]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=203\nPages: 203\ntransmutational alchemy on more than an individual level, the origination of the\nterm in the late seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries is clearly linked to those\npursuits. Further, it should be noted that these first arcanists are entirely separate\nfrom communities and guilds of potters in their various regions, offering an entirely\nnovel actor class that appears at the end of the seventeenth century, chymists whose\nfocus was on the production of translucent ceramics rather than metallurgical,\nmedical, or other natural philosophical avenues.\nNo evidence towards production of a hard-paste porcelain body by European\npotters before the eighteenth century is extant, leaving the chymist\u2019s laboratory as\nthe principle space of ceramic innovation. Specific investigation of the physical\nproperties of Chinese porcelain undertaken by John Dwight (c.1633\u20131704) and\nEhrenfried Walther von Tschirnhaus (1651\u20131708) represent the first successful]"]}

{"result":["[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=27\nPages: 27\nqualities (namely wet, dry, hot, and cold). These changes are explained through\nexamples taken from various meteorological phenomena mainly based on evaporation and condensation of water.3 For instance, \u201cwater becomes like a stone [i.e.\nchanges into earth] when it freezes [and] becomes air when it evaporates.\u201d4\nMoreover, similar transformations of the basic elements/qualities also help to\nunderstand more complex phenomena, such as the case of a tree burned by a\nlightning strike, in which all the humidity of wood is consumed by the fire.5 In\nPsellos\u2019s opinion, \u03c6\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03ba\u1f74 \u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03af\u03c9\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2 (natural processes of alteration) of the same\nkind are to be detected behind the \u201cart of fire,\u201d which is redefined as \u1f21 \u03c4\u03b5\u0002\u03c7\u03bd\u03b7 \u03c4~\n\u03b7\u03c2\n\u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b2\u03bf\u03bb~\n\u03b7\u03c2 (the art of transformation) at the beginning of the section quoted above\n(II. 3\u20134). This art, in fact, included a wide set of practices and techniques dealing\nwith the transformation of various \u1f55\u03bb\u03b1\u03b9 (materials), such as metals, stones, and]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=204\nPages: 204\ncame to me to tell you of the practice of this art also. Although it may seem at first glance to\nbe outside the order and purpose of my writing, he who considers well will see that it is not\nunrelated to it but proper, since it is wholly dependent on the agency and power of fire if it is\nto be brought to its perfection. Moreover, the potter\u2019s glazes and colors are all substances of\nvarious metals or impure minerals and therefore belong to fire. Since it is my intention to\ntreat of fire, minerals, and metals for you, I surely should not have omitted this, particularly\nbecause it is a necessary art which enriches and is greatly praised both for its ingenuity and\nits beauty.4\nLike the other arts treated in the Pirotechnia, the action of the fire on base earths\nand minerals provided integral transformation in the objects shaped by the potter\u2019s\nhands. At the time of Biringuccio\u2019s writing, the potter\u2019s art was on the threshold of a]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=206\nPages: 206\nbetween the disciplines, came into full application in the pursuit of ceramic\ninnovation.\nDue to the highly resistant nature of porcelain to analysis via distillation, the\napplication of direct heat was the recourse of both Dwight and Tschirnhaus. While\ntheir techniques were radically different, applying the heat of the furnace and the\nenergy of the sun respectively, the basic principles of this thermal experiment was\nclosely linked to the long-standing application of chymical fire analysis.\nThe exposure of both Dwight and Tschirnhaus to fire analysis during their\nstudies at university can be situated within a larger debate regarding the legitimacy\nof the process during the seventeenth century. The ultimate goal of separating\nbodies into their constituent components and, ideally, recombining them through\nthe application of fire, was assailed on a methodological and philosophical level in\n14\nThe speculation regarding the extended fermentation of clay and the addition of \u2018artificial]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=26\nPages: 26,27\n2\nThe Alchemical Art of Dyeing: The Fourfold Division of Alchemy. . .\n3\nThe passage comes after a long introduction (\u00a7\u00a7 1\u20134) in which Psellos rhetorically\ndiscusses the philosophical framework within which chrysopoeia is to be understood and assessed. At the very beginning (\u00a7 1, ll. 5f.) the scholar identifies the main\ntopic of his letter with \u1f21 \u1f10\u03bc\u03c0\u03cd\u03c1\u03b9\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b5\u0002\u03c7\u03bd\u03b7 (the art of fire), whose first aim is said to be\nthe transformation of lead, tin, and any other metal into gold (\u00a7 1, ll. 12\u201315). The\nkey concept of transformation is framed and expanded in the following paragraphs\n(\u00a7\u00a7 2\u20134), where Psellos tries to set the basic principles guiding his \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u2019\u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03ae\u03bc\u03b7\u03c2\n(scientific) explanation of this art. He insists on the four elements that compose the\nphysical world, on their reciprocal changes, and on the alterations of the four\nqualities (namely wet, dry, hot, and cold). These changes are explained through]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=207\nPages: 207\ntool for interrogation of material, but as commentators have pointed out, no true fire\nanalysis could occur.\nConsidering the context of ceramics, the limiting factor of fire analysis must\nnecessarily be in its inability to undo changes in crystalline structure during the\ninitial firing of an object. Because of these phase shifts, the specific components of a\nceramic body resist resolution by thermal or chemical means, making the original\nmaterials inscrutable. Even with modern scanning electron microscopy only an\nanalysis of the volumes of base elements is available (though insight into crystalline\nstructure is provided); establishing a definitive source or recipe for the ware prior to\nfiring is frequently impossible. Dwight and Tschirnhaus were subject to substantially greater limitations, with the possible attributes available for their analysis\nrestricted to: temperature of vitrification, point of liquefaction and failure of the]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=93\nPages: 93,94\nBiringuccio\u2019s original approach to the arts of fire emerges and that distinguishes\nhim, for instance, from Georg Agricola who, at almost the same time, wrote his De\nre metallica in which he outlined the general arts of metals related to mining and\nmetallurgy. Biringuccio expanded his perspective to include all the arts of fire,\nincluding, artillery, making gunpowder, acids preparation, pottery, goldsmithing,\nfireworks, generic distillation arts, as well as alchemy.44 If we accept his conditions,\n43\nSee Biringuccio, De la pirotechnia (1914), 27\u201340; Perifano, \u201cAlchimie\u201d; Smith, Body of the\nArtisan, 143\u20134; and Bernardoni, La conoscenza del fare, 669.\n44\nBiringuccio, De la pirotechnia (1977), fol. 123r\u20134r.\nArtisanal Processes and Epistemological Debate in the Works of Leonardo. . .\n71\nalchemy and pyrotechnics are not in contradiction, rather, in so far as they are used\nin the same philosophical concepts and the same operational practices, alchemy]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=8\nPages: 8\npainting celebrates Antwerp\u2019s economic power and the productive ingenuity of its\ncraftsmen and artists as much as it praises the transformative force of fire turning\nrelatively cheap and humble materials into highly valued objects of art. These\nobjects were all products of the arts of fire, which according to Vannoccio\nBiringuccio (1480\u2013c.1539) included alchemy, and excluded \u201cfalse alchemy\u201d\nconcerned with pretentious transmutation.2\nIn the background of Van Utrecht\u2019s painting, a window opens on to a space in\nwhich a man stands working at a stove with an open fire. Stirring a cauldron, the\nman is shown in the material company of bellows, an anvil, a melting and a\ndistilling furnace, and other equipment related to the worlds of assaying and\nmetallurgy. Van Utrecht\u2019s background refers to the spaces in which the objects in\nthe foreground were produced. Were these spaces laboratories or artisanal workshops? Were they home to gold- and silversmiths, glassmakers or producers of]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=203\nPages: 203,204\nthe decorative arts before the early modern period is worthwhile. Prior to its\ninteraction with chymistry, the relationship between the potter\u2019s craft and fire was\nprincipally of a mechanical, fixative nature. As the heat of the kiln was known to\nremove the water from earthen bodies, its ability to affect permanent transformation\non the materials placed in the kiln was its principal contribution to the success of\nceramic production. Those objects existed first as trade goods rather than artisanal\nobjects and only later became valued as aesthetic products. Vannoccio\nBiringuccio\u2019s (1480\u2013c.1539) introduction to his brief \u201cdiscourse on the art of the\npotter\u201d from his Pirotechnia of 1540, encapsulates both the recent recognition\nreceived by ceramic craft and its inseparability from fire:\n184\nM. Wesley\nHaving started to tell you of working potter\u2019s clay for making crucibles and shells, the wish\ncame to me to tell you of the practice of this art also. Although it may seem at first glance to]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=208\nPages: 208,207\nrestricted to: temperature of vitrification, point of liquefaction and failure of the\nbody, separation of glaze and body material in phases, and reaction of any applied\ndecorations in a manner different to the body or glaze. This limited access to deeper\nstructures would demand that any speculation as to source or recipe would have to\n15\nThe essay by Debus, \u201cFire Analysis,\u201d encapsulates much of the instability related to fire analysis\nas it appears in the major texts of the seventeenth century, while Newman, Promethean Ambitions,\n251\u201362, revisits and furthers the discussion as it relates to the art-nature debate.\n16\nBacon, New Organon, Book II, Aph. 7.\n17\nBoyle, The Sceptical Chymist.\n18\nFor more on Boyle and Starkey\u2019s relationship and the work of Starkey as an experimentalist, see\nNewman & Principe, Alchemy Tried in the Fire, 92\u2013128; and Newman, Gehennical Fire.\n19\nDebus, \u201cFire Analysis,\u201d 128\u201330.\n188\nM. Wesley]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=84\nPages: 84,85\n14.\n28\n62\nA. Bernardoni\nFig. 2 Leonardo, artillery moulding process for the barrel, Codex Atlanticus, fol. 46br, Biblioteca\nAmbrosiana, Milan (Image taken from Codex Atlanticus, Hoepli edition, Milan, 1894\u20131904)\nair into the chamber from below. The note under the drawing helps us interpret the\ndevice as a study for amplifying the penetrative action of fire: \u201cThe greater the\nnatural motion of the fire or the greater its weight, the greater its impulsive force\u201d\n(Fig. 3).29 Leonardo talks about fire in the same terms as the weight of bodies, so he\ninterprets it as a hard material particulate flow, able to penetrate the body and break\nthe link of its particles. In Aristotelian matter theory, fire is the lightest element that\nfinds its natural place at the most peripheral region of the sub-lunar world. Just as a\nstone falls towards the earth to reach its natural place, fire goes in the opposite\ndirection, rising to the far reaches of the sky; the longer the distance, the quicker it]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=207\nPages: 207\nbe viewed as somewhat problematic, considering the American chymist George\nStarkey\u2019s (1628\u20131665) extensive influence on his early research. Starkey\u2019s notebooks contain extensive application of fire analysis to test various experiments,\nwith the notation refutata per ignem appearing multiple times.18\nDebus clearly argues that the debate over the acceptability of fire analysis was\nclosely linked to the ongoing conflict being waged against Aristotelian thought in\nthe seventeenth century.19 As such many of the arguments against, from an empirical standpoint, must be viewed as couched within that particular political rhetoric.\nWithin the practices of Dwight and Tschirnhaus, their education in chymistry points\nto a profound awareness of the controlled application of fire in laboratory practice,\nbut more practical demands circumvented their full engagement within the Aristotelian debate and records of their work support the notion that fire became a critical]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=85\nPages: 85\ndirection, rising to the far reaches of the sky; the longer the distance, the quicker it\nrises. So towards the vertical ducts of these experimental furnaces, the particles of\nfire would have to increase their impact speed on the mass of metal inside the fusion\nchamber. The short sentence below the drawing of the furnace, along with many\nother observations of the physical status of the four elements and other natural\nsubstances, enables us to reconstruct Leonardo\u2019s theory of matter as a sort of a\n\u2018Aristotelian corpuscolarism\u2019 and a kinetic theory of heat/fire in which the melting\nof metal or the dissolution of a substance by fire depends on the percussion of a flow\nof particles.30 This interpretation finds confirmation in several reverberatory furnace drawings made with bent surfaces to drive the flow of fire into the middle of\nthe fusion chamber (Codex Atlanticus, fol. 1103r, 548r, 580v, 82v) (Fig. 4).\n29]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=15\nPages: 15\nas a field of expert inquiry on materials and material transformation was considered\nsufficiently positive to identify with. However, we should not forget that Vasari\u2019s\nidentification of Van Eyck as an alchemist served the purpose of downplaying\nNetherlandish art as techne, only a first step in a narrative of art historical progress\nculminating in Vasari\u2019s beloved Florentine art.\nThe epistemic value of techne was shifting at the time of Vasari. Artisans came\nto be considered experts of nature likening the artisanal processes of material\ntransformation undertaken in their workshops to those of nature.20 As Andrea\nBernardoni shows in this volume, Biringuccio\u2019s Pirotechnia is part of this larger\nprocess of shifting epistemic value of artisanal processes. Rejecting transmutational\nalchemy as \u201cfalse\u201d and the alchemists who practiced it as fraudulent, Biringuccio\ncarved out space for true alchemy as one of the arts of fire. Artisanal workshops,]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=16\nPages: 16,15\ncarved out space for true alchemy as one of the arts of fire. Artisanal workshops,\nsuch as Andrea Verrocchio\u2019s (c.1435\u20131488) in which Leonardo da Vinci (1452\u2013\n1519) apprenticed or Leonardo\u2019s own workplace, shared a material culture with\nalchemical laboratories. As we have already pointed out, artisans used similar\nequipment and performed \u201cchemical\u201d operations. However, Bernardoni argues,\nBiringuccio made the claim that these artisans were the true experts on matter,\nmaterials and material transformation and that artisanal \u201cchemical\u201d operations were\nthe key to natural knowledge.\nOne of the readers of Biringuccio\u2019s Pirotechnia was Johannes Mathesius (1504\u2013\n1565), a Lutheran preacher in St. Joachimsthal, the center of an important mining\ndistrict. In her contribution to this volume, Henrike Haug analyzes Mathesius\u2019s\n19\nHassenstein, Das Feuerwerckbuch, 45\u20136. For translation and discussion, see Werrett,\nFireworks, 28.\n20\nSmith, Body of the Artisan. esp. 95\u2013127.\nIntroduction\nxv]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=86\nPages: 86,87\nfurnace\u2019s vertical section and, when we read the note below, we understand that\nhis interest is not in the technological device but the transformation of the elements\ninvolved in the combustion process inside it. The note below the furnace helps us\nunderstand that\nonce you have dealt with the motion of heavy solids, deal with heavy liquids and with air\nand with the motion of fire. Compare the motion of fire with the whirls of air and water and\n64\nA. Bernardoni\nFig. 4 Leonardo, Vortices\nof fire, Codex Atlanticus,\nfol. 580v, Biblioteca\nAmbrosiana, Milan (Image\ntaken from Codex\nAtlanticus, Hoepli edition,\nMilan, 1894\u20131904)\nyou will find a drilling motion of fire that makes it powerful for fusion; you can obtain these\ngyrations with the help of registers and boiling water.31\nLeonardo\u2019s main interest in this drawing is to create a device for him to see the\ndrilling motion of fire. Leonardo\u2019s goals are both technological and scientific; the]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=27\nPages: 27\n3\nMeteorology represents an important aspect of Psellos\u2019s natural philosophy; the scholar devoted\nto this topic both many chapters of his De Omnifaria Doctrina (\u00a7\u00a7 139\u201378 in Westerink,\nOmnifaria Doctrina) and some specific essays (see Bidez, E\u00b4pitre sur la Chrysope\u0301e, 51\u201370; and\nDuffy, Michaelis Pselli, texts 19\u201331). On the relations between Psellos\u2019s alchemical interests and\nhis investigation of the physical world, see Katsiampoura, \u201cTransmutation of Matter,\u201d 665\u20137.\n4\n\u201c\u03c4\u1f78 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u1f55\u03b4\u03c9\u03c1 \u03c0\u03b7\u03b3\u03bd\u03cd\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd \u03bb\u03b9\u03b8\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b5\u03b9$ \u03c2 \u03ba\u03c1\u03cd\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd [and] \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf \u03b5\u03b9$ \u03c2 \u1f00\u03c4\u03bc\u03af\u03b4\u03b1 \u03bb\u03c5o\u0301\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd \u1f00\u1f74\u03c1\n\u03ba\u03b1\u03b8\u03af\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9.\u201d\n5\nIn \u00a7 4 Psellos explains the petrifaction of an oak struck by a lightning strike: a quick and sharp\nlightning does not only make the oak black, but consumes all its humidity and transforms the wood\ninto stone.\n6\nSee infra, \u00a7 3.\n7\nThe entry continues by telling how the emperor Diocletian (284\u2013305) made to burn all the\nEgyptian books on alchemy (in the Greek text: \u201c\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03c7\u03b7\u03bc\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03c2 \u03c7\u03c1\u03c5\u03c3\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9 \u1f00\u03c1\u03b3\u03cd\u03c1\u03bf\u03c5\u201d); this]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=92\nPages: 92\nBiringuccio\u2019s Pirotechnia and the Knowledge of Nature\nBiringuccio, like Leonardo, placed the focus of his consideration on the possibility\nof increasing knowledge and reproducing processes of nature through the technological codification emerging from alchemical tradition and from his professional\nactivity. In the Pirotechnia (Fig. 9), we again find the two traditional contradictory\nopinions on alchemy: negative towards the alchemists who hide their art behind\nesotericism, magic, alchemical authority and those who practice chemical process\nwithout ratio and empirical control, and positive in relation to the improvement of\nmankind:\nHow many alchemists have I heard lamenting, one because by some unfortunate chance he\nhad spilled his whole composition in the ashes; another because he had been deceived by\nthe excessive strength of the fire, so that the substance of his materials had been burned and\nthe spirits inadvertently allowed to escape; and yet another because he had poor and feeble]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=206\nPages: 206,207\n14\nThe speculation regarding the extended fermentation of clay and the addition of \u2018artificial\nminerals\u2019 to Chinese porcelain comes from Bacon, New Organon, Book II, Aph. 50.\nIgne refutata: Thermal Analysis in the Laboratory Practices of John Dwight. . .\n187\nthe writings of the chymists.15 Supporters, such as Daniel Sennert (1572\u20131637),\nargued that it presented the most effective means of resolution, provided that\nviolent reactions were avoided in favor of distillation and more subtle applications\nof heat. While Francis Bacon (1561\u20131626) described the action of fire on the\nprinciples of a body as something that \u201cconfounds\u201d in that \u201cmany natures which\nare in fact newly brought out and superinduced by fire and heat.\u201d16 Similarly Robert\nBoyle (1627\u20131691) questioned the role of fire in analysis, based on the uncertainty\nof its ability to alter rather than separate substances.17 This position of Boyle\u2019s can\nbe viewed as somewhat problematic, considering the American chymist George]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=94\nPages: 94\nin the same philosophical concepts and the same operational practices, alchemy\ncould be considered a continuity of the arts of fire. Biringuccio\u2019s Pirotechnia, in\nfact, could be interpreted as a sort of normalized alchemy, that is, an \u2018engineering\ndiscipline\u2019 founded on a general theory of matter and in codified operative practices\nto control the power of fire during matter transformation processes.\nThe importance of Biringuccio\u2019s book in the history of metallurgy and chemistry\nis well known. Along with Agricola\u2019s works, it was a most important source for\nmany chemical technology devices and processes.45 Although Pirotechnia was\nessentially a practical treatise, the author\u2019s intention was to go beyond the writing\ndown of know how towards a theoretical consideration about the nature and\ntransformation of substances. As can be seen in many passages of the book,\nBiringuccio developed independent ideas on these issues, combining different]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=208\nPages: 208,207\n19\nDebus, \u201cFire Analysis,\u201d 128\u201330.\n188\nM. Wesley\nbe made with comparative data from other experiments on local raw materials, a\nroute that both men pursued aggressively, as discussed below.\nThat Bacon and Boyle were key figures in the debate regarding fire analysis had\na corollary impact on the advancement of ceramic innovation, and perhaps on the\nultimate failure to discover the arcanum in England. As the evidence of Dwight\u2019s\nexperimentation is considered, his links to Boyle and the influence of Bacon\u2019s\nwritings become increasingly important. Due to the restrictions of his fire analysis,\nhe was unable to disprove Bacon\u2019s speculation that there was an \u2018artificial mineral\u2019\nemployed in the production of porcelain, and his later experiments and workbooks\ndemonstrate that while he became intimately aware of the firing temperatures\nconnected to the Chinese prototypes he was able to secure, he never gave up on\nthe idea of a synthetic additive that would make clay into porcelain.]"]}

{"result":["[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=207\nPages: 207\nbe viewed as somewhat problematic, considering the American chymist George\nStarkey\u2019s (1628\u20131665) extensive influence on his early research. Starkey\u2019s notebooks contain extensive application of fire analysis to test various experiments,\nwith the notation refutata per ignem appearing multiple times.18\nDebus clearly argues that the debate over the acceptability of fire analysis was\nclosely linked to the ongoing conflict being waged against Aristotelian thought in\nthe seventeenth century.19 As such many of the arguments against, from an empirical standpoint, must be viewed as couched within that particular political rhetoric.\nWithin the practices of Dwight and Tschirnhaus, their education in chymistry points\nto a profound awareness of the controlled application of fire in laboratory practice,\nbut more practical demands circumvented their full engagement within the Aristotelian debate and records of their work support the notion that fire became a critical]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=207\nPages: 207\ntool for interrogation of material, but as commentators have pointed out, no true fire\nanalysis could occur.\nConsidering the context of ceramics, the limiting factor of fire analysis must\nnecessarily be in its inability to undo changes in crystalline structure during the\ninitial firing of an object. Because of these phase shifts, the specific components of a\nceramic body resist resolution by thermal or chemical means, making the original\nmaterials inscrutable. Even with modern scanning electron microscopy only an\nanalysis of the volumes of base elements is available (though insight into crystalline\nstructure is provided); establishing a definitive source or recipe for the ware prior to\nfiring is frequently impossible. Dwight and Tschirnhaus were subject to substantially greater limitations, with the possible attributes available for their analysis\nrestricted to: temperature of vitrification, point of liquefaction and failure of the]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=208\nPages: 208,207\nrestricted to: temperature of vitrification, point of liquefaction and failure of the\nbody, separation of glaze and body material in phases, and reaction of any applied\ndecorations in a manner different to the body or glaze. This limited access to deeper\nstructures would demand that any speculation as to source or recipe would have to\n15\nThe essay by Debus, \u201cFire Analysis,\u201d encapsulates much of the instability related to fire analysis\nas it appears in the major texts of the seventeenth century, while Newman, Promethean Ambitions,\n251\u201362, revisits and furthers the discussion as it relates to the art-nature debate.\n16\nBacon, New Organon, Book II, Aph. 7.\n17\nBoyle, The Sceptical Chymist.\n18\nFor more on Boyle and Starkey\u2019s relationship and the work of Starkey as an experimentalist, see\nNewman & Principe, Alchemy Tried in the Fire, 92\u2013128; and Newman, Gehennical Fire.\n19\nDebus, \u201cFire Analysis,\u201d 128\u201330.\n188\nM. Wesley]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=206\nPages: 206\nbetween the disciplines, came into full application in the pursuit of ceramic\ninnovation.\nDue to the highly resistant nature of porcelain to analysis via distillation, the\napplication of direct heat was the recourse of both Dwight and Tschirnhaus. While\ntheir techniques were radically different, applying the heat of the furnace and the\nenergy of the sun respectively, the basic principles of this thermal experiment was\nclosely linked to the long-standing application of chymical fire analysis.\nThe exposure of both Dwight and Tschirnhaus to fire analysis during their\nstudies at university can be situated within a larger debate regarding the legitimacy\nof the process during the seventeenth century. The ultimate goal of separating\nbodies into their constituent components and, ideally, recombining them through\nthe application of fire, was assailed on a methodological and philosophical level in\n14\nThe speculation regarding the extended fermentation of clay and the addition of \u2018artificial]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=206\nPages: 206,207\n14\nThe speculation regarding the extended fermentation of clay and the addition of \u2018artificial\nminerals\u2019 to Chinese porcelain comes from Bacon, New Organon, Book II, Aph. 50.\nIgne refutata: Thermal Analysis in the Laboratory Practices of John Dwight. . .\n187\nthe writings of the chymists.15 Supporters, such as Daniel Sennert (1572\u20131637),\nargued that it presented the most effective means of resolution, provided that\nviolent reactions were avoided in favor of distillation and more subtle applications\nof heat. While Francis Bacon (1561\u20131626) described the action of fire on the\nprinciples of a body as something that \u201cconfounds\u201d in that \u201cmany natures which\nare in fact newly brought out and superinduced by fire and heat.\u201d16 Similarly Robert\nBoyle (1627\u20131691) questioned the role of fire in analysis, based on the uncertainty\nof its ability to alter rather than separate substances.17 This position of Boyle\u2019s can\nbe viewed as somewhat problematic, considering the American chymist George]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=208\nPages: 208,207\n19\nDebus, \u201cFire Analysis,\u201d 128\u201330.\n188\nM. Wesley\nbe made with comparative data from other experiments on local raw materials, a\nroute that both men pursued aggressively, as discussed below.\nThat Bacon and Boyle were key figures in the debate regarding fire analysis had\na corollary impact on the advancement of ceramic innovation, and perhaps on the\nultimate failure to discover the arcanum in England. As the evidence of Dwight\u2019s\nexperimentation is considered, his links to Boyle and the influence of Bacon\u2019s\nwritings become increasingly important. Due to the restrictions of his fire analysis,\nhe was unable to disprove Bacon\u2019s speculation that there was an \u2018artificial mineral\u2019\nemployed in the production of porcelain, and his later experiments and workbooks\ndemonstrate that while he became intimately aware of the firing temperatures\nconnected to the Chinese prototypes he was able to secure, he never gave up on\nthe idea of a synthetic additive that would make clay into porcelain.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=201\nPages: 201,202\ntechnology and innovation. The principal focus is on the adoption of specific\nM. Wesley (*)\nDepartment of History, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK\ne-mail: thenex@mac.com\nS. Dupre\u0301 (ed.), Laboratories of Art, Archimedes 37,\n181\nDOI 10.1007/978-3-319-05065-2_8, \u00a9 Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014\n182\nM. Wesley\nchymical practices in early modern ceramic innovation that lead to a drastic\nreshaping of the experimental landscape. While many adopted practices flowed\nseamlessly between the two disciplines through shared tools and techniques developed by generations of practitioners working with fire, the specific nature of\nceramics forced adaptations on other practices. Elements borrowed from controversial chymical fire analysis found more specific application in investigating\nthermal qualities of ceramic bodies in laboratory experimentation. Used in ceramic]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=217\nPages: 217\n197\nworkshop. While an eventual solution may have been found, the possibility was\ncircumvented by the engagement of the chymists with the problem of porcelain\nproduction.\nIt is clear that both Dwight and Tschirnhaus were concerned with asking similar\nquestions of Chinese porcelain and their results directed the future avenues of their\nexperiments. As previously mentioned, both sets of data were limited in their scope\nand restricted to comparative discourse with local material. The efficacy of analytic\ntechniques on ceramic bodies can also be seen to play a role, with the slow firing of\nsherds in Dwight\u2019s various furnaces or kilns restricting his ability to both observe\nthe objects as they processed through the sequence and the time frame for his\nanalysis. If one considers the heating rate of a seventeenth-century stoneware kiln,\nor even a smaller furnace, its maximum achievable temperature and the amount of]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=218\nPages: 218,219\nluxury pottery production. We need look no further than William Cookworthy\u2019s\n(1705\u20131780) patent for the manufacture of porcelain in 1768 or the thousands of\nexperiments conducted by Josiah Wedgwood (1730\u20131795) in the production of his\nJasperwares. Unlike the other arts of the fire; metalworking, glassmaking, and\ndyeing, the late inclusion of ceramics into the hierarchy of decorative arts allows\ncontemporary scholars opportunities to investigate the separations between the\ncraft artisan and the chymist during the early modern period, of which this discussion of thermal analysis is only one of many.\nIgne refutata: Thermal Analysis in the Laboratory Practices of John Dwight. . .\n199\nBibliography\nBacon, Francis. 1858. New Organon, trans. James Spedding et al. London: Longmans and Co.\nBirch, Thomas. 1756\u20131757. History of the Royal Society of London. London: A. Millar.\nBiringuccio, Vannoccio. [1540] 1942. The Pirotechnia of Vannoccio Biriniguccio: The Classic]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=203\nPages: 203\nEhrenfried Walther von Tschirnhaus (1651\u20131708) represent the first successful\nexamples of chymistry\u2019s methodological apparatus being directed toward porcelain\ninnovation. Thermal experiment was an important element in the practices of both\nindividuals and evidence presented in the archaeological record demonstrates\nDwight\u2019s re-firing of Chinese sherds while Tschirnhaus published results of the\nexperimental application of burning lenses to determine the physical properties of\nvaried ceramic bodies. Dwight was ultimately unsuccessful in his endeavors, likely\ndue to economic realities, while Tschirnhaus\u2019s work would lay the cornerstones for\nthe eventual production of Meissen porcelain.\nThe Potter\u2019s Art as Craft Practice\nTo understand why the shift from the intellectual space of the craft workshop to the\nchymical laboratory was critical to the advancement of European ceramic development, an examination of the awkward position of pottery within the hierarchy of]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=181\nPages: 181\na variety of chymically-based projects, and, crucially for such a project as this one,\nthis network left behind a wealth of written records that provide historians with the\nnecessary clear evidence from which to work. I will therefore focus here on the\nchymical activities of gold- and silversmiths within this group and their interactions\nwith its other members and with the broader realms of chymistry.\nAnthoni and Andries Grill in the Netherlands and Sweden\nOne part of this network has already been extensively studied, namely the portion\ngathered around the intelligencer Samuel Hartlib (1600\u20131662) in London.8 The\nHartlib Circle\u2019s utopian, educational, and commercial schemes made chymistry a\nsubject of particular interest due to its lucrative potential. An important contact in\nthis regard was the former Calvinist minister Johann Moriaen (c.1591\u20131668) in\nAmsterdam. Moriaen both pursued his own chymical interests and aspirations and]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=178\nPages: 178\nand financial success. Grill built large laboratories, managed laborants, engaged in\ncollaborations, mined texts for information, and shared results. Several Parisian\ngoldsmiths were likewise tied into this chymical network where they exchanged\nexperimental and theoretical information with such figures as Kenelm Digby,\nSamuel Cottereau Duclos, and Johann Rudolf Glauber. In England, George Starkey\nfound that the expertise of gold- and silversmiths could, alternatively, be inconvenient when trying to sell alchemical metals. The documentation provided here blurs\nthe boundary between artisans and natural philosophers, at least in chymistry.\nAlchemy, or to speak more inclusively and less anachronistically, chymistry was a\nfamiliar topic in early modern Europe. Despite its well-established culture of\nsecrecy, it was not only highly visible and widely-known, but widely-practiced]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=85\nPages: 85\ndirection, rising to the far reaches of the sky; the longer the distance, the quicker it\nrises. So towards the vertical ducts of these experimental furnaces, the particles of\nfire would have to increase their impact speed on the mass of metal inside the fusion\nchamber. The short sentence below the drawing of the furnace, along with many\nother observations of the physical status of the four elements and other natural\nsubstances, enables us to reconstruct Leonardo\u2019s theory of matter as a sort of a\n\u2018Aristotelian corpuscolarism\u2019 and a kinetic theory of heat/fire in which the melting\nof metal or the dissolution of a substance by fire depends on the percussion of a flow\nof particles.30 This interpretation finds confirmation in several reverberatory furnace drawings made with bent surfaces to drive the flow of fire into the middle of\nthe fusion chamber (Codex Atlanticus, fol. 1103r, 548r, 580v, 82v) (Fig. 4).\n29]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=8\nPages: 8,6\nLawrence M. Principe\nIgne refutata: Thermal Analysis in the Laboratory Practices\nof John Dwight and Ehrenfried Walther von Tschirnhaus . . . . . . . . . . . 181\nMorgan Wesley\nv\nThiS is a FM Blank Page\nIntroduction\nThe Antwerp painter Adriaen van Utrecht (1599\u20131652) arranged Chinese porcelain, a goblet made of rock crystal and cristallo glasses a\u0300 la fac\u0327on de Venise, next to\na magnificent display of gold- and silversmiths\u2019 works on a table in the foreground\nof his 1636 \u201cAllegory of Fire\u201d (Fig. 1).1 Many of these objects have been identified\nas originating in Antwerp, and it is likely that Van Utrecht\u2019s painting celebrates\nthe manufacture and trade of luxury goods for which Antwerp gained fame in the\nearly seventeenth century. Van Utrecht\u2019s objects have another point in common:\none way or the other they are produced through the agency of fire. Van Utrecht\u2019s\npainting celebrates Antwerp\u2019s economic power and the productive ingenuity of its]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=218\nPages: 218\nthe Chinese material.\nChymical Laboratory as Potter\u2019s Workshop\nThe early modern inclusion of ceramics within the arts of the fire brought with it\naccess to the experimental techniques developed by alchemist and chymists. This\nshift allowed an interrogative approach to the production of porcelain that utilized\nmany of the tools traditionally found in the craftsman\u2019s workshop while\ncircumventing the gradual processes of craft innovation. When we consider\nchymistry as both a kind of knowledge, and an object-producing discipline, the\napplication of its techniques to reverse the process of making porcelain is a logical\nextension of the economic demand for china and the intellectual drive toward\nmaker\u2019s knowledge as expressed by Bacon.\nCertainly, the history of ceramics after the seventeenth century is inextricably\nlinked to chemistry\u2019s success at solving increasingly sophisticated questions of\nluxury pottery production. We need look no further than William Cookworthy\u2019s]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=198\nPages: 198\nneat division of artisan and natural philosopher emerges considerably blurred.\nThe diversity of characters within the network and their various connections and\ncollaborations revises still-prevalent views of alchemical laborers as characteristically solitary, secretive, and isolated. Indeed, when we consider the reports of\nGrill\u2019s multiple laboratories staffed with at least 16 operators, it is hard not to recall\nthe contemporaneous depictions of chymical laboratories in Netherlandish genre\npainting that almost always depict a foregrounded main experimenter with a group\nof other workers in the background tending various processes. While there are\ncertainly purely stylistic and iconographic motivations behind such depictions\n(similar layouts are used in other genre paintings not showing chymists), the\naccounts of Grill\u2019s workshop do add a level of verisimilitude to these artistic\nrepresentations that we might not otherwise have attributed to them. The image]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=180\nPages: 180\nclearly aware of the figure of the alchemist and his iconic value.6 Likewise, the\nallegorical images of widely varying artistic quality in chymical books and manuscripts imply some sort of contact between author/practitioner and artist. Yet such\nartworks do not necessarily indicate that the artists were actually in direct and\nmeaningful contact with chymists. On a purely commercial level, artists would\nhave been in contact (possibly directly in some instances, but probably more\nfrequently indirectly through a retailer) with makers of chymically-prepared pigments such as vermilion or white lead, just as metalworkers and assayers would\nhave connected with producers of mineral acids, fabric-makers with dye manufacturers, and so forth. Yet none of these contacts tells us anything about possible\nepistemic exchanges or collaborations on the level of practical or theoretical\nknowledge.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=189\nPages: 189,190\n29\nBorrichius, Itinerarium, vol. III, 105\u20137, 6 October 1663.\nOn Helmontian theory, see Newman & Principe, Alchemy Tried in the Fire, 56\u201391. Interestingly, this idea of using the \u201cfermentative odor\u201d of copper scoria to effect transmutation was a\n30\nGoldsmiths and Chymists: The Activity of Artisans Within Alchemical Circles\n169\nthis operation as fermentative, and left the mixture in a hotter fire longer, he could\nhave increased his daily profit to 300 crowns, and suggested that Grill should build a\nbigger furnace outside of some city to effect it. The Frenchman also compared his\nown experiments with litharge and their results to those carried out by Grill.31 That\nBorrichius and a learned French chymist heard about and discussed this matter\nseriously in Paris indicates that Grill and his chymical work in Sweden had attained\na substantial level of international notoriety.\nBy 1664, Grill had risen to become Riksguardien vid Kronans Myntverk (Master]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=198\nPages: 198,199\nrepresentations that we might not otherwise have attributed to them. The image\nof a busy, and presumably compartmentalized and hierarchical, chymical workshop\npulls our understanding of these locales towards a comparison with contemporaneous artisanal ateliers, which, if the principals involved were themselves artisans,\nwould have been the obvious model upon which to draw virtually automatically.\n(Interestingly, a modern academic chemical research group retains much of this\ncharacter and structure.) The transconfessional and international character of the\nlarger network\u2014which included Catholics and assorted types of Protestants, as well\nas Dutch, French, English, Danes, Swedes, and Germans\u2014parallels the way in\nwhich it cut across social levels. This situation complicates some of the standard\nways in which historians are accustomed to draw reckoning lines, and recalls the\nideal of a respublica litterarum even in a subject as distant from traditional\nhumanism as sooty chymistry.\n178]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=26\nPages: 26,27\n2\nThe Alchemical Art of Dyeing: The Fourfold Division of Alchemy. . .\n3\nThe passage comes after a long introduction (\u00a7\u00a7 1\u20134) in which Psellos rhetorically\ndiscusses the philosophical framework within which chrysopoeia is to be understood and assessed. At the very beginning (\u00a7 1, ll. 5f.) the scholar identifies the main\ntopic of his letter with \u1f21 \u1f10\u03bc\u03c0\u03cd\u03c1\u03b9\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b5\u0002\u03c7\u03bd\u03b7 (the art of fire), whose first aim is said to be\nthe transformation of lead, tin, and any other metal into gold (\u00a7 1, ll. 12\u201315). The\nkey concept of transformation is framed and expanded in the following paragraphs\n(\u00a7\u00a7 2\u20134), where Psellos tries to set the basic principles guiding his \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u2019\u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03ae\u03bc\u03b7\u03c2\n(scientific) explanation of this art. He insists on the four elements that compose the\nphysical world, on their reciprocal changes, and on the alterations of the four\nqualities (namely wet, dry, hot, and cold). These changes are explained through]"]}

{"result":["[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=207\nPages: 207\ntool for interrogation of material, but as commentators have pointed out, no true fire\nanalysis could occur.\nConsidering the context of ceramics, the limiting factor of fire analysis must\nnecessarily be in its inability to undo changes in crystalline structure during the\ninitial firing of an object. Because of these phase shifts, the specific components of a\nceramic body resist resolution by thermal or chemical means, making the original\nmaterials inscrutable. Even with modern scanning electron microscopy only an\nanalysis of the volumes of base elements is available (though insight into crystalline\nstructure is provided); establishing a definitive source or recipe for the ware prior to\nfiring is frequently impossible. Dwight and Tschirnhaus were subject to substantially greater limitations, with the possible attributes available for their analysis\nrestricted to: temperature of vitrification, point of liquefaction and failure of the]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=217\nPages: 217,218\nin their compositions, while all meet similar physical criteria (Table 1). The last line\nof the table is an analysis of the body composition of porcelain produced at Meissen\nafter approximately 1727 demonstrating changes that reduced the firing temperature of the material and brought it more directly into line with its Chinese inspiration. That this change was made after the gradual dissemination of the letters of\nPe\u0300re d\u2019Entrecolles describing the process observed in China must be viewed as a\nfinal indication of the impact that thermal experimentation had on establishing the\nqualities of the earliest commercial European porcelain.\nThe chemical differences are a quantifiable demonstration that, while allowing a\nsophisticated application of experimental process to solve the problem of producing\nporcelain, thermal experiments in the seventeenth century were unable to fully\n198\nM. Wesley]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=215\nPages: 215\nwould suggest that these were likely the Hessian crucibles mentioned above.40\nThe following three works to appear in the pages of Acta, in April 1688,\nNovember 1691, and August 1696 respectively were significant contributions to\nthe knowledge of thermal properties of a range of substances, but reveal no distinct\nexperimentation on ceramic materials.41 The essay from April of 1688 records the\nsuccessful use of a burning mirror towards the liquefaction of asbestos. He goes on\nfurther to discuss the effect of the time of year on the power of the lenses, specifying\nthat material that would melt in 8 or 9 min in the summer would take as long as\n12 min in the frigid cold of January.42\nThe extended essay of November of 1691 included detailed instructions on the\nconstruction of the lenses with an accompanying figure presenting a schematic for\nthe angles involved in correctly aligning their focus. Tschirnhaus presents an]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=206\nPages: 206\nbetween the disciplines, came into full application in the pursuit of ceramic\ninnovation.\nDue to the highly resistant nature of porcelain to analysis via distillation, the\napplication of direct heat was the recourse of both Dwight and Tschirnhaus. While\ntheir techniques were radically different, applying the heat of the furnace and the\nenergy of the sun respectively, the basic principles of this thermal experiment was\nclosely linked to the long-standing application of chymical fire analysis.\nThe exposure of both Dwight and Tschirnhaus to fire analysis during their\nstudies at university can be situated within a larger debate regarding the legitimacy\nof the process during the seventeenth century. The ultimate goal of separating\nbodies into their constituent components and, ideally, recombining them through\nthe application of fire, was assailed on a methodological and philosophical level in\n14\nThe speculation regarding the extended fermentation of clay and the addition of \u2018artificial]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=216\nPages: 216\nSaxony.47 While later work on the porcelain arcanum was divided between\nTschirnhaus and Bo\u0308ttger, based on the material characteristics of early Meissen\nporcelain it is undeniable that the unique approach to thermal experimentation with\nburning lenses was critical in achieving the first successes.\nThe Legacy of Thermal Analysis on European Porcelain\nProduction\nPrevious scholarship has rightly raised the issue of missionary and trade records\nthat contained practical information on the Chinese production techniques.48 Certainly records as early as the writings of Gaspar da Cruz (c.1520\u20131570), in his\nTractado em que se cotam muito por esteso as cousas da China of 1569, offered an\naccurate description of porcelain\u2019s constituents of clay and white soft stone.49 No\ndirect links between these texts and the work of the seventeenth- century arcanists\ncan be drawn, or even with the influence of textual sources on the ceramicists of the]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=217\nPages: 217\n197\nworkshop. While an eventual solution may have been found, the possibility was\ncircumvented by the engagement of the chymists with the problem of porcelain\nproduction.\nIt is clear that both Dwight and Tschirnhaus were concerned with asking similar\nquestions of Chinese porcelain and their results directed the future avenues of their\nexperiments. As previously mentioned, both sets of data were limited in their scope\nand restricted to comparative discourse with local material. The efficacy of analytic\ntechniques on ceramic bodies can also be seen to play a role, with the slow firing of\nsherds in Dwight\u2019s various furnaces or kilns restricting his ability to both observe\nthe objects as they processed through the sequence and the time frame for his\nanalysis. If one considers the heating rate of a seventeenth-century stoneware kiln,\nor even a smaller furnace, its maximum achievable temperature and the amount of]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=85\nPages: 85\ndirection, rising to the far reaches of the sky; the longer the distance, the quicker it\nrises. So towards the vertical ducts of these experimental furnaces, the particles of\nfire would have to increase their impact speed on the mass of metal inside the fusion\nchamber. The short sentence below the drawing of the furnace, along with many\nother observations of the physical status of the four elements and other natural\nsubstances, enables us to reconstruct Leonardo\u2019s theory of matter as a sort of a\n\u2018Aristotelian corpuscolarism\u2019 and a kinetic theory of heat/fire in which the melting\nof metal or the dissolution of a substance by fire depends on the percussion of a flow\nof particles.30 This interpretation finds confirmation in several reverberatory furnace drawings made with bent surfaces to drive the flow of fire into the middle of\nthe fusion chamber (Codex Atlanticus, fol. 1103r, 548r, 580v, 82v) (Fig. 4).\n29]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=218\nPages: 218,219\nluxury pottery production. We need look no further than William Cookworthy\u2019s\n(1705\u20131780) patent for the manufacture of porcelain in 1768 or the thousands of\nexperiments conducted by Josiah Wedgwood (1730\u20131795) in the production of his\nJasperwares. Unlike the other arts of the fire; metalworking, glassmaking, and\ndyeing, the late inclusion of ceramics into the hierarchy of decorative arts allows\ncontemporary scholars opportunities to investigate the separations between the\ncraft artisan and the chymist during the early modern period, of which this discussion of thermal analysis is only one of many.\nIgne refutata: Thermal Analysis in the Laboratory Practices of John Dwight. . .\n199\nBibliography\nBacon, Francis. 1858. New Organon, trans. James Spedding et al. London: Longmans and Co.\nBirch, Thomas. 1756\u20131757. History of the Royal Society of London. London: A. Millar.\nBiringuccio, Vannoccio. [1540] 1942. The Pirotechnia of Vannoccio Biriniguccio: The Classic]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=201\nPages: 201\nno substantive evidence of direct knowledge transfer has been discovered. This\npaper endeavors to shift the focus from an externally driven developmental process\nand relocate the principal method of innovation within the experimental framework\nestablished by early modern chymistry. Evidence for the use of thermal experimentation will be considered as a foundational element toward a chymical solution\nto the problem of porcelain production. Excavated material from the workshop of\nthe seventeenth century English arcanist John Dwight and the published experiments of the seventeenth century Silesian natural philosopher Ehrenfried Walther\nvon Tschirnhaus will provide the basis for this examination. This material, along\nwith the thermal elements unique to the successful Meissen porcelains will be used\nto frame the initial comparisons of the technological differences between the]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=213\nPages: 213\nIgne refutata: Thermal Analysis in the Laboratory Practices of John Dwight. . .\n193\nIn conversations recorded by Hooke in his diary, and referenced in at least one\nmeeting of the Royal Society on 5th December 1678, Dwight was vocal about the\nsuitability of various English clays for the production of \u201cporcelane.\u201d32 Further,\nCharles Leigh published a second hand account of the clays local to Wigan that\nwere being employed by potters that Dwight \u201cmade his first Discovery\u201d upon.33\nDwight was thus actively pursuing a synthetic solution to the problems facing\nporcelain production using local materials in a methodical manner, the firing and\nre-firing of sherds being fundamental to his process.\nEhrenfried Walther Von Tschirnhaus: Harnessing the Sun\nIn contrast to the limited contemporary information regarding Dwight\u2019s activities\nand a lack of autograph material besides the two slender workbooks, an increasing]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=217\nPages: 217\nor even a smaller furnace, its maximum achievable temperature and the amount of\nenergy necessary to vitrify or melt a sample of porcelain, the process would have\nbeen fuel intensive and taken hours per test, with little direct control of the\nexperimental environment. Tschirnhaus\u2019s burning lenses allowed for results to be\nobtained in minutes, and greater specificity in the temperature and period of\nheating.\nThe limitations placed on Dwight proved to be insurmountable to the production\nof a commercially viable porcelain body, yet resulted in substantial progress made\ntowards that end goal. His synthetic additive allowed the creation of material that\nwas chemically similar to some of the porcelains being produced in China, his\nultimate failure resting on his inability to solve the issues of glazing and material\nstability while firing. That pivotal problem accounts for the excavated sherds that\nshow re-firing at temperatures hot enough to affect the glaze, but not the body.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=206\nPages: 206\nof those materials, even though other artisans were making use of them. The failure\nwas thus not connected to any form of geological predetermination, but entirely by\nsocial constraints limiting the application of knowledge to the problem.\nThe speculation that porcelain was comprised of either special clay, fermented\nfor generations, or of crushed shell incorporated in its manufacture, was a direct\nindication that similar materials were outside the realm of contemporary craft\nknowledge.14 In order to successfully move past these limitations, the experimental\ntechniques of the natural philosophers allowed objects from China to serve as\nprototypes for interrogation towards their properties and composition. It is at this\npoint that the techniques employed by chymistry, some borrowed from metallurgical assaying and the furnaces of the glassmakers in the centuries-long discourse\nbetween the disciplines, came into full application in the pursuit of ceramic\ninnovation.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=208\nPages: 208,207\nrestricted to: temperature of vitrification, point of liquefaction and failure of the\nbody, separation of glaze and body material in phases, and reaction of any applied\ndecorations in a manner different to the body or glaze. This limited access to deeper\nstructures would demand that any speculation as to source or recipe would have to\n15\nThe essay by Debus, \u201cFire Analysis,\u201d encapsulates much of the instability related to fire analysis\nas it appears in the major texts of the seventeenth century, while Newman, Promethean Ambitions,\n251\u201362, revisits and furthers the discussion as it relates to the art-nature debate.\n16\nBacon, New Organon, Book II, Aph. 7.\n17\nBoyle, The Sceptical Chymist.\n18\nFor more on Boyle and Starkey\u2019s relationship and the work of Starkey as an experimentalist, see\nNewman & Principe, Alchemy Tried in the Fire, 92\u2013128; and Newman, Gehennical Fire.\n19\nDebus, \u201cFire Analysis,\u201d 128\u201330.\n188\nM. Wesley]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=208\nPages: 208,207\n19\nDebus, \u201cFire Analysis,\u201d 128\u201330.\n188\nM. Wesley\nbe made with comparative data from other experiments on local raw materials, a\nroute that both men pursued aggressively, as discussed below.\nThat Bacon and Boyle were key figures in the debate regarding fire analysis had\na corollary impact on the advancement of ceramic innovation, and perhaps on the\nultimate failure to discover the arcanum in England. As the evidence of Dwight\u2019s\nexperimentation is considered, his links to Boyle and the influence of Bacon\u2019s\nwritings become increasingly important. Due to the restrictions of his fire analysis,\nhe was unable to disprove Bacon\u2019s speculation that there was an \u2018artificial mineral\u2019\nemployed in the production of porcelain, and his later experiments and workbooks\ndemonstrate that while he became intimately aware of the firing temperatures\nconnected to the Chinese prototypes he was able to secure, he never gave up on\nthe idea of a synthetic additive that would make clay into porcelain.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=202\nPages: 202,203\ncomposed by Rustichello while he shared imprisonment with Marco Polo after the latter\u2019s return to\nVenice in 1295 AD. A full discussion of Polo\u2019s references to porcelain can be found in Carswell,\nBlue and White, 52\u20134.\n3\nFor the full correspondence, see Tschirnhaus, Amtliche Schriften, ch. II.\n2\nIgne refutata: Thermal Analysis in the Laboratory Practices of John Dwight. . .\n183\nmedieval and early modern periods, in the context of porcelain, strong arguments\ncan be made towards the artisanal-alchemical bridge. The correspondences that\nremain in the archives at Dresden, originate from that alchemical tradition, to the\nextent that arguments have been leveled to suggest that the correspondence was, in\nfact, about the creation of the Philosophers\u2019 Stone rather than a search for the\ncomposition of porcelain. While later arcanists cannot be seen to participate in\ntransmutational alchemy on more than an individual level, the origination of the]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=202\nPages: 202\nthermal qualities of ceramic bodies in laboratory experimentation. Used in ceramic\ninvestigations in England and Saxony during the late seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries, this hybrid approach was a defining moment in high-fire European\nceramic production.\nThe recent change in terminology surrounding medieval and early modern\ndistinctions between alchemy, chymistry and chemistry is particularly significant\nin informing the need for similar clarifications in discussions of historic porcelains.1\nAs a more extensive network of documentary sources related to early modern\nEuropean ceramics is assembled, the mercurial nature of the term \u2018porcelain\u2019 is\nincreasingly cast into the spotlight. From the traditionally ascribed basis in records\nof Marco Polo\u2019s (c.1254\u20131324) voyage, different interpretations have existed, and\nno substantial historic reconciliation has been attempted. It is beyond the scope of]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=205\nPages: 205,206\nCeramic Technology, 146\u201363.\n10\n186\nM. Wesley\nclay native to the region, slowly perfecting what was considered an important art\nform. The long period of development in the Far East allowed incremental refinements necessary for successful innovations through craft practice. With a limited\ntime span driven by the demand for the material in Europe, the interrogative\ntechniques of the chymist\u2019s laboratory were necessary to circumvent the slower,\nless focused workshop process.\nExperiment and Fire Analysis\nAs discussed, the primary hindrance on the production of a porcelain body was the\nlack of identified materials that could be combined to produce these translucent,\nhigh fire, ceramic objects. The production of material at Hesse and the later\ndiscovery of kaolinic clay in Cornwall, England, again demonstrate that Europe\ndid not lack the raw materials, but rather that potters were unaware of the properties\nof those materials, even though other artisans were making use of them. The failure]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=212\nPages: 212,213\nthe glaze without damaging the fabric or the decoration, suggesting that, on a\nsmaller scale, Dwight had keen control over the temperatures of his experimentation. The bright, transparent nature of the Chinese glaze, combined with its excellent fit to the fabric of the ware, may have further influenced Dwight towards an\nessay discussing a theoretical lead China glaze, as it appears in his notebook,\ndemonstrating that his attempts to create an alkali glaze had failed, or if successful,\nhis solution remains one of the best kept secrets of European ceramics.\nHis application of thermal experimentation, as noted, was limited in its scope,\nbut still formed a critical point of departure for his investigation into the properties\nnecessary to replicate the Chinese materials. He combined these inquiries with\nknowledge of a wide range of raw materials available to potters in England.\nIgne refutata: Thermal Analysis in the Laboratory Practices of John Dwight. . .\n193]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=206\nPages: 206,207\n14\nThe speculation regarding the extended fermentation of clay and the addition of \u2018artificial\nminerals\u2019 to Chinese porcelain comes from Bacon, New Organon, Book II, Aph. 50.\nIgne refutata: Thermal Analysis in the Laboratory Practices of John Dwight. . .\n187\nthe writings of the chymists.15 Supporters, such as Daniel Sennert (1572\u20131637),\nargued that it presented the most effective means of resolution, provided that\nviolent reactions were avoided in favor of distillation and more subtle applications\nof heat. While Francis Bacon (1561\u20131626) described the action of fire on the\nprinciples of a body as something that \u201cconfounds\u201d in that \u201cmany natures which\nare in fact newly brought out and superinduced by fire and heat.\u201d16 Similarly Robert\nBoyle (1627\u20131691) questioned the role of fire in analysis, based on the uncertainty\nof its ability to alter rather than separate substances.17 This position of Boyle\u2019s can\nbe viewed as somewhat problematic, considering the American chymist George]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=201\nPages: 201,202\ntechnology and innovation. The principal focus is on the adoption of specific\nM. Wesley (*)\nDepartment of History, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK\ne-mail: thenex@mac.com\nS. Dupre\u0301 (ed.), Laboratories of Art, Archimedes 37,\n181\nDOI 10.1007/978-3-319-05065-2_8, \u00a9 Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014\n182\nM. Wesley\nchymical practices in early modern ceramic innovation that lead to a drastic\nreshaping of the experimental landscape. While many adopted practices flowed\nseamlessly between the two disciplines through shared tools and techniques developed by generations of practitioners working with fire, the specific nature of\nceramics forced adaptations on other practices. Elements borrowed from controversial chymical fire analysis found more specific application in investigating\nthermal qualities of ceramic bodies in laboratory experimentation. Used in ceramic]"]}

{"result":["[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=207\nPages: 207\nbe viewed as somewhat problematic, considering the American chymist George\nStarkey\u2019s (1628\u20131665) extensive influence on his early research. Starkey\u2019s notebooks contain extensive application of fire analysis to test various experiments,\nwith the notation refutata per ignem appearing multiple times.18\nDebus clearly argues that the debate over the acceptability of fire analysis was\nclosely linked to the ongoing conflict being waged against Aristotelian thought in\nthe seventeenth century.19 As such many of the arguments against, from an empirical standpoint, must be viewed as couched within that particular political rhetoric.\nWithin the practices of Dwight and Tschirnhaus, their education in chymistry points\nto a profound awareness of the controlled application of fire in laboratory practice,\nbut more practical demands circumvented their full engagement within the Aristotelian debate and records of their work support the notion that fire became a critical]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=207\nPages: 207\ntool for interrogation of material, but as commentators have pointed out, no true fire\nanalysis could occur.\nConsidering the context of ceramics, the limiting factor of fire analysis must\nnecessarily be in its inability to undo changes in crystalline structure during the\ninitial firing of an object. Because of these phase shifts, the specific components of a\nceramic body resist resolution by thermal or chemical means, making the original\nmaterials inscrutable. Even with modern scanning electron microscopy only an\nanalysis of the volumes of base elements is available (though insight into crystalline\nstructure is provided); establishing a definitive source or recipe for the ware prior to\nfiring is frequently impossible. Dwight and Tschirnhaus were subject to substantially greater limitations, with the possible attributes available for their analysis\nrestricted to: temperature of vitrification, point of liquefaction and failure of the]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=208\nPages: 208,207\n19\nDebus, \u201cFire Analysis,\u201d 128\u201330.\n188\nM. Wesley\nbe made with comparative data from other experiments on local raw materials, a\nroute that both men pursued aggressively, as discussed below.\nThat Bacon and Boyle were key figures in the debate regarding fire analysis had\na corollary impact on the advancement of ceramic innovation, and perhaps on the\nultimate failure to discover the arcanum in England. As the evidence of Dwight\u2019s\nexperimentation is considered, his links to Boyle and the influence of Bacon\u2019s\nwritings become increasingly important. Due to the restrictions of his fire analysis,\nhe was unable to disprove Bacon\u2019s speculation that there was an \u2018artificial mineral\u2019\nemployed in the production of porcelain, and his later experiments and workbooks\ndemonstrate that while he became intimately aware of the firing temperatures\nconnected to the Chinese prototypes he was able to secure, he never gave up on\nthe idea of a synthetic additive that would make clay into porcelain.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=208\nPages: 208,207\nrestricted to: temperature of vitrification, point of liquefaction and failure of the\nbody, separation of glaze and body material in phases, and reaction of any applied\ndecorations in a manner different to the body or glaze. This limited access to deeper\nstructures would demand that any speculation as to source or recipe would have to\n15\nThe essay by Debus, \u201cFire Analysis,\u201d encapsulates much of the instability related to fire analysis\nas it appears in the major texts of the seventeenth century, while Newman, Promethean Ambitions,\n251\u201362, revisits and furthers the discussion as it relates to the art-nature debate.\n16\nBacon, New Organon, Book II, Aph. 7.\n17\nBoyle, The Sceptical Chymist.\n18\nFor more on Boyle and Starkey\u2019s relationship and the work of Starkey as an experimentalist, see\nNewman & Principe, Alchemy Tried in the Fire, 92\u2013128; and Newman, Gehennical Fire.\n19\nDebus, \u201cFire Analysis,\u201d 128\u201330.\n188\nM. Wesley]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=206\nPages: 206\nbetween the disciplines, came into full application in the pursuit of ceramic\ninnovation.\nDue to the highly resistant nature of porcelain to analysis via distillation, the\napplication of direct heat was the recourse of both Dwight and Tschirnhaus. While\ntheir techniques were radically different, applying the heat of the furnace and the\nenergy of the sun respectively, the basic principles of this thermal experiment was\nclosely linked to the long-standing application of chymical fire analysis.\nThe exposure of both Dwight and Tschirnhaus to fire analysis during their\nstudies at university can be situated within a larger debate regarding the legitimacy\nof the process during the seventeenth century. The ultimate goal of separating\nbodies into their constituent components and, ideally, recombining them through\nthe application of fire, was assailed on a methodological and philosophical level in\n14\nThe speculation regarding the extended fermentation of clay and the addition of \u2018artificial]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=201\nPages: 201,202\ntechnology and innovation. The principal focus is on the adoption of specific\nM. Wesley (*)\nDepartment of History, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK\ne-mail: thenex@mac.com\nS. Dupre\u0301 (ed.), Laboratories of Art, Archimedes 37,\n181\nDOI 10.1007/978-3-319-05065-2_8, \u00a9 Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014\n182\nM. Wesley\nchymical practices in early modern ceramic innovation that lead to a drastic\nreshaping of the experimental landscape. While many adopted practices flowed\nseamlessly between the two disciplines through shared tools and techniques developed by generations of practitioners working with fire, the specific nature of\nceramics forced adaptations on other practices. Elements borrowed from controversial chymical fire analysis found more specific application in investigating\nthermal qualities of ceramic bodies in laboratory experimentation. Used in ceramic]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=206\nPages: 206,207\n14\nThe speculation regarding the extended fermentation of clay and the addition of \u2018artificial\nminerals\u2019 to Chinese porcelain comes from Bacon, New Organon, Book II, Aph. 50.\nIgne refutata: Thermal Analysis in the Laboratory Practices of John Dwight. . .\n187\nthe writings of the chymists.15 Supporters, such as Daniel Sennert (1572\u20131637),\nargued that it presented the most effective means of resolution, provided that\nviolent reactions were avoided in favor of distillation and more subtle applications\nof heat. While Francis Bacon (1561\u20131626) described the action of fire on the\nprinciples of a body as something that \u201cconfounds\u201d in that \u201cmany natures which\nare in fact newly brought out and superinduced by fire and heat.\u201d16 Similarly Robert\nBoyle (1627\u20131691) questioned the role of fire in analysis, based on the uncertainty\nof its ability to alter rather than separate substances.17 This position of Boyle\u2019s can\nbe viewed as somewhat problematic, considering the American chymist George]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=217\nPages: 217\n197\nworkshop. While an eventual solution may have been found, the possibility was\ncircumvented by the engagement of the chymists with the problem of porcelain\nproduction.\nIt is clear that both Dwight and Tschirnhaus were concerned with asking similar\nquestions of Chinese porcelain and their results directed the future avenues of their\nexperiments. As previously mentioned, both sets of data were limited in their scope\nand restricted to comparative discourse with local material. The efficacy of analytic\ntechniques on ceramic bodies can also be seen to play a role, with the slow firing of\nsherds in Dwight\u2019s various furnaces or kilns restricting his ability to both observe\nthe objects as they processed through the sequence and the time frame for his\nanalysis. If one considers the heating rate of a seventeenth-century stoneware kiln,\nor even a smaller furnace, its maximum achievable temperature and the amount of]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=85\nPages: 85\ndirection, rising to the far reaches of the sky; the longer the distance, the quicker it\nrises. So towards the vertical ducts of these experimental furnaces, the particles of\nfire would have to increase their impact speed on the mass of metal inside the fusion\nchamber. The short sentence below the drawing of the furnace, along with many\nother observations of the physical status of the four elements and other natural\nsubstances, enables us to reconstruct Leonardo\u2019s theory of matter as a sort of a\n\u2018Aristotelian corpuscolarism\u2019 and a kinetic theory of heat/fire in which the melting\nof metal or the dissolution of a substance by fire depends on the percussion of a flow\nof particles.30 This interpretation finds confirmation in several reverberatory furnace drawings made with bent surfaces to drive the flow of fire into the middle of\nthe fusion chamber (Codex Atlanticus, fol. 1103r, 548r, 580v, 82v) (Fig. 4).\n29]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=93\nPages: 93,94\nBiringuccio\u2019s original approach to the arts of fire emerges and that distinguishes\nhim, for instance, from Georg Agricola who, at almost the same time, wrote his De\nre metallica in which he outlined the general arts of metals related to mining and\nmetallurgy. Biringuccio expanded his perspective to include all the arts of fire,\nincluding, artillery, making gunpowder, acids preparation, pottery, goldsmithing,\nfireworks, generic distillation arts, as well as alchemy.44 If we accept his conditions,\n43\nSee Biringuccio, De la pirotechnia (1914), 27\u201340; Perifano, \u201cAlchimie\u201d; Smith, Body of the\nArtisan, 143\u20134; and Bernardoni, La conoscenza del fare, 669.\n44\nBiringuccio, De la pirotechnia (1977), fol. 123r\u20134r.\nArtisanal Processes and Epistemological Debate in the Works of Leonardo. . .\n71\nalchemy and pyrotechnics are not in contradiction, rather, in so far as they are used\nin the same philosophical concepts and the same operational practices, alchemy]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=217\nPages: 217\nor even a smaller furnace, its maximum achievable temperature and the amount of\nenergy necessary to vitrify or melt a sample of porcelain, the process would have\nbeen fuel intensive and taken hours per test, with little direct control of the\nexperimental environment. Tschirnhaus\u2019s burning lenses allowed for results to be\nobtained in minutes, and greater specificity in the temperature and period of\nheating.\nThe limitations placed on Dwight proved to be insurmountable to the production\nof a commercially viable porcelain body, yet resulted in substantial progress made\ntowards that end goal. His synthetic additive allowed the creation of material that\nwas chemically similar to some of the porcelains being produced in China, his\nultimate failure resting on his inability to solve the issues of glazing and material\nstability while firing. That pivotal problem accounts for the excavated sherds that\nshow re-firing at temperatures hot enough to affect the glaze, but not the body.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=218\nPages: 218,219\nluxury pottery production. We need look no further than William Cookworthy\u2019s\n(1705\u20131780) patent for the manufacture of porcelain in 1768 or the thousands of\nexperiments conducted by Josiah Wedgwood (1730\u20131795) in the production of his\nJasperwares. Unlike the other arts of the fire; metalworking, glassmaking, and\ndyeing, the late inclusion of ceramics into the hierarchy of decorative arts allows\ncontemporary scholars opportunities to investigate the separations between the\ncraft artisan and the chymist during the early modern period, of which this discussion of thermal analysis is only one of many.\nIgne refutata: Thermal Analysis in the Laboratory Practices of John Dwight. . .\n199\nBibliography\nBacon, Francis. 1858. New Organon, trans. James Spedding et al. London: Longmans and Co.\nBirch, Thomas. 1756\u20131757. History of the Royal Society of London. London: A. Millar.\nBiringuccio, Vannoccio. [1540] 1942. The Pirotechnia of Vannoccio Biriniguccio: The Classic]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=85\nPages: 85,86\nthe fusion chamber (Codex Atlanticus, fol. 1103r, 548r, 580v, 82v) (Fig. 4).\n29\n\u201cquanto piu\u0300 il moto natural del foco o del peso sia lungo, piu\u0300 vale la sua percussion.\u201d (Leonardo,\nCodex Atlanticus, fol. 87r).\n30\nBernardoni, \u201cElementi, sostanze naturali.\u201d\nArtisanal Processes and Epistemological Debate in the Works of Leonardo. . .\n63\nFig. 3 Leonardo, Technological application of the element of fire, Codex Atlanticus, fol. 87r,\nBiblioteca Ambrosiana, Milan (Image taken from Codex Atlanticus, Hoepli edition, Milan, 1894\u2013\n1904)\nFurnaces become Leonardo\u2019s instrument for studying and observing fire. A\ndrawing on a folio in the Codex Arundel representing a tower furnace, used in the\nMiddle Ages by alchemists for distillation, assumes a very important epistemological value (Fig. 5). The drawing presents an apparently accurate copy of this\nfurnace\u2019s vertical section and, when we read the note below, we understand that]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=8\nPages: 8,6\nLawrence M. Principe\nIgne refutata: Thermal Analysis in the Laboratory Practices\nof John Dwight and Ehrenfried Walther von Tschirnhaus . . . . . . . . . . . 181\nMorgan Wesley\nv\nThiS is a FM Blank Page\nIntroduction\nThe Antwerp painter Adriaen van Utrecht (1599\u20131652) arranged Chinese porcelain, a goblet made of rock crystal and cristallo glasses a\u0300 la fac\u0327on de Venise, next to\na magnificent display of gold- and silversmiths\u2019 works on a table in the foreground\nof his 1636 \u201cAllegory of Fire\u201d (Fig. 1).1 Many of these objects have been identified\nas originating in Antwerp, and it is likely that Van Utrecht\u2019s painting celebrates\nthe manufacture and trade of luxury goods for which Antwerp gained fame in the\nearly seventeenth century. Van Utrecht\u2019s objects have another point in common:\none way or the other they are produced through the agency of fire. Van Utrecht\u2019s\npainting celebrates Antwerp\u2019s economic power and the productive ingenuity of its]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=86\nPages: 86,87\nfurnace\u2019s vertical section and, when we read the note below, we understand that\nhis interest is not in the technological device but the transformation of the elements\ninvolved in the combustion process inside it. The note below the furnace helps us\nunderstand that\nonce you have dealt with the motion of heavy solids, deal with heavy liquids and with air\nand with the motion of fire. Compare the motion of fire with the whirls of air and water and\n64\nA. Bernardoni\nFig. 4 Leonardo, Vortices\nof fire, Codex Atlanticus,\nfol. 580v, Biblioteca\nAmbrosiana, Milan (Image\ntaken from Codex\nAtlanticus, Hoepli edition,\nMilan, 1894\u20131904)\nyou will find a drilling motion of fire that makes it powerful for fusion; you can obtain these\ngyrations with the help of registers and boiling water.31\nLeonardo\u2019s main interest in this drawing is to create a device for him to see the\ndrilling motion of fire. Leonardo\u2019s goals are both technological and scientific; the]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=84\nPages: 84,85\n14.\n28\n62\nA. Bernardoni\nFig. 2 Leonardo, artillery moulding process for the barrel, Codex Atlanticus, fol. 46br, Biblioteca\nAmbrosiana, Milan (Image taken from Codex Atlanticus, Hoepli edition, Milan, 1894\u20131904)\nair into the chamber from below. The note under the drawing helps us interpret the\ndevice as a study for amplifying the penetrative action of fire: \u201cThe greater the\nnatural motion of the fire or the greater its weight, the greater its impulsive force\u201d\n(Fig. 3).29 Leonardo talks about fire in the same terms as the weight of bodies, so he\ninterprets it as a hard material particulate flow, able to penetrate the body and break\nthe link of its particles. In Aristotelian matter theory, fire is the lightest element that\nfinds its natural place at the most peripheral region of the sub-lunar world. Just as a\nstone falls towards the earth to reach its natural place, fire goes in the opposite\ndirection, rising to the far reaches of the sky; the longer the distance, the quicker it]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=87\nPages: 87\ndrilling motion of fire. Leonardo\u2019s goals are both technological and scientific; the\nfire works as a drill. If this were to be verified, it could be used in some technological application but it could also assume a more general scientific and philosophical\nexplanation because the power of fire, like the power of the other elements (water,\nair and earth), manifests itself in the form of a spiral\u2014the natural screw. The power\nof the screw could be seen in the vortices of water and air, but also in Brunelleschi\u2019s\nbigger cranes and powerful technological elevator devices that become an analogic\nexplanation for the forces operating in nature.32\nAnother very interesting case involving the chemical equipment studied by\nLeonardo is the development of the alembic refrigerator system. In the Codex\nAtlanticus there are some drawings (fol. 912r, 1114r a\u2013b, 216r, 989r, 1118r)\n31\n\u201cTrattato che a\u0300i de\u2019 moti de\u2019 solidi gravi, trata de\u2019 gravi liquidi e dell\u2019aria e de\u2019 moti del foco, e]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=203\nPages: 203,204\nthe decorative arts before the early modern period is worthwhile. Prior to its\ninteraction with chymistry, the relationship between the potter\u2019s craft and fire was\nprincipally of a mechanical, fixative nature. As the heat of the kiln was known to\nremove the water from earthen bodies, its ability to affect permanent transformation\non the materials placed in the kiln was its principal contribution to the success of\nceramic production. Those objects existed first as trade goods rather than artisanal\nobjects and only later became valued as aesthetic products. Vannoccio\nBiringuccio\u2019s (1480\u2013c.1539) introduction to his brief \u201cdiscourse on the art of the\npotter\u201d from his Pirotechnia of 1540, encapsulates both the recent recognition\nreceived by ceramic craft and its inseparability from fire:\n184\nM. Wesley\nHaving started to tell you of working potter\u2019s clay for making crucibles and shells, the wish\ncame to me to tell you of the practice of this art also. Although it may seem at first glance to]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=214\nPages: 214,215\n36\nThe most extensive discussion of these experiments can be found in Plassmeyer, Sonnenfeuer,\nwhich presents an extensive discussion of the wider reception of his endeavours, refinements\nconnected to the burning lenses, and a complete catalogue of the lenses in the collections of\nDresden.\n37\nPietsch, \u201cTschirnhaus,\u201d summarizes the current state of scholarship on the matter, including\nvarious visits and investigations by Tschirnhaus prior to the involvement of Bo\u0308ttger. It does\nhowever fail to discuss the comments made by Tschirnhaus in Acta Eruditorum during this period.\n38\nTschirnhaus, \u201cSpeculi ustorii.\u201d\nIgne refutata: Thermal Analysis in the Laboratory Practices of John Dwight. . .\n195\nobjects included crucibles that would withstand the heat until past the eight-minute\npoint.39 Based on the times given for copper and gold before liquefying the data\nwould suggest that these were likely the Hessian crucibles mentioned above.40]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=84\nPages: 84,85\ndemonstrate that his mental approach to technological problems went beyond the\ncreation of a specific process or device. His detailed drawings of furnaces based on\nvery close observation allowed him to let his curiosity take him beyond the\nimprovement of the technical apparatus towards some very interesting observations\nand considerations on the nature of fire and its penetrative power.\nFolio 87r of the Codex Atlanticus portrays several kinds of reverberatory furnaces and among them there is a drawing of a curious and obscure apparatus. The\ndrawing portrays a fusion chamber above a very tall platform connected to a firebox\nby two vertical ducts. On the left there is also another duct that probably conducts\n27\nBernardoni, \u201cLeonardo and the Equestrian Monument\u201d; and Brugnoli, \u201cScultura di Leonardo.\u201d\nBernardoni, Esplosioni, fusioni e trasmutazioni, 26\u201335; Brioist, Vinci, Homme de guerre, 105\u2013\n14.\n28\n62\nA. Bernardoni]"]}

{"result":["[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=107\nPages: 107,108\nsufficient.\u201d13 Thus, Albertus\u2019s text is an advancement of the Aristotelian systems,\nwhich he blends with alchemical texts and concepts obtained from Arabic sources.\nHe also enriched his text with empirical know how gained on his visits to mining\n12\n\u201cQuos vero tam Graeco, quam Latinos annis plus mille in rerum congitiones versatos videmus,\nomnes ad unum scripta Platonis, aut Aristoteles interpretati sunt, & sententias fecuti: eoque minus\nmultas res nondum, explanatas vocarunt in quaestionem, literisque illustrarunt. Nam Albertus\nnoster aggressus dicere de ortu eorum quae effodiumtur, Philosophorum & Alstrologorum &\nChymistarum decreta in unum confundit.\u201d (Agricola, \u201cGeologie und Mineralogie,\u201d 76, and\nOrtu, 24).\n13\nAlbertus, Book of Minerals, 9.\nArtificial Interventions in the Natural Form of Things: Shared. . .\n85\ndistricts as he relates in his Book of Minerals (III, I, I). According to Aristotle, there\nare four causes: the material, the efficient, the formal and the final.14 Albertus]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=174\nPages: 174\nhave any significant effects on the Tuscan scientific tradition. Although Galileo\nwould soon become a cherished, almost mythical figure, his efforts did not mark a\nnew direction in natural philosophy. The Accademia del Cimento adopted Galileo\u2019s\nmethod only in part and many of its members pursued natural investigations within\ndifferent traditions, originating in the experiments undertaken in workshops of the\nFonderie of the Casino and the Uffizi. At the end of the seventeenth century,\nimportant alchemical experiments were still performed with Benedetto Bregans\u2019s\nburning lens at Cosimo III\u2019s court and the core of Tuscan science was still\ndominated by natural history, medicine and chemical arts, as if Galileo had never\nexisted. During the eighteenth century, the Reale Museo di fisica e storia naturale,\nthe most important scientific institution founded by the new ruling dynasty of the\nHapsburg-Lorraine, privileged the traditional disciplines cultivated by the Medici.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=106\nPages: 106,107\nin Mathesius, Sarepta, fol. XXXIIIv).\n84\nH. Haug\nempirical knowledge within the limits of a regular and harmonic world, where\neverything points back to its origin, i.e. God.\nMathesius and other mineralogists of the sixteenth century could only rely on a\nfew preliminary works when they made their speculations on the Metallogenese, as\nAgricola regrets in the introduction to his De ortu et causis subterraneorum from\n1546:\nThe Greeks and Latins, however, who we see working for more than a thousand years to\nincrease scientific knowledge, all of them only interpreted the writings of Plato and\nAristotle and followed their views; they neither made inquiries about unsolved questions\nnor did they treat them scientifically. When our Albertus started to make observations about\nthe genesis of excavated materials, he blended the teachings of philosophers, astrologers\nand chymists into one.12\nTwo important preliminary writings, Aristotle\u2019s reflections on meteorology and]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=107\nPages: 107\nalchemical practices as well as the theoretical concepts of \u2018modern\u2019 metallurgists\nand was part of the common knowledge in the workshops of goldsmiths and other\nmetalworkers of the early modern periods. A remark in Aristotle\u2019s treatise lead\nAlbertus to assume that the ancient philosopher had written a follow-up work on\nminerals, stones, earth and metals. It was Albertus\u2019s intention to comment on the\nwhole Aristotle, i.e. to commentate the texts that were in the thirteenth century\nconsidered to be the Aristotelian philosophical works on nature. Therefore it is no\nwonder that he, believing that Aristotle\u2019s treatise was lost, commenced his own\nLapidary (Book of Stone): \u201cWe have not seen Aristotle\u2019s books about these\n[minerals], but only some excerpts from them; and what Avicenna says about\n[minerals] in the third chapter of the first book which he wrote about them is not\nsufficient.\u201d13 Thus, Albertus\u2019s text is an advancement of the Aristotelian systems,]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=107\nPages: 107\nTwo important preliminary writings, Aristotle\u2019s reflections on meteorology and\nAlbertus Magnus\u2019s (1193\u20131280) Libri cinque de mineralibus et rebus metallicis,\nare considered by Agricola and other early modern authors and are present in\nalmost all theories of the sixteenth century. With Albertus\u2019s De mineralibus an\nimportant testimony to the transmission of antique metallurgic knowledge and its\ncombination with alchemical concepts has been preserved. That Albertus\u2019s knowledge was not out of date in the early modern period is attested by the two prints of\nhis works by Giovanni and Gregorius de Gregoriis in Venice (De mineralibus,\n1495) and of Jacob Ko\u0308bel (Liber mineralium, 1518) in Oppenheim. His amalgamation had a great influence and contributed strongly to the work of several natural\nphilosophers and alchemists of the sixteenth century. It found its way equally into\nalchemical practices as well as the theoretical concepts of \u2018modern\u2019 metallurgists]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=111\nPages: 111\nartificers of fraud and who are not on the same level as \u2018real\u2019 metallurgists.22\nThirdly Agricola takes on the astrologers, referring to the authors who claim that\nthe seven planets as formative powers influence some kind of primordial metallic\narch-matter to create the seven known metals. The theory that celestial bodies\ninfluence and shape earthly substances is treated at the beginning of Ru\u0308lein of\nCalw\u2019s Bergb\u20ac\nuchlein:\nFor the formation and growth of ores an effector is required and a subordinated material or\nmatter, which is adapted to receive the effect. The common effector of the ores and of all\nthings that are born is heaven with his orbits, his light and his influence, as the masters of\nnature teach. [. . .] Every ore receives a special influence from the planet he is named after,\nso that the planet and the ore concur in their warmth, coldness, humidity and aridity.23\nThe early modern efforts to categorize the world and its substances, based on]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=30\nPages: 30\nSo now let me start telling you something about this man, the philosopher Democritus, who\nwas a natural philosopher from Adbera, who investigated every natural question and\nexplained every phenomenon on the basis of its own nature. Abdera is a Thracian town;\nbut he became a very wise man when he came to Egypt and was initiated by the great\nmagician Ostanes with all Egyptian priests. He got from Ostanes the bases [of the alchemical processes] and wrote four books on dyeing, that is, on gold and silver and precious\nstones and purple.14\nThe great relevance ps.-Democritus\u2019s four books had in the later alchemical\ntradition\u2014that is unanimous in recognizing the atomist as one of the founders of\nthis discipline\u2014allows us to consider the four areas of expertise included in his\nwork as relevant parts of the technical background from which alchemy took its first\nsteps in the first-second century AD. The four books are concisely defined by]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=108\nPages: 108,109\npower to achieve the destined form.\nHere Albertus merges an alchemical concept with ideas from Aristotle extracted\nfrom his Generation of Animals. He equates a female principle with the material\ncause, i.e. the shapeless matter, subjected to an efficient cause, a forming principle\nthat is inherent in the male semen. To initiate this transformational process Albertus\nintroduces the celestial bodies as impulses. After discussing the material and\nefficient cause he then treats the third, the formal cause, where he follows Aristotle\nwho said that the male principle contributes the form of the offspring, i.e. the\n14\n15\nAlbertus, Book of Minerals, XXXI.\nAristoteles, \u201cMeteorologie,\u201d 136.\n86\nH. Haug\nspecies. Again Albertus turns to the power of the stars that act as formative powers\ndescending from the heavens and which are responsible for the seven known main\nmetals.\nThe structure of the book and the line of his argumentation shows that Albertus]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=145\nPages: 145\nconsidered knowledge the key to power in politics. The Grand Duke Cosimo I had\nalready given decisive impulse to all areas of scientific activities within the framework of state centralized structures. For example, he reorganized the Studio in Pisa\nby bringing in famous teachers. Gabriele Falloppio and Realdo Colombo taught\nanatomy (after Ve\u0301sale\u2019s short stay), Luca Ghini the study of herbs and Giovanni\nArgentario taught medicine. In 1567, at the expense of the doctors and\napothecaries\u2019s corporation, Cosimo I edited the new Ricettario Fiorentino, a\ncorrected version of the one from 1498.52 He also established harsh penalties for\nthose who practised medicine or surgery without obtaining the required titles from a\ndoctors\u2019 college. Even if Cosimo I\u2019s scientific engagement could be placed in the\ncontext of an absolutist policy for the sake of prestige, it is also true that he\ndemonstrated a great personal interest in the sciences, which was all the more]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=152\nPages: 152,153\nZambelli\u2019s section was artificially separated from that of \u2018science.\u2019 On the historiographic\ndistortions originated in the Galileian myth see also Galluzzi, \u201cMotivi paracelsiani.\u201d\n6\nHeikamp\u2019s article of 1970 has set the standard, see Heikamp, \u201cAntica sistemazione.\u201d\n132\nM. Beretta\npotentially challenged the prerogatives of traditional academic intellectuals.7 These\nachievements were also the result of political influence exerted by the guilds on the\ngovernment of the Tuscan capital.8 As early as the fourteenth century the so-called\narti minori managed to be represented at all levels of the municipal government.9 It\nis beyond the scope of this presentation to examine the causes of the expansion of\nFlorentine guilds, but it suffices here to note the remarkable importance achieved by\nthose related to the chemical arts, such as pharmacy, dyeing, glassmaking and\ngoldsmiths.10 In 1427 there was only one spectacle maker shop in Florence but in\n1480 this had increased to seven.11]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=97\nPages: 97\nconcludes:\nI have done this willingly in order that you may acquire more learning and because I am\ncertain that new information always gives birth in men\u2019s mind to new discoveries and so to\nfurther information. Indeed I am certain that it is the key that arouses intelligent men and\nmakes them, if they wish, arrive at certain conclusions that they could not have reached\nwithout such a foundation, or even nearly approached.54\nThe advancement of learning for Biringuccio depends on continual \u201cdiscoveries\u201d and \u201cnew information,\u201d that results in two processes of knowledge: the first\nleads to the creation of new artificial products and the second determines the\nincrease in and deepening of knowledge about nature. As is clear from this passage,\nhuman creativity can be awakened by practical problems. And once such \u201cnew\ninformation\u201d is integrated into the wealth of knowledge this can lead humanity to\nthe opening of new paths of research.55]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=106\nPages: 106\nMathesius\u2019s texts interweave preaching and scientific imagination and thus attest\nto how strongly early modern natural philosophy and metallurgic research are\ninfluenced by the Christian episteme:\nBut my undertaking shall conduct to that effect, to show to you, my parishioners, the\nalmighty and wonderful hand of God and his immeasurable abundance and his inscrutable\nwisdom and his merciful and fatherly heart in his creation and revelation of all kinds of\nminerals and metals, to make you recognize your God in his gifts and teach you to praise\nhim, which he conveys to you in this mountain in clement benevolence.11\nThis juxtaposition of empirical knowledge based on experience next to philosophical and theological reflections of the causes of things is typical for Mathesius\nand many other writers of the sixteenth century, as they interpret their increasing\n9\nThis concept can be found in medieval authors writing on natura as goddess, as pro-dea and as]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=96\nPages: 96,97\npart. To stress the importance of factual knowledge he underlines the importance of\n51\nBiringuccio, Pirotechnia (1942), 114. For the Italian, see Biringuccio, De la pirotechnia (1977),\nfol. 36v.\n52\nFor a more detailed analysis of Biringuccio\u2019s concept of \u2018atoms\u2019 and his theory of matter, see\nBernardoni, La conoscenza del fare, 78\u2013105. For a general analysis on the medieval and Renaissance concept of \u2018matter\u2019, see Murdoch, \u201cMinima Naturalia\u201d; and Grellard & Robert, Atomism.\n53\nFilarete, Trattato di architettura, 470; Cardano, Practica arithmetica, ch. LXIII; and Cattaneo,\nDell\u2019arte del misurare. For a detailed analysis of the units of measure use in Italy from the Middle\nAges to the modern era, see Frangioni, Metrologia lombarda.\n74\nA. Bernardoni\nevidence from nature whatever its origin (books, nature, oral tradition) and\nconcludes:\nI have done this willingly in order that you may acquire more learning and because I am]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=152\nPages: 152\nlate sixteenth century, but we should be aware that the myth of Galileo still casts its\nhegemonic influence, overshadowing any branch of natural knowledge which\nseems to deviate from the canons of the new mathematized \u2018sciences\u2019.\nIn what follows, I shall try to give a brief glimpse of what is hidden in this\nshadow. In order to do so we have to look into some older sources, depicting\nFlorentine cultural life just before Galileo\u2019s spectacular entrance onto the scene.\nMoreover, we need to take into consideration that, with the partial exception of\nmedicine, the investigation of natural phenomena was intimately connected with\narts and crafts, a prosperous body of activities that, particularly in Florence, had\nbeen flourishing since the late thirteenth century. It can be argued that nowhere else\ndo we find such strong ties between the arts and the sciences than in Renaissance]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=207\nPages: 207\nbe viewed as somewhat problematic, considering the American chymist George\nStarkey\u2019s (1628\u20131665) extensive influence on his early research. Starkey\u2019s notebooks contain extensive application of fire analysis to test various experiments,\nwith the notation refutata per ignem appearing multiple times.18\nDebus clearly argues that the debate over the acceptability of fire analysis was\nclosely linked to the ongoing conflict being waged against Aristotelian thought in\nthe seventeenth century.19 As such many of the arguments against, from an empirical standpoint, must be viewed as couched within that particular political rhetoric.\nWithin the practices of Dwight and Tschirnhaus, their education in chymistry points\nto a profound awareness of the controlled application of fire in laboratory practice,\nbut more practical demands circumvented their full engagement within the Aristotelian debate and records of their work support the notion that fire became a critical]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=32\nPages: 32,31\n\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03ba\u03b1\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03bb\u03ac.\u201d\n19\nSee Martelli, Pseudo-Democrito, 180\u2013205 (and 73\u20139) \u00bc CAAG II 41\u20139.\n20\nSee Martelli, Pseudo-Democrito, 206\u201316 (and 79\u201383) \u00bc CAAG II 49\u201353.\n21\nEdited in CAAG II 350\u201364; the Greek title reads: \u201c\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03b2\u03b1\u03c6\u1f74 \u03bb\u03af\u03b8\u03c9\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c3\u03bc\u03b1\u03c1\u03ac\u03b3\u03b4\u03c9\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76\n\u1f51\u03b1\u03ba\u03af\u03bd\u03b8\u03c9\u03bd \u1f10\u03ba \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u1f00\u03b4\u03cd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f31\u03b5\u03c1\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f10\u03ba\u03b4\u03bf\u03b8\u03b5\u0002\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b2\u03b9\u03b2\u03bb\u03af\u03bf\u03c5.\u201d The earliest testimonies are the\nmanuscripts Parisinus gr. 2325 (13th century; fols. 160v\u2013173v), and Parisinus gr. 2327 (15th\ncentury; fol. 147r\u2013159r).\n22\nSee, in particular, for Democritus: CAAG II 353,11\u201325, and 354,12\u2013357,19; for Ostanes:\nCAAG II 351,16\u201328, and 352,10 (fragments reedited by Bidez & Cumont, Mages helle\u0301nise\u0301s,\nvol. II, 323\u20134); for Moses: CAAG II 353,19; for Maria: CAAG II 351,23; 352,2\u20138; 355,1, and\n257,19.\n8\nM. Martelli\nthat hands down the above-mentioned recipe book on precious stones preserves\nanother important treatise that introduces a new important element into the discussion. The Parisinus gr. 2325 (fols. 256r\u2013258v), in fact, contains a book ascribed to]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=36\nPages: 36\n\u2018they hid the writings on the natural substances under the multiplicity of matter.\u2019\nPerhaps they wanted to exercise our souls. Now, if they exercise the souls, well,\nphilosopher, why to deny it? But you know how to exercise either the body or the\nsoul, and it always leads you to achieve the perfection. In fact a wise saying\nreads: \u2018studying is everything.\u2019 And also Isidoros says: \u2018studying increases your\nwork.\u2019 I know, this is not beyond your understanding (my lady), but you know it\nwell, since you are one of those who would have liked to hide the art, if it had not\nbeen put in writing. For this reason you formed an assembly and administered\nthe oath to each other. But you (my lady) moved away from the various topics\n(of this book); you presented them in a shorter form and you taught them openly.\nBut you claim that this book cannot be possessed unless in secret. Now, even\nthough secrets are necessary, it is quite fair that anyone has a book of alchemy,]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=173\nPages: 173,174\npowerful aura and the original strong connections between alchemy, the arts and\npolitics that had been established in the Casino. As strongly as Don Antonio\nbelieved in the cultural and social importance of alchemy, he was in no position\nto pursue his father\u2019s aim to incorporate these interests into the government of\nTuscany. Chemistry, alchemy, pharmacy and medicine remained at the center of\nMedici patronage, but the new Grand Dukes, by inviting Galileo to court as their\nphilosopher and mathematician, privileged a more pragmatic patronage which\nMaterial and Temporal Powers at the Casino di San Marco (1574\u20131621)\n153\nFig. 14 The Tribuna di Galileo. Photo second half of the nineteenth century (Courtesy of Museo\nGalileo. Florence)\ncombined a more encyclopedic view of the ways nature could be investigated.\nIronically, however, this new development in Medici scientific-patronage did not\nhave any significant effects on the Tuscan scientific tradition. Although Galileo]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=105\nPages: 105,106\nErtzen,\u201d in Mathesius, Sarepta, fol. XXXIXr).\nArtificial Interventions in the Natural Form of Things: Shared. . .\n83\nMathesius, in line with most contemporaneous authors, assumes a continuing\nemergence of substances with God, or a divine potency incorporated in nature,\nresponsible for the on-going generation of metals.9\nThe main issues that concerned Mathesius and contemporary writers were: what\nsubstances are the sources of the metals? Are there one or more primary matters?\nHow and under what conditions do these primordial materials transmute into the\ndifferent metallic substances? And last but not least: what causes this process?\nMathesius and his \u201cThird Sermon\u201d is not a randomly chosen source. The author\nstood in the centre of scholarly culture in St. Joachimsthal, in one of the most\nimportant centres of the Renaissance mining industry and he was an important link]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=118\nPages: 118,119\nunderstanding of nature might mean a return to the paradisiacal original state, a\nreversion of the lost Adamic comprehension of the world by just naming it, and that\nthe reading of the book of nature could be the equivalent to reading God\u2019s\nrevelation.42 This becomes evident when Mathesius says that the precise causes\n40\nTheophilus, Essay Upon Various Arts (1847), XLV\u2013XLVII. For the Latin and a German\ntranslation, see Theophilus, \u201cMalerei und Glas,\u201d 49.\n41\nHarrison, Fall of Man.\n42\n\u201cDoch die Klagen, dass man etwas nur \u2018mit gro\u00dfer Mu\u0308he\u2019 bewa\u0308ltigt habe, begegnen einem in\nerza\u0308hlenden Quellen nach wie vor so ha\u0308ufig, dass man als innerweltlichen hochmittelalterlichen\nHauptantrieb zur Scho\u0308pfung neuer Technik die erhoffte Erleichterung ko\u0308rperlicher Arbeit\n96\nH. Haug\nFig. 3 KokosnussDoppelscheuer (coconut\nvessel), open, with the detail\nof Adam and Eve, sixteenth\ncentury St. Joachimsthal\n(?). Vienna,\nKunsthistorisches Inv.\nNo. 885/886]"]}

{"error_message":"The page range provided is invalid: end_page must be between 1 and 220, got 240. Please provide a valid page range."}

{"result":["[Pages 220:\n200\nM. Wesley\nNewman, William R., and Lawrence M. Principe. 1998. Alchemy vs. Chemistry: The Etymological Origins of a Historiographic Mistake. Early Science and Medicine 3: 32\u201365.\nNewman, William R., and Lawrence M. Principe. 2002. Alchemy Tried in the Fire: Starkey, Boyle\nand the Fate of Helmontian Chymistry. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.\nPietsch, Ulrich. 2001. Tschirnhaus und das europa\u0308ische Porzellan. In Ehrenfried Walther\nvon Tschirnhaus (1651\u20131708): Experimente mit dem Sonnenfeuer, eds. P. Plassmeyer and\nS. Siebel, 68\u201374. Dresden: Staatliche Kunstammlungen.\nPlassmeyer, Peter. 2001. Ehrenfried Walther von Tschirnhaus (1651\u20131708): Experimente mit dem\nSonnenfeuer. Dresden: Staatlich Kunstammlungen Dresden.\nReinhardt, Kurt. 1903. Beitra\u0308ge zur Lebensgeschichte von Ehrenfried Walther von Tschirnhaus. In\nJahresbericht der F\u20ac\nurstenund und Landesschule St. Afra in Meissen. Meissen: Klinkicht &\nSohn.\nReinhardt, Kurt. 1912. Tschirnhaus oder Bo\u0308ttger? Eine urkundliche Geschichte der Erfindung des\nMeissener Porzellans. Neues Lausitzisches Magazine 88: 1\u2013162.\nStarkey, George. 2004. Alchemical Laboratory Notebooks and Correspondence, eds. and trans.\nWilliam R. Newman and Lawrence M. Principe. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.\nSchreiber, Lady Charlotte. 1874. Lady Charlotte Schreiber\u2019s Notebook, Manuscript, British\nMuseum OA.6557.\nTheophilus, Presbyter. 1847. An Essay Upon Various Arts in Three Books, by Theophilus, Called\nalso Rugerus, Priest and Monk, Forming an Encyclopedia of Christian Art of the Eleventh\nCentury, ed. and trans. Robert Hendrie. London: John Murray.\nTheophilus, Presbyter. 1961. Theophilus, the Various Arts: De Diversis Artibus, ed. and trans.\nC. R. Dodwell. Oxford: Clarendon.\nTheophilus, Presbyter. 1963. Theophilus On Diverse Arts: The Foremost Medieval Treatise on\nPainting, Glassmaking and Metalwork, eds. and trans. John G. Hawthorn, and Cyril Stanley\nSmith. New York: Dover.\nTschirnhaus, Ehrenfried Walther von. 1687. Relatio de insignibus novi cujusdam speculi ustorii\neffectibus. Acta Eruditorum 6: 52\u201354.\nTschirnhaus, Ehrenfried Walther von. 1688. Paralipomenon ad Acta mensis Januarii 1687, pag.\n52 de specula cujusdam ustorii singularibus effectibus. Acta Eruditorum: 206.\nTschirnhaus, Ehrenfried Walther von. 1691. Singularia effecta vitri caustici bipedalis, quod omnia\nmagno sumto hactenus constructa specula ustoria virtute superat. Acta Eruditorum: 517\u2013520.\nTschirnhaus, Ehrenfried Walther von. 1696. Intimatio singularis novaeque emendationis Artis\nvitriariae. Acta Eruditorum: 345\u2013347.\nTschirnhaus, Ehrenfried Walther von. 1697. De magnis lentibus seu vitris causticis, quorum\ndiameter trium quatuorve pedum, nec non euorundem usu & effectu plene & perspicue\nindicato. Acta Eruditorum: 414\u2013419.\nTschirnhaus, Ehrenfried Walther von. 2000. Gesamtausgabe. Reihe II, Amtliche Schriften,\ned. Eberhard Knobloch. Leipzig: Verlag der Sa\u0308chsischen Akademie der Wissenschaften.\nWatanabe-O\u2019Kelly, Helen. 2002. Court Culture in Dresden: From Renaissance to Baroque.\nBasingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.\nWilson, Timothy. 2007. Le maioliche. In Il Rinascimento Italiano e l\u2019Europa. Vol. IV,\nCommercio e cultura mercantile, eds. Franco Franceschi, Richard A. Goldwaithe, and\nReinhold C. Mueller, 217\u2013245. Treviso: Fondazione Cassamarca; Costabissara (Vincenza):\nAngelo Colla.\nWinter, Eduard. 1960. Der Bahnbrecher der deutschen Fru\u0308haufkla\u0308rung. E.W.v. Tschirnhaus und\ndie Fru\u0308haufkla\u0308rung in Mittel- und Osteuropa. In Quellen und Studien zur Geschichte\nOsteuropas, III. Berlin: Akademie-Verlag.\nZumbulyadis, Nicholas. 2010. Bo\u0308ttger\u2019s Eureka!: New Insights into the European Reinvention of\nPorcelain. Bulletin for the History of Chemistry 35: 24\u201332.\n]"]}

{"result":["[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=154\nPages: 154\na city \u201cfounded upon the guilds and trade.\u201d17\nThis new configuration of professional relations led to a thorough reassessment\nof the locations where cultural and economic activities were conducted, articulating\nin an experimental key the arts, which previously had been regarded as the fruit of\nindividual dexterity rather than the outcome of a deliberate cultural program. In\nmany cases the architectural changes were not apparent, since many kinds of\nartisans (e.g., the goldsmiths) kept on using the same premises they had occupied\nfor generations. However, even in such examples of apparent continuity the arts\nwere seen as vectors for change. This perception found visual expression in a\nvolume of engravings, based on drawings by Jan van der Straet (1523\u20131605)\n(or Giovanni Stradano), that bore the significant title Nova Reperta, commissioned\nby the Florentine academician Luigi Alamanni (1558\u20131603) around the end of the]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=62\nPages: 62\npractica, all of which are delineated and separated by blank spaces or folios. These\ntexts were written by several hands, on paper from different origins dated from the\nfifteenth and the sixteenth centuries. The main contribution comes from an anonymous scribe who is responsible for a number of independent collections of recipes\nbut also for some additions throughout other parts of the volume.54 Perhaps this\ncontributor was at the root of both the (partial) writing and the collecting and\nassembling of these data into one single volume. This theory is supported by the\nfact that his hand dates from the sixteenth century, which coincides with the\nestimated date of the binding and the titles written on the cover. Once all the diverse\nparts were bound together, the manuscript was subject to later additions by the main\nscribe, who wrote these on previously blank space (fol. 143v\u2013144r and fol. 158r,\n163v), both at the beginning and the end of two distinct treatises.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=60\nPages: 60\nSuch observations seem to argue against the view that sees these books as\nmanuals written for the practitioner. But neither were these compendium written\npurely for scholarly purposes, deprived of any practical function. In parallel to the\ndata that could be considered part of the technical heritage of a earlier period, these\nrecipe books also contain more recent practical instructions\u2014coming from contemporary artists and practicing scholars or from the scribe\u2019s own experiments, as the\nexamples of Seidel, Freising and Schobinger discussed above illustrate. Even when\nthe writing of these instructions, verbalized in the rhetoric of the recipes, was\ncarried out by scribes, data were not blindly copied. Scribes organised, assembled,\ncompleted or corrected when they felt it necessary. Thus, even if they were not the\nauthor per se, in the sense that they were not the origin or the source of the technical\nor chemical procedures they wrote down, they accomplished a set of activities]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=52\nPages: 52\nwere compiled from three different types of source:\n1. content produced by copying and compiling of other written sources;\n2. practical information obtained from personalities (practitioner or not) cited by\nthe scribes;\n3. content possibly derived from personal contributions made by the scribes.\nIn some instances, most of the content came from the copying and compilation of\nother written sources. This process can be followed by tracing the repeated appearances of certain popular texts found in the manuscripts of that period. Taking a\nwider view, these books have a great number of texts in common\u2014dedicated to\nmedicine, pharmacology, herbal, cosmetic, etc.\u2014which were widely copied and\ndisseminated in mediaeval and premodern times. These texts are quite often\nassociated with the name of older or quoted authorities. Within our corpus several\nalchemical treatises and recipes are attributed to (pseudo) Albertus Magnus\n(c.1190\u20131280), Arnaldus de Villa Nova (c.1240\u20131311) or Roger Bacon (1214\u2013]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=51\nPages: 51\nproduction behind these texts, as well as their compilation and dissemination,\nelucidates information about the former nature and the previous and current function of these writings.20 Answering these questions would: first, help to better\nestimate the relevance of these books when using them as a historical source for\nreconstructing part of mediaeval and premodern alchemical and artistic knowledge.\nAnd second, examining the various connections and similarities between these two\nfields, as described within recipe books, would serve to (re)situate them in their\nhistorical and cultural contexts.\nThe Sources and the Context of Production\nFirst of all, the wide diversity of subjects and fields embedded within the corpus begs\nthe question: were they written by several authors? A priori, palaeographical examination tends to confirm this: as with a large number of recipe books produced during\nmediaeval and premodern times, the manuscripts examined were written by several\n17]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=100\nPages: 100\nLeonardo da Vinci. 2002b. The Manuscripts of Leonardo da Vinci in the Institut de France:\nManuscript F, ed. and trans. John Venerella. Milan: Castello sforzesco.\nLeonardo da Vinci. 2003. The Manuscripts of Leonardo da Vinci in the Institut de France:\nManuscript B, ed. and trans. John Venerella. Milan: Ente raccolta vinciana.\nLong, Pamela O. 2001. Openness, Secrecy, Authorship: Technical Arts and the Culture of\nKnowledge from Antiquity to the Renaissance. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.\nLong, Pamela O. 2002. Objects of Art/Objects of Nature: Visual Representation and the Investigation of Nature. In Merchants and Marvels: Commerce, Science and Art in Early Modern\nEurope, eds. Pamela H. Smith and Paula Findlen, 63\u201382. New York: Routledge.\nLong, Pamela O. 2011. Artisan/Practitioners and the Rise of the New Sciences, 1400\u20131600.\nCorvallis: Oregon State University Press.\nMaccagni, Carlo. 1993. Leggere, scrivere e disegnare la \u201cscienza volgare\u201d nel Rinascimento.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=198\nPages: 198\nsource of random observations made casually in the course of exercising their\ncraft, they initiated projects, conducted experiments, made innovations, read\nlearned treatises, and communicated or collaborated with more traditionallyeducated or more natural philosophically inclined members. While someone like\nAnthoni Grill was undoubtedly an exceptional figure, he nevertheless serves to\nillustrate one end of the spectrum of possible social and intellectual positions\noccupied by early modern gold- and silversmiths. His active participation and\neventual notoriety and success indicate the social boundaries that were crossed\nwithin the network, a situation that also existed with Caillart and Roussel and others\nin the French context as well. These examples thus begin to resituate the role of\nsuch artisan-chymists within the larger ambit of chymistry. While not erased, the\nneat division of artisan and natural philosopher emerges considerably blurred.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=153\nPages: 153\n1480 this had increased to seven.11\nMapping the Florentine Arts\nIn 1584 a magnificent map of Florence, made by the grand duke\u2019s cosmographer\nStefano Bonsignori (?\u20131589), presented the topography of the city from an isometric perspective (Fig. 1).12 Tracing the outlines of its physical features, sites and\nbuildings in considerable detail, it showed a city that in little more than a century\nhad been transformed by a new diversified architectural vision. In addition to\nresplendent churches, palaces and state offices, Florence witnessed the establishment of several sites dedicated to the experimental sciences and to the applied arts\nconnected with them.13\nIn the year 1561 there were 2,182 workshops providing a livelihood for around\n10,000 artisans and serving a population of 70,000 inhabitants.14 The crisis of the\nRepublic doubtlessly contributed to the gradual decline of the guilds which no\nlonger could, and in some cases no longer sought to, restrain the entrepreneurial]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=59\nPages: 59,60\ncontemporary workshop or laboratory practices.48\nFirst of all, the textual environment and the diversity of the subjects bound\ntogether with the artistic and alchemical recipes in a same book, lead to the\nconclusion that these compilations were mainly read by scholars primarily interested in natural philosophy and were not intended for contemporary practical use.\nMoreover, it has been frequently stated that craft practices were transmitted orally,\n48\nClarke, \u201cCodicological Indicators\u201d; and Neven, Recettes artistiques, 16\u201323.\n36\nS. Neven\nfrom the master to the apprentice.49 A large number of the manuscripts of this study\nresult from copying and compilation processes undertaken by scribes. As they were\ncopied in a context outside the workshop or the laboratory, these recipes were not\nrevised and, consequently, conveyed an anachronistic technical tradition that\nbecame more and more outdated.\nSuch observations seem to argue against the view that sees these books as]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=121\nPages: 121\ncraftsmen\u2019, introduced by Edgar Zilsel in 1942, who started to interact with\nacademics and humanists, is just one of the many important texts dealing with the\nexchange between the artes mechanicae and the artes liberales from the fifteenth\ncentury onwards, a theory which was recently elaborated and confirmed by Pamela\nH. Smith in The Body of the Artisan in 2004 and by Pamela O. Long in Artisan/\nPractitioners in 2011.45 Again in 2004, Davis Baird\u2019s contribution on \u2018thing\nknowledge\u2019 focussed on a \u2018philosophy of scientific instruments\u2019 and distinguishes\nwithin this epistemology of the artificial object three forms in which an instrument\ncan represent knowledge: firstly as model, secondly as product and medium of\nworking knowledge and thirdly as embodiment of \u2018encapsulated knowledge\u2019. His\ntheoretical system not only applied to scientific instruments, but can also be adapted\nto other artificially created objects, for instance to the Handsteine. In this field, it]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=17\nPages: 17,18\nat Renaissance courts. Laboratories and artisanal workshops shared a material\n25\nSee also Pietsch, \u201cTschirnhaus,\u201d and Klein, \u201cChemical Experts.\u201d\nIntroduction\nxvii\nculture. In fact, in the early modern period, they were often so similar in terms of the\ninstruments they contained that they carried the same name. This material culture\nremained largely the same. A change took place at another level: the increasing\npresence of books and texts in laboratories and workshops populated by figures who\nmerged artisanal and scholarly cultures. This book suggests that this shift in\nworkshop culture facilitated the epistemic exchanges between alchemists and producers of the decorative arts.\nAcknowledgements\nThis book was conceived and written in dialogue with an exhibition project \u201cArt\nand Alchemy. The Mystery of Transformation.\u201d The exhibition is on view at the\nMuseum Kunstpalast in Du\u0308sseldorf from April to August 2014. I would like to]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=49\nPages: 49,50\nvol. I.\n26\nS. Neven\nand descriptions of miscellaneous chemical operations, including instructions for\nthe manufacture of dyes and pigments, for the gilding and painting on glass, as well\nas, among others, metalwork, chrysography, distilling alcohol, making candy, and\ncreating military devices.12\nMediaeval and Premodern Recipe Books\nIn mediaeval and premodern times, artistic and alchemical procedures were often\ndescribed within compilations of texts that may concurrently address various fields\nsuch as medicine, cooking, botany or pharmacology. They also include magical\nrecipes, dietetical instructions or advice on home-economics. All these various\ndisciplines are embedded within the genre of the Fachliteratur.13 This kind of\nliterature regroups all texts of a utilitarian and informative nature whose content\ndoes not principally concern aesthetic or religious issues, or matters relating to\nemotional purpose.14 A great number of these writings share the same format and]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=66\nPages: 66\n(collection(s) of) text(s). By displaying the various ways alchemical and artistic\nrecipes are embedded within the same manuscript, this study has highlighted the\npotential difficulties in localizing and distinguishing them.\nOn the other hand, it has been demonstrated that recipe books partly derived\nfrom the recording and transmission of (more or less) contemporaneous practices.\nThus, recipe books also reflect alchemical and artistic knowledge and interests of\nboth scribes and contemporary scholars, both of whom could be involved as readers\nor authorities. Recipe books also serve to define a more precise network in which\nthese types of knowledge circulated, delivering information about the \u2018actors\u2019\u2014\nwhether artisans, scholars, natural philosophers, (theoretical) alchemists or lay\nscribes\u2014and their interconnections, as well as the media (copy, oral source,\nexperiment) they used to exchange, share and communicate art and alchemy.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=22\nPages: 22,23\nthe Technical University, Berlin. Her dissertation focussed on forms and media of\nhistorical memory in medieval sea republics (Pisa, Genoa, Venice). Her current\nresearch interest centres around early modern goldsmiths and their role within the\nscholarly network of early modern natural philosophers. Her recent publications\ninclude: \u201cMaterie als Prinzip und Ursache der Individuation. A\u0308hnlichkeit und\nxxi\nxxii\nAbout the Authors\nBildnis in der Plastik des 13. Jahrhunderts\u201d (2012); \u201cWunderbarliche Gewechse.\nBergbau und Goldschmiedekunst im 16. Jahrhundert\u201d (2012).\nFanny Kieffer is an associate researcher at the Centre d\u2019E\u0301tudes Supe\u0301rieures de la\nRenaissance in Tours and teaches art history at the universities of Tours and\nPoitiers. She has been a Vittore Branca fellow of the Fondazione Cini and a Frances\nYates fellow at the Warburg Institute. Her primary research focus is the interaction\nbetween arts and sciences in Renaissance Italy and France. She is about to publish a]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=124\nPages: 124\n101\nAgricola, Georg. 1956. Schriften zur Geologie und Mineralogie I. Georgius Agricola.\nAusgew\u20ac\nahlte Werke, vol. 3, ed. Georg Fraustadt and Hans Prescher. Berlin: Deutscher Verlag\nder Wissenschaften.\nAlbertus, Magnus. 1967. Book of Minerals, trans. Dorothy Wyckoff. Oxford: Clarendon Press.\nAristoteles. 1955. Meteorologie. Die Lehrschriften, vol. 7, ed. Paul Gohlke. Paderborn:\nScho\u0308ningh.\nBa\u0308umel, Jutta. 1990. Die Darstellung des Bergbaus im ho\u0308fischen Fest des 16. und 17. Jahrhunderts.\nIn Der silberne Boden. Kunst und Bergbau in Sachsen, ed. Manfred Bachmann, Harald Marx,\nand Eberhard Wa\u0308chtler, 213\u2013215. Leipzig: Edition Leipzig.\nBeretta, Marco. 1993. The Enlightenment of Matter: The Definition of Chemistry from Agricola to\nLavoisier. Canton: Science History Publications.\nBiringuccio, Vannoccio. 1540. De la pirotechnia. Venice: Per Venturino Roffinello.\nBiringuccio, Vannoccio. [1540] 1942. The Pirotechnia of Vannoccio Biriniguccio: The Classic]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=75\nPages: 75,76\nWilliam R. Newman and Anthony Grafton, 385\u2013431. Cambridge: MIT Press.\nSchobinger, Viktor. 1978. Die Schowinger von St. Gallen, Bartlome Schowingers B\u20ac\nucher.\nZu\u0308rich: Schobinger.\nSinger, Dorothea W. 1928\u20131931. Catalogue of Latin and Vernacular Alchemical Manuscripts in\nGreat Britain and Ireland, 3 vols. Brussels: Lamertin.\nSmith, Pamela H. 2004. The Body of the Artisan: Art and Experience in the Scientific Revolution.\nChicago: University of Chicago Press.\nSmith, Cyril S., and John G. Hawthorne. 1974. Mappae Clavicula. A Little Key to the World of\nMedieval Technique. Philadelphia: American Philosophical Society.\nTeleky, Ludwig. 1948. History of Factory and Mine Hygie\u0300ne. New York: Columbia University\nPress.\nTheisen, Wilfrid. 1995. The Attraction of Alchemy for Monks and Friars in the 13th\u201314th\ncenturies. The American Benedictine Review 46: 239\u2013253.\nArtisanal Processes and Epistemological\nDebate in the Works of Leonardo Da Vinci\nand Vannoccio Biringuccio\nAndrea Bernardoni]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=123\nPages: 123,124\ndiscourse and the ordered world of the princely Kunstkammer.\nBibliography\n1990. Meisterwerke bergbaulicher Kunst vom 13. bis 19. Jahrhundert, eds. Rainer Slotta and\nChristoph Bartels. Bochum: Deutsches Bergbau-Museum Bochum.\n1997. Bei diesem Schein kehrt Segen ein: Gold, Silber und Kupfer aus dem Slowakischen\nErzgebirge, eds. Rainer Slotta and Ju\u0308rgen Labuda. Bochum: Deutsches Bergbau-Museum\nBochum.\nAdams, Frank Dawson. 1934. The Origin and Nature of Ore Deposits. An Historical Study.\nBulletin of the Geological Society of America 45: 375\u2013424.\nAmico, Leonard N. 1996. Bernard Palissy: In Search of Earthly Paradise. Paris: Flammarion.\nAgricola, Georg. 1546. De ortu et causis subterraneorum. Basel: Hieronymus Froben & Nikolaus\nEpiscopius.\n48\nLong, Artisan/Practitioners, ch. IV, 94\u2013126, esp. 107\u201312.\nArtificial Interventions in the Natural Form of Things: Shared. . .\n101\nAgricola, Georg. 1956. Schriften zur Geologie und Mineralogie I. Georgius Agricola.\nAusgew\u20ac]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=73\nPages: 73,74\nClarke, Mark. 2001. The Art of All colours. Medieval Recipe Books for Painters and Illuminators.\nLondon: Archetype Publications.\nClarke, Mark. 2009. Codicological Indicators of Practical Medieval Artists\u2019 Recipes. In\nSources and Serendipity. Testimonies of Artists\u2019 Practice, ed. Erma Hermens and Joyce\nTownsend, 8\u201317. London: Archetype Publications.\nCorbett, James A. 1936. L\u2019Alchimiste Le\u0301onard de Maurperg (XIVe sie\u0300cle). Sa collection de\nrecettes et ses voyages. Bibliothe\u0300que de l\u2019e\u0301cole des chartes 97: 131\u2013141.\nEamon, William. 1994. Science and the Secrets of Nature. Books of Secrets in Medieval and\nEarly Modern Culture. Princeton: Princeton University Press.\nEis, Gerhard. 1962. Mittelalterliche Fachliteratur. Stuttgart: Metzler.\n50\nS. Neven\nEisermann, Falk, and Eckhard Graf. 1998. Johannes Hartlieb: Das Buch der verbotenen K\u20ac\nunste.\nMu\u0308nchen: Diederichs.\nFox, Adam, and Daniel Woolf. 2002. The Spoken Word. Oral Culture in Britain, 1500\u20131850.\nManchester: Manchester University Press.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=123\nPages: 123\nfour questions are inextricably linked: the analysis of the coconut vessel reveals a\nvast number of formal and iconographical references to the metallogenetic theories\nnegotiated in contemporary discourses, which were embedded in the larger context\nof art-theoretical ideas on the relationship between man and nature as well as\nbetween form and matter. This is not surprising, because goldsmiths, alchemist\nand Montantwissenschaftler (mining professionals) moved in the same \u2018spaces\u2019\u2014\nlocally and discursively. The example of St. Joachimsthal illustrates the importance\nof the concept of \u2018trading zones\u2019 for the transfer of knowledge between different\nprofessional categories, recently brought into focus by Pamela O Long: in this\nmining centre the persons processing metals drew their knowledge from the same\ntheoretical writings and treat their matter with the same practices: goldsmiths,\nalchemist and Pr\u20ac\nufer (assayer) all were employed in the processes of melting,]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=52\nPages: 52\n(c.1190\u20131280), Arnaldus de Villa Nova (c.1240\u20131311) or Roger Bacon (1214\u2013\n1294). Previous studies have established that, quite often, such writings correspond\nto apocryphal or pseudepigraphical works.21 As most recipe books are compilations, it is possible that some anonymous texts were (sometimes involuntarily)\nassembled together under the name of an authority cited in another part of the\nmanuscript and subsequently disseminated under that name. Generally, these citations acted as a testimony of authority; they legitimised the alchemical knowledge\nrecorded in these books. No doubt, the typical attraction and reverence for ancient\nauthorities on the one hand, and the opportunity to record a (presumably) non\nanonymous text on the other hand, favoured the dissemination of these writings.22\nThe association with the name of an authority gave rise to a tradition of works\nwhich, due to the processes of copying and compilation, circulated under various]"]}

{"result":["[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=52\nPages: 52\n(c.1190\u20131280), Arnaldus de Villa Nova (c.1240\u20131311) or Roger Bacon (1214\u2013\n1294). Previous studies have established that, quite often, such writings correspond\nto apocryphal or pseudepigraphical works.21 As most recipe books are compilations, it is possible that some anonymous texts were (sometimes involuntarily)\nassembled together under the name of an authority cited in another part of the\nmanuscript and subsequently disseminated under that name. Generally, these citations acted as a testimony of authority; they legitimised the alchemical knowledge\nrecorded in these books. No doubt, the typical attraction and reverence for ancient\nauthorities on the one hand, and the opportunity to record a (presumably) non\nanonymous text on the other hand, favoured the dissemination of these writings.22\nThe association with the name of an authority gave rise to a tradition of works\nwhich, due to the processes of copying and compilation, circulated under various]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=60\nPages: 60,61\nhim as a better (method) is delivered on 219.51 Then on folio 219, he indicates\nanother method for the same technical procedure, giving as title \u201cHow one should\nmasterfully melt crystal.\u201d52\nIn this sense, the scribes at the root of these recipe books created not simply a\ncopy but a unique work, which reflected their own interests, their cultural and life\ncontext and sometimes their intention, which was to deliver practical and useful\ninstruction.\n49\nHalleux, Entre technologie et alchimie, 7.\nFor this definition of authorship, see notably Love, Attributing Authorship, 32\u201340.\n51\n\u201cDise kunst prauchet ich nit hinden amm 219 hastu vil pessere.\u201d (Munich, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Cgm 4117, fol. 53r)\n52\n\u201cWie man christallen maisterlich giessen soll.\u201d (Munich, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Cgm\n4117, fol. 219)\n50\nTransmission of Alchemical and Artistic Knowledge in German Mediaeval and. . .\n37\nReliability of Recipe Books]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=180\nPages: 180\nclearly aware of the figure of the alchemist and his iconic value.6 Likewise, the\nallegorical images of widely varying artistic quality in chymical books and manuscripts imply some sort of contact between author/practitioner and artist. Yet such\nartworks do not necessarily indicate that the artists were actually in direct and\nmeaningful contact with chymists. On a purely commercial level, artists would\nhave been in contact (possibly directly in some instances, but probably more\nfrequently indirectly through a retailer) with makers of chymically-prepared pigments such as vermilion or white lead, just as metalworkers and assayers would\nhave connected with producers of mineral acids, fabric-makers with dye manufacturers, and so forth. Yet none of these contacts tells us anything about possible\nepistemic exchanges or collaborations on the level of practical or theoretical\nknowledge.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=60\nPages: 60\nor chemical procedures they wrote down, they accomplished a set of activities\nlinked to \u2018authorship\u2019.50 Scribes also made attempts to ensure that the recipes could\nbe consulted at need: they composed tables of contents or indexes, they introduced\ntitles within the margins and many other details which attest to a real desire to\ndeliver usable information. In this context the marginal notes and additions made by\nthe scribes/authors of the recipe book are of interest as most of them are technical\ncomments testifying practical interest in both alchemical and artistic instructions.\nSeveral marginal annotations due to Seidel\u2019s hand punctuate the Cgm 4117 and\nconsist in personal commentaries regarding the technical procedures he records.\nFor example, on folio 53r, Seidel compares two ways for the melting of crystal.\nConcerning the first process he states in the margin that this \u2018art\u2019 was not of use to\nhim as a better (method) is delivered on 219.51 Then on folio 219, he indicates]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=18\nPages: 18,19\nWeinryb, Steve Wharton, and Alan Williams.\nThis book would not have been possible \u2013 and even less possible in such a short\ntime \u2013 without the efficient and magnificent editorial assistance of Gina Partridge\nGrzimek, Lea Poeschl and Celine Camps. My final thanks go to Jed Buchwald for\nhis trust in the project and for considering the book for his series Archimedes, and to\nLucy Fleet for her assistance, advice and patience throughout the several stages of\nthis edited book project.\nBerlin, Germany\nSven Dupre\u0301\nxviii\nIntroduction\nBibliography\nBeretta, Marco. 2009. The Alchemy of Glass. Counterfeit, Imitation and Transmutation in\nAncient Glass-Making. Sagamore Beach: Science History Publications.\nDavis, Lucy. 2009. Renaissance Inventions: Van Eyck\u2019s Workshop as a Site of Discovery and\nTransformation in Jan van der Straet\u2019s Nova Reperta. In Envisioning the Artist in the]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=52\nPages: 52\nwere compiled from three different types of source:\n1. content produced by copying and compiling of other written sources;\n2. practical information obtained from personalities (practitioner or not) cited by\nthe scribes;\n3. content possibly derived from personal contributions made by the scribes.\nIn some instances, most of the content came from the copying and compilation of\nother written sources. This process can be followed by tracing the repeated appearances of certain popular texts found in the manuscripts of that period. Taking a\nwider view, these books have a great number of texts in common\u2014dedicated to\nmedicine, pharmacology, herbal, cosmetic, etc.\u2014which were widely copied and\ndisseminated in mediaeval and premodern times. These texts are quite often\nassociated with the name of older or quoted authorities. Within our corpus several\nalchemical treatises and recipes are attributed to (pseudo) Albertus Magnus\n(c.1190\u20131280), Arnaldus de Villa Nova (c.1240\u20131311) or Roger Bacon (1214\u2013]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=60\nPages: 60\nSuch observations seem to argue against the view that sees these books as\nmanuals written for the practitioner. But neither were these compendium written\npurely for scholarly purposes, deprived of any practical function. In parallel to the\ndata that could be considered part of the technical heritage of a earlier period, these\nrecipe books also contain more recent practical instructions\u2014coming from contemporary artists and practicing scholars or from the scribe\u2019s own experiments, as the\nexamples of Seidel, Freising and Schobinger discussed above illustrate. Even when\nthe writing of these instructions, verbalized in the rhetoric of the recipes, was\ncarried out by scribes, data were not blindly copied. Scribes organised, assembled,\ncompleted or corrected when they felt it necessary. Thus, even if they were not the\nauthor per se, in the sense that they were not the origin or the source of the technical\nor chemical procedures they wrote down, they accomplished a set of activities]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=193\nPages: 193\nmanuscripts also reveal a wider circle of closely-knit chymists active in Paris\nthroughout the 1650s and 1660s. This circle included, besides Duclos and Digby,\nthe abbe\u0301 Jullien de Loberie (chaplain of the Colle\u0300ge Fortet) and an abbe\u0301 Boucaud,\nThomas Gobelin (member of a prominent family and counselor to the Paris\nParlement), the chymical authors Jean-Baptiste de la Noue, Pierre Borel, and\nFranc\u0327ois de Soucy, Sieur de Gerzan, as well as a host of others. The group shared\nmanuscripts, processes, and other information gathered from books or private\ncorrespondence, and collaborated (in various combinations) on practical chymical\nprocesses, most frequently of a transmutational nature. Some of them frequented\nwell-known intellectual groupings such as the academy of the abbe\u0301 Bourdelot.43\nThe travelling savants Borrichius and Henry Oldenburg (1619\u20131677) also\ninteracted with the group during their visits to Paris.\nSeveral documents record the participation of goldsmiths in this Parisian]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=36\nPages: 36\nthis book. Each of them is given a specific title that is either a letter (of the\nalphabet) or a word. They are explained by the words of priests. One of these is\nentitled \u2018Imus\u2019, another \u2018Imuth\u2019, another \u2018Face\u2019\u2014so it was interpreted\n(or translated). One of these is entitled \u2018Key\u2019, another \u2018Seal\u2019 or \u2018Signet\u2019, another\n\u2018Handbook\u2019 (see gr. \u1f10\u03b3\u03c7\u03b5\u03b9\u03c1\u03af\u03b4\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd), another \u2018Position\u2019 (of the stars? see gr. \u1f10\u03c0\u03bf\u03c7\u03ae).\nAs I said, each one is given a specific title. This book contains the crafts and\nmany thousands of words. Then those who came afterwards, with the intent of\ndoing well, divided the book in many parts; as someone would say: (they did so)\nin order to compose short versions (of the book) for themselves. And they were\nnot even able to write something useful. For they did not only damage the books\nof alchemy, but also hidden them. The philosopher (i.e. Democritus) claims:\n\u2018they hid the writings on the natural substances under the multiplicity of matter.\u2019]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=51\nPages: 51\nproduction behind these texts, as well as their compilation and dissemination,\nelucidates information about the former nature and the previous and current function of these writings.20 Answering these questions would: first, help to better\nestimate the relevance of these books when using them as a historical source for\nreconstructing part of mediaeval and premodern alchemical and artistic knowledge.\nAnd second, examining the various connections and similarities between these two\nfields, as described within recipe books, would serve to (re)situate them in their\nhistorical and cultural contexts.\nThe Sources and the Context of Production\nFirst of all, the wide diversity of subjects and fields embedded within the corpus begs\nthe question: were they written by several authors? A priori, palaeographical examination tends to confirm this: as with a large number of recipe books produced during\nmediaeval and premodern times, the manuscripts examined were written by several\n17]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=18\nPages: 18\nconference hosted at the Max Planck Institute for the History of Science in March\n2013. Although this book contains only a selection of the papers presented at this\nconference, I would like to thank all presenters as well as all commentators and\ndiscussants for their contributions before during and after the conference. Their\ninterventions have made this a much better book. At the risk of forgetting someone,\nI would like to name and thank Marjolijn Bol, Suzanne Butters, David Brafman,\nSpike Bucklow, Mark Clarke, Teresa Esposito, Christine Goettler, Matthew Hunter,\nStephen Johnston, Didier Kahn, Martin Kemp, Ursula Klein, Karin Leonhard,\nWolfgang Lefe\u0300vre, Pamela Long, Alexander Marr, Tine Meganck, Bruce Moran,\nWilliam Newman, Tara Nummedal, Doris Oltrogge, Valentina Pugliano, Jennifer\nRampling, Marlise Rijks, Maurice Yves-Christian Sass, Lorenz Seelig, Pamela\nSmith, Anke Timmermann, Barbara Tramelli, Berit Wagner, Arie Wallert, Ittai\nWeinryb, Steve Wharton, and Alan Williams.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=52\nPages: 52,53\nwhich, due to the processes of copying and compilation, circulated under various\ntitles and were sometimes attributed to diverse authorities.23\nAt this stage, it should be noted that there are also a significant number of texts\ndedicated to religious content bound together with the recipe books under scrutiny.\nThese are theological works, liturgies, extracts from the bible and hagiographies.\nIn fact, a great number of recipe books appear to have been written or compiled within\n21\nMinnis, Theory of Authorship. Concerning the alchemical works attributed to Albertus Magnus\nsee notably Kibre, \u201cAlchemical Writings.\u201d See also Newman, \u201cAlchemy of Roger Bacon.\u201d For\nArnaldus de Villa Nova, see notably Calvet, \u201cTradition alchimique latine.\u201d\n22\nMinnis, Theory of Authorship, 9.\n23\nCalvet, \u201cTradition alchimique latine,\u201d 42.\nTransmission of Alchemical and Artistic Knowledge in German Mediaeval and. . .\n29]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=62\nPages: 62\npractica, all of which are delineated and separated by blank spaces or folios. These\ntexts were written by several hands, on paper from different origins dated from the\nfifteenth and the sixteenth centuries. The main contribution comes from an anonymous scribe who is responsible for a number of independent collections of recipes\nbut also for some additions throughout other parts of the volume.54 Perhaps this\ncontributor was at the root of both the (partial) writing and the collecting and\nassembling of these data into one single volume. This theory is supported by the\nfact that his hand dates from the sixteenth century, which coincides with the\nestimated date of the binding and the titles written on the cover. Once all the diverse\nparts were bound together, the manuscript was subject to later additions by the main\nscribe, who wrote these on previously blank space (fol. 143v\u2013144r and fol. 158r,\n163v), both at the beginning and the end of two distinct treatises.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=56\nPages: 56\nA small number of these writings are produced in the form of carefully presented\nand independent collections: they are written in metallogallic ink and are quite\noften embellished with titles in red, and rubrics. These examples may be relatively\nhomogeneous: usually, only one or two scribes (who are contemporaneous) can be\nidentified and the presentation of their texts is almost identical. Moreover, no\nadditional material modifies the original volume.\nOthers (though not the majority) are quite heterogeneous, both in their content\n(medical, theological, astronomical, technical, household) and in their physical\nappearance (diversity of format, dialect and handwriting). They are informally\nwritten, with no decoration, and are characterized by apparently random presentation\nand inconsistent structure.\nThe recipe titles, which do not always correspond to the procedure that follows\nthem, do not imply a coherent organization. This second type of manuscript was]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=198\nPages: 198\nsource of random observations made casually in the course of exercising their\ncraft, they initiated projects, conducted experiments, made innovations, read\nlearned treatises, and communicated or collaborated with more traditionallyeducated or more natural philosophically inclined members. While someone like\nAnthoni Grill was undoubtedly an exceptional figure, he nevertheless serves to\nillustrate one end of the spectrum of possible social and intellectual positions\noccupied by early modern gold- and silversmiths. His active participation and\neventual notoriety and success indicate the social boundaries that were crossed\nwithin the network, a situation that also existed with Caillart and Roussel and others\nin the French context as well. These examples thus begin to resituate the role of\nsuch artisan-chymists within the larger ambit of chymistry. While not erased, the\nneat division of artisan and natural philosopher emerges considerably blurred.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=61\nPages: 61\nbooks, and in alchemical or magical texts. Frequently, the copyist was free to add,\nto remove or to omit some words or even some parts of the text. These modifications or omissions sometimes concern primary data, such as the name of the\ningredients or materials, or may be related to some of the steps of the procedure.\nAt each stage of the copying process, variations or errors can occur. This phenomenon can be explained in several ways: it could be an attempt to improve or to\ndiversify a previous formula; it could be a quid pro quo, in which an unknown or\nexpensive ingredient is substituted with a more well known or less expensive one; it\nmay have been a voluntary reduction of the recipe text.\nIf we suppose that the function of a recipe book was practical or instructive, this\nfunction could be the motivation behind changes to the recipes. An author or a scribe\nmay, voluntarily, have corrected the text, or added information to it. However,]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=64\nPages: 64\neasily fill in the lacuna that punctuated the text of the recipe.\nAs previously observed, citations of authority were frequently used by the scribes\nof the manuscripts. However, the tendency for an older authority to be cited in the\nrecipe books is particularly characteristic of the alchemical writings and less typical\nof the art-technological recipes. As stated above, such citations primarily served to\nlegitimate the technical and chemical procedures. In addition, most alchemical\nrecipes describe processes and practical results to validate previously enounced\ntheoretical principles. Thus, more than artistic recipes, alchemical instructions\nemphasize the efficacy of the procedure which is frequently confirmed through\nexpressions such as expertum es or probatum est which are placed at the beginning]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=57\nPages: 57\nlater owner punctuate the distinct recipes within the manuscripts. In fact, these\nadditions mostly appear under the form of titles or details given as a counterpart to\nthe instructions. In the Ms. Vadiana 429 from St. Gallen, a great number of\nadditional notes consist of technical commentaries and supplementary notes\nadded to those of the compiler of the manuscript. In the Nuremberg Hs. 33733, a\nlater owner added several titles and remarks within the margins. Some of these\nmarginal additions also mention the name of the person from whom the scribe may\nhave obtained the data he is adding. For example, in the Vienna Ms. 5224, fol.\n74, the scribe indicated the name of a physician, \u201cDoctor Jorg erffordie,\u201d before the\ntitle of a recipe dedicated to the production of sal ammoniac. On folio 105 of the\nsame manuscript, the scribe associated an alchemical procedure with the name\n\u201cMarggrauff von Ro\u0308tell\u201d by mentioning him in the upper margin. This observation]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=16\nPages: 16,17\nKlein, \u201cChemical Experts.\u201d\n23\nOn hybrid experts, see Klein, \u201cArtisanal-Scientific Experts,\u201d and \u201cDepersonalizing the Arcanum.\u201d\n24\nFor glassmaking (not discussed here), see Beretta, Alchemy of Glass; and Dupre\u0301, \u201cValue of\nGlass.\u201d\n22\nxvi\nIntroduction\nSilver- and goldsmiths seem obvious candidates when we think of careers that\ncross artisan and alchemist. Silversmiths, goldsmiths and alchemists worked on the\nsame materials (silver and gold), and silver- and goldsmiths\u2019 expertise was called\nfor to assay the purported gold and silver transmuted by alchemists. Silver- and\ngoldsmiths could also become involved themselves in transmutational endeavours.\nIn his contribution to this book, Principe focuses on the brothers Anthoni and\nAndries Grill (1604\u20131655) as examples of such hybrid figures. They ran successful\nsilversmithing businesses in mid-seventeenth century Amsterdam and The Hague.\nAnthoni Grill\u2019s Amsterdam laboratory also produced work on transmutation for]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=74\nPages: 74\nDe Graaf.\nJohnson, Rozelle P. 1939. The Compositiones Variae from Codex 490, Biblioteca Capitolare,\nLucc. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.\nKahn, Didier. 2007. Alchimie et paracelsisme en France a\u0300 la fin de la Renaissance (1567\u20131625).\nGene\u0300ve: Droz.\nKibre, Pearl. 1942. Alchemical Writings Ascribed to Albertus Magnus. Speculum 17: 499\u2013518.\nKoelsch, Franz. 1967. Beitr\u20ac\nage zur Geschichte des Arbeitsmedizin. Munich: Bayerische\nLandesa\u0308rztekammer.\nLaurioux, Bruno. 1997. Les Livres de cuisine me\u0301die\u0301vaux. Turnhout: Brepols.\nLove, Harold. 2002. Attributing Authorship: An Introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University\nPress.\nMartelli, Matteo. 2011. Pseudo-Democrito. Scritti alchemici con il commentario di Sinesio. Paris/\nMilan: S.E\u0301.H.A.-Arche\u0300.\nMeier, Pirmin. 2004. Paracelsus. Arzt und Prophet. Zu\u0308rich: Ammann.\nMinnis, Alastair. 2010. Medieval Theory of Authorship. Scholastic Literary Attitudes in the\nLater Middle Ages. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.]"]}

{"result":["[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=60\nPages: 60,61\nhim as a better (method) is delivered on 219.51 Then on folio 219, he indicates\nanother method for the same technical procedure, giving as title \u201cHow one should\nmasterfully melt crystal.\u201d52\nIn this sense, the scribes at the root of these recipe books created not simply a\ncopy but a unique work, which reflected their own interests, their cultural and life\ncontext and sometimes their intention, which was to deliver practical and useful\ninstruction.\n49\nHalleux, Entre technologie et alchimie, 7.\nFor this definition of authorship, see notably Love, Attributing Authorship, 32\u201340.\n51\n\u201cDise kunst prauchet ich nit hinden amm 219 hastu vil pessere.\u201d (Munich, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Cgm 4117, fol. 53r)\n52\n\u201cWie man christallen maisterlich giessen soll.\u201d (Munich, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Cgm\n4117, fol. 219)\n50\nTransmission of Alchemical and Artistic Knowledge in German Mediaeval and. . .\n37\nReliability of Recipe Books]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=52\nPages: 52\n(c.1190\u20131280), Arnaldus de Villa Nova (c.1240\u20131311) or Roger Bacon (1214\u2013\n1294). Previous studies have established that, quite often, such writings correspond\nto apocryphal or pseudepigraphical works.21 As most recipe books are compilations, it is possible that some anonymous texts were (sometimes involuntarily)\nassembled together under the name of an authority cited in another part of the\nmanuscript and subsequently disseminated under that name. Generally, these citations acted as a testimony of authority; they legitimised the alchemical knowledge\nrecorded in these books. No doubt, the typical attraction and reverence for ancient\nauthorities on the one hand, and the opportunity to record a (presumably) non\nanonymous text on the other hand, favoured the dissemination of these writings.22\nThe association with the name of an authority gave rise to a tradition of works\nwhich, due to the processes of copying and compilation, circulated under various]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=52\nPages: 52\nwere compiled from three different types of source:\n1. content produced by copying and compiling of other written sources;\n2. practical information obtained from personalities (practitioner or not) cited by\nthe scribes;\n3. content possibly derived from personal contributions made by the scribes.\nIn some instances, most of the content came from the copying and compilation of\nother written sources. This process can be followed by tracing the repeated appearances of certain popular texts found in the manuscripts of that period. Taking a\nwider view, these books have a great number of texts in common\u2014dedicated to\nmedicine, pharmacology, herbal, cosmetic, etc.\u2014which were widely copied and\ndisseminated in mediaeval and premodern times. These texts are quite often\nassociated with the name of older or quoted authorities. Within our corpus several\nalchemical treatises and recipes are attributed to (pseudo) Albertus Magnus\n(c.1190\u20131280), Arnaldus de Villa Nova (c.1240\u20131311) or Roger Bacon (1214\u2013]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=36\nPages: 36\nthis book. Each of them is given a specific title that is either a letter (of the\nalphabet) or a word. They are explained by the words of priests. One of these is\nentitled \u2018Imus\u2019, another \u2018Imuth\u2019, another \u2018Face\u2019\u2014so it was interpreted\n(or translated). One of these is entitled \u2018Key\u2019, another \u2018Seal\u2019 or \u2018Signet\u2019, another\n\u2018Handbook\u2019 (see gr. \u1f10\u03b3\u03c7\u03b5\u03b9\u03c1\u03af\u03b4\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd), another \u2018Position\u2019 (of the stars? see gr. \u1f10\u03c0\u03bf\u03c7\u03ae).\nAs I said, each one is given a specific title. This book contains the crafts and\nmany thousands of words. Then those who came afterwards, with the intent of\ndoing well, divided the book in many parts; as someone would say: (they did so)\nin order to compose short versions (of the book) for themselves. And they were\nnot even able to write something useful. For they did not only damage the books\nof alchemy, but also hidden them. The philosopher (i.e. Democritus) claims:\n\u2018they hid the writings on the natural substances under the multiplicity of matter.\u2019]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=57\nPages: 57\nlater owner punctuate the distinct recipes within the manuscripts. In fact, these\nadditions mostly appear under the form of titles or details given as a counterpart to\nthe instructions. In the Ms. Vadiana 429 from St. Gallen, a great number of\nadditional notes consist of technical commentaries and supplementary notes\nadded to those of the compiler of the manuscript. In the Nuremberg Hs. 33733, a\nlater owner added several titles and remarks within the margins. Some of these\nmarginal additions also mention the name of the person from whom the scribe may\nhave obtained the data he is adding. For example, in the Vienna Ms. 5224, fol.\n74, the scribe indicated the name of a physician, \u201cDoctor Jorg erffordie,\u201d before the\ntitle of a recipe dedicated to the production of sal ammoniac. On folio 105 of the\nsame manuscript, the scribe associated an alchemical procedure with the name\n\u201cMarggrauff von Ro\u0308tell\u201d by mentioning him in the upper margin. This observation]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=61\nPages: 61\nbooks, and in alchemical or magical texts. Frequently, the copyist was free to add,\nto remove or to omit some words or even some parts of the text. These modifications or omissions sometimes concern primary data, such as the name of the\ningredients or materials, or may be related to some of the steps of the procedure.\nAt each stage of the copying process, variations or errors can occur. This phenomenon can be explained in several ways: it could be an attempt to improve or to\ndiversify a previous formula; it could be a quid pro quo, in which an unknown or\nexpensive ingredient is substituted with a more well known or less expensive one; it\nmay have been a voluntary reduction of the recipe text.\nIf we suppose that the function of a recipe book was practical or instructive, this\nfunction could be the motivation behind changes to the recipes. An author or a scribe\nmay, voluntarily, have corrected the text, or added information to it. However,]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=52\nPages: 52,53\nwhich, due to the processes of copying and compilation, circulated under various\ntitles and were sometimes attributed to diverse authorities.23\nAt this stage, it should be noted that there are also a significant number of texts\ndedicated to religious content bound together with the recipe books under scrutiny.\nThese are theological works, liturgies, extracts from the bible and hagiographies.\nIn fact, a great number of recipe books appear to have been written or compiled within\n21\nMinnis, Theory of Authorship. Concerning the alchemical works attributed to Albertus Magnus\nsee notably Kibre, \u201cAlchemical Writings.\u201d See also Newman, \u201cAlchemy of Roger Bacon.\u201d For\nArnaldus de Villa Nova, see notably Calvet, \u201cTradition alchimique latine.\u201d\n22\nMinnis, Theory of Authorship, 9.\n23\nCalvet, \u201cTradition alchimique latine,\u201d 42.\nTransmission of Alchemical and Artistic Knowledge in German Mediaeval and. . .\n29]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=60\nPages: 60\nor chemical procedures they wrote down, they accomplished a set of activities\nlinked to \u2018authorship\u2019.50 Scribes also made attempts to ensure that the recipes could\nbe consulted at need: they composed tables of contents or indexes, they introduced\ntitles within the margins and many other details which attest to a real desire to\ndeliver usable information. In this context the marginal notes and additions made by\nthe scribes/authors of the recipe book are of interest as most of them are technical\ncomments testifying practical interest in both alchemical and artistic instructions.\nSeveral marginal annotations due to Seidel\u2019s hand punctuate the Cgm 4117 and\nconsist in personal commentaries regarding the technical procedures he records.\nFor example, on folio 53r, Seidel compares two ways for the melting of crystal.\nConcerning the first process he states in the margin that this \u2018art\u2019 was not of use to\nhim as a better (method) is delivered on 219.51 Then on folio 219, he indicates]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=57\nPages: 57\nthey collected their data and specify the dates of these events, which span several\nyears. Notably there are several mentions of the \u201cmagistri Johannis Bog\u201d and places\nsuch as \u201cErffordie\u201d (Erfurt), and \u201cKo\u0308ln\u201d (Cologne).43\nMoreover, later additions or annotations found within the manuscripts tend to\nsuggest that these books have been handled, manipulated and passed from one\nowner to another, sometimes over a long period. The Prager Malerbuch had several\nowners and circulated through several localities before entering the monastery of\nZlata\u0301 Koruna. According to a note written by Federl Mir, the main scribe of the\nPrager Malerbuch, this manuscript was written c.1452, in Tittmoning in the district\nof Traunstein (Bavaria). This place probably corresponds to the original provenance\nof the recipe book. Moreover, the scribe tells us that he has gathered data from\nMichel Schril, a professor in Vienna, who passed away in 1472. We also know that]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=62\nPages: 62\npractica, all of which are delineated and separated by blank spaces or folios. These\ntexts were written by several hands, on paper from different origins dated from the\nfifteenth and the sixteenth centuries. The main contribution comes from an anonymous scribe who is responsible for a number of independent collections of recipes\nbut also for some additions throughout other parts of the volume.54 Perhaps this\ncontributor was at the root of both the (partial) writing and the collecting and\nassembling of these data into one single volume. This theory is supported by the\nfact that his hand dates from the sixteenth century, which coincides with the\nestimated date of the binding and the titles written on the cover. Once all the diverse\nparts were bound together, the manuscript was subject to later additions by the main\nscribe, who wrote these on previously blank space (fol. 143v\u2013144r and fol. 158r,\n163v), both at the beginning and the end of two distinct treatises.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=35\nPages: 35\n11\nthe ninth book of Imouth, reading as follows:30 \u201cThe Holy Scriptures, that is the\nbooks, say, my lady (i.e. Theosebeia),31 that there is a race of demons who avail\nthemselves of women. Hermes also mentioned this in his Physika, and nearly\nevery treatise, both public and esoteric, made mention of this. Thus the ancient\nand divine scriptures said this, that certain angels lusted after women, and having\ndescended taught them all the works of nature. For this reason they fell into\ndisgrace, he (Hermes?) says, and remained outside heaven, because they taught\nmankind everything wicked and nothing benefiting the soul. The same scriptures\nsay that from them the giants were born. So theirs is the first teaching concerning\nthese arts [Chemeu]. They called this book Che\u0304meu,32 whence also the art is\ncalled Alchemy (i.e. che\u0304meia),\u201d and so forth.33\n2. Syriac Zosimus (for a preliminary edition of this text see Appendix)]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=18\nPages: 18\nconference hosted at the Max Planck Institute for the History of Science in March\n2013. Although this book contains only a selection of the papers presented at this\nconference, I would like to thank all presenters as well as all commentators and\ndiscussants for their contributions before during and after the conference. Their\ninterventions have made this a much better book. At the risk of forgetting someone,\nI would like to name and thank Marjolijn Bol, Suzanne Butters, David Brafman,\nSpike Bucklow, Mark Clarke, Teresa Esposito, Christine Goettler, Matthew Hunter,\nStephen Johnston, Didier Kahn, Martin Kemp, Ursula Klein, Karin Leonhard,\nWolfgang Lefe\u0300vre, Pamela Long, Alexander Marr, Tine Meganck, Bruce Moran,\nWilliam Newman, Tara Nummedal, Doris Oltrogge, Valentina Pugliano, Jennifer\nRampling, Marlise Rijks, Maurice Yves-Christian Sass, Lorenz Seelig, Pamela\nSmith, Anke Timmermann, Barbara Tramelli, Berit Wagner, Arie Wallert, Ittai\nWeinryb, Steve Wharton, and Alan Williams.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=51\nPages: 51\nproduction behind these texts, as well as their compilation and dissemination,\nelucidates information about the former nature and the previous and current function of these writings.20 Answering these questions would: first, help to better\nestimate the relevance of these books when using them as a historical source for\nreconstructing part of mediaeval and premodern alchemical and artistic knowledge.\nAnd second, examining the various connections and similarities between these two\nfields, as described within recipe books, would serve to (re)situate them in their\nhistorical and cultural contexts.\nThe Sources and the Context of Production\nFirst of all, the wide diversity of subjects and fields embedded within the corpus begs\nthe question: were they written by several authors? A priori, palaeographical examination tends to confirm this: as with a large number of recipe books produced during\nmediaeval and premodern times, the manuscripts examined were written by several\n17]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=60\nPages: 60\nSuch observations seem to argue against the view that sees these books as\nmanuals written for the practitioner. But neither were these compendium written\npurely for scholarly purposes, deprived of any practical function. In parallel to the\ndata that could be considered part of the technical heritage of a earlier period, these\nrecipe books also contain more recent practical instructions\u2014coming from contemporary artists and practicing scholars or from the scribe\u2019s own experiments, as the\nexamples of Seidel, Freising and Schobinger discussed above illustrate. Even when\nthe writing of these instructions, verbalized in the rhetoric of the recipes, was\ncarried out by scribes, data were not blindly copied. Scribes organised, assembled,\ncompleted or corrected when they felt it necessary. Thus, even if they were not the\nauthor per se, in the sense that they were not the origin or the source of the technical\nor chemical procedures they wrote down, they accomplished a set of activities]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=180\nPages: 180\nclearly aware of the figure of the alchemist and his iconic value.6 Likewise, the\nallegorical images of widely varying artistic quality in chymical books and manuscripts imply some sort of contact between author/practitioner and artist. Yet such\nartworks do not necessarily indicate that the artists were actually in direct and\nmeaningful contact with chymists. On a purely commercial level, artists would\nhave been in contact (possibly directly in some instances, but probably more\nfrequently indirectly through a retailer) with makers of chymically-prepared pigments such as vermilion or white lead, just as metalworkers and assayers would\nhave connected with producers of mineral acids, fabric-makers with dye manufacturers, and so forth. Yet none of these contacts tells us anything about possible\nepistemic exchanges or collaborations on the level of practical or theoretical\nknowledge.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=18\nPages: 18,19\nWeinryb, Steve Wharton, and Alan Williams.\nThis book would not have been possible \u2013 and even less possible in such a short\ntime \u2013 without the efficient and magnificent editorial assistance of Gina Partridge\nGrzimek, Lea Poeschl and Celine Camps. My final thanks go to Jed Buchwald for\nhis trust in the project and for considering the book for his series Archimedes, and to\nLucy Fleet for her assistance, advice and patience throughout the several stages of\nthis edited book project.\nBerlin, Germany\nSven Dupre\u0301\nxviii\nIntroduction\nBibliography\nBeretta, Marco. 2009. The Alchemy of Glass. Counterfeit, Imitation and Transmutation in\nAncient Glass-Making. Sagamore Beach: Science History Publications.\nDavis, Lucy. 2009. Renaissance Inventions: Van Eyck\u2019s Workshop as a Site of Discovery and\nTransformation in Jan van der Straet\u2019s Nova Reperta. In Envisioning the Artist in the]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=38\nPages: 38\nis mentioned also in the Syriac text (50r2).40\nOn the other hand, the Syriac passage emphasises the central role played by\nbooks in the revelation and transmission of alchemical knowledge. While The Book\nof Enoch presented Azae\u0304l\u2019s revelation in the form of oral teaching, Zosimus\nunderlines the written form in which mankind received this secret knowledge.\nThe arts and all the natural procedures (Sync. 14,7 \u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03c4~\n\u03b7\u03c2 \u03c6\u03cd\u03c3\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2\n\u1f14\u03c1\u03b3\u03b1\u00bcSyrZos. 49r19\u201320\n) disclosed by demons had been somehow\nsummarized in the enigmatic books called Che\u0304meu, from which the related term\nche\u0304meia (\u03c7\u03b7\u03bc\u03b5\u1fd6\u03b1 or\n, kumiya) derives. However, while the Final Account insists\non demons\u2019 increasing jealousy towards mankind and on their attempt to gain\ncontrol of the revealed techniques, the Syriac text stresses the point that the original\nknowledge started deteriorating because of the improper use human beings made of\nthe revealed books. In the same way as the demons (or maybe under their influence)]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=64\nPages: 64\neasily fill in the lacuna that punctuated the text of the recipe.\nAs previously observed, citations of authority were frequently used by the scribes\nof the manuscripts. However, the tendency for an older authority to be cited in the\nrecipe books is particularly characteristic of the alchemical writings and less typical\nof the art-technological recipes. As stated above, such citations primarily served to\nlegitimate the technical and chemical procedures. In addition, most alchemical\nrecipes describe processes and practical results to validate previously enounced\ntheoretical principles. Thus, more than artistic recipes, alchemical instructions\nemphasize the efficacy of the procedure which is frequently confirmed through\nexpressions such as expertum es or probatum est which are placed at the beginning]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=193\nPages: 193\nmanuscripts also reveal a wider circle of closely-knit chymists active in Paris\nthroughout the 1650s and 1660s. This circle included, besides Duclos and Digby,\nthe abbe\u0301 Jullien de Loberie (chaplain of the Colle\u0300ge Fortet) and an abbe\u0301 Boucaud,\nThomas Gobelin (member of a prominent family and counselor to the Paris\nParlement), the chymical authors Jean-Baptiste de la Noue, Pierre Borel, and\nFranc\u0327ois de Soucy, Sieur de Gerzan, as well as a host of others. The group shared\nmanuscripts, processes, and other information gathered from books or private\ncorrespondence, and collaborated (in various combinations) on practical chymical\nprocesses, most frequently of a transmutational nature. Some of them frequented\nwell-known intellectual groupings such as the academy of the abbe\u0301 Bourdelot.43\nThe travelling savants Borrichius and Henry Oldenburg (1619\u20131677) also\ninteracted with the group during their visits to Paris.\nSeveral documents record the participation of goldsmiths in this Parisian]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=38\nPages: 38\nthe revealed books. In the same way as the demons (or maybe under their influence)\nsome people tried to hide the books, to summarize them, and disperse their content\nby focusing only on specific topics.\nIn this respect, the last part of the Syriac passage is particularly relevant, since\nZosimus explains that some alchemists narrowed their inquiry to the methods for\ngilding silver. Whereas, the art called che\u0304meia, at least in its original form, included\na wider set of dyeing techniques that were applied to all kinds of metals in order to\ndye them different colours. This explanation is consistent with Zosimus\u2019s other\n39\nFestugie\u0300re, Re\u0301ve\u0301lation d\u2019Herme\u0300s, 365, ll. 15\u201320 (\u00bc CAAG II 242,10\u20136). The name of Isidoros\nappears also in the list of alchemists handed down by the Marcianus gr. 299 (fol. 7v); see CAAG I\n110.\n40\nWe cannot exclude the possibility that other treatises circulating under the name of Hermes]"]}

{"result":["[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=5\nPages: 5\nmethodology now known or hereafter developed. Exempted from this legal reservation are brief excerpts\nin connection with reviews or scholarly analysis or material supplied specifically for the purpose of being\nentered and executed on a computer system, for exclusive use by the purchaser of the work. Duplication\nof this publication or parts thereof is permitted only under the provisions of the Copyright Law of the\nPublisher\u2019s location, in its current version, and permission for use must always be obtained from\nSpringer. Permissions for use may be obtained through RightsLink at the Copyright Clearance Center.\nViolations are liable to prosecution under the respective Copyright Law.\nThe use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this\npublication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt\nfrom the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=36\nPages: 36\nthis book. Each of them is given a specific title that is either a letter (of the\nalphabet) or a word. They are explained by the words of priests. One of these is\nentitled \u2018Imus\u2019, another \u2018Imuth\u2019, another \u2018Face\u2019\u2014so it was interpreted\n(or translated). One of these is entitled \u2018Key\u2019, another \u2018Seal\u2019 or \u2018Signet\u2019, another\n\u2018Handbook\u2019 (see gr. \u1f10\u03b3\u03c7\u03b5\u03b9\u03c1\u03af\u03b4\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd), another \u2018Position\u2019 (of the stars? see gr. \u1f10\u03c0\u03bf\u03c7\u03ae).\nAs I said, each one is given a specific title. This book contains the crafts and\nmany thousands of words. Then those who came afterwards, with the intent of\ndoing well, divided the book in many parts; as someone would say: (they did so)\nin order to compose short versions (of the book) for themselves. And they were\nnot even able to write something useful. For they did not only damage the books\nof alchemy, but also hidden them. The philosopher (i.e. Democritus) claims:\n\u2018they hid the writings on the natural substances under the multiplicity of matter.\u2019]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=52\nPages: 52\n(c.1190\u20131280), Arnaldus de Villa Nova (c.1240\u20131311) or Roger Bacon (1214\u2013\n1294). Previous studies have established that, quite often, such writings correspond\nto apocryphal or pseudepigraphical works.21 As most recipe books are compilations, it is possible that some anonymous texts were (sometimes involuntarily)\nassembled together under the name of an authority cited in another part of the\nmanuscript and subsequently disseminated under that name. Generally, these citations acted as a testimony of authority; they legitimised the alchemical knowledge\nrecorded in these books. No doubt, the typical attraction and reverence for ancient\nauthorities on the one hand, and the opportunity to record a (presumably) non\nanonymous text on the other hand, favoured the dissemination of these writings.22\nThe association with the name of an authority gave rise to a tradition of works\nwhich, due to the processes of copying and compilation, circulated under various]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=56\nPages: 56\nA small number of these writings are produced in the form of carefully presented\nand independent collections: they are written in metallogallic ink and are quite\noften embellished with titles in red, and rubrics. These examples may be relatively\nhomogeneous: usually, only one or two scribes (who are contemporaneous) can be\nidentified and the presentation of their texts is almost identical. Moreover, no\nadditional material modifies the original volume.\nOthers (though not the majority) are quite heterogeneous, both in their content\n(medical, theological, astronomical, technical, household) and in their physical\nappearance (diversity of format, dialect and handwriting). They are informally\nwritten, with no decoration, and are characterized by apparently random presentation\nand inconsistent structure.\nThe recipe titles, which do not always correspond to the procedure that follows\nthem, do not imply a coherent organization. This second type of manuscript was]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=60\nPages: 60\nor chemical procedures they wrote down, they accomplished a set of activities\nlinked to \u2018authorship\u2019.50 Scribes also made attempts to ensure that the recipes could\nbe consulted at need: they composed tables of contents or indexes, they introduced\ntitles within the margins and many other details which attest to a real desire to\ndeliver usable information. In this context the marginal notes and additions made by\nthe scribes/authors of the recipe book are of interest as most of them are technical\ncomments testifying practical interest in both alchemical and artistic instructions.\nSeveral marginal annotations due to Seidel\u2019s hand punctuate the Cgm 4117 and\nconsist in personal commentaries regarding the technical procedures he records.\nFor example, on folio 53r, Seidel compares two ways for the melting of crystal.\nConcerning the first process he states in the margin that this \u2018art\u2019 was not of use to\nhim as a better (method) is delivered on 219.51 Then on folio 219, he indicates]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=57\nPages: 57\nlater owner punctuate the distinct recipes within the manuscripts. In fact, these\nadditions mostly appear under the form of titles or details given as a counterpart to\nthe instructions. In the Ms. Vadiana 429 from St. Gallen, a great number of\nadditional notes consist of technical commentaries and supplementary notes\nadded to those of the compiler of the manuscript. In the Nuremberg Hs. 33733, a\nlater owner added several titles and remarks within the margins. Some of these\nmarginal additions also mention the name of the person from whom the scribe may\nhave obtained the data he is adding. For example, in the Vienna Ms. 5224, fol.\n74, the scribe indicated the name of a physician, \u201cDoctor Jorg erffordie,\u201d before the\ntitle of a recipe dedicated to the production of sal ammoniac. On folio 105 of the\nsame manuscript, the scribe associated an alchemical procedure with the name\n\u201cMarggrauff von Ro\u0308tell\u201d by mentioning him in the upper margin. This observation]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=180\nPages: 180\nclearly aware of the figure of the alchemist and his iconic value.6 Likewise, the\nallegorical images of widely varying artistic quality in chymical books and manuscripts imply some sort of contact between author/practitioner and artist. Yet such\nartworks do not necessarily indicate that the artists were actually in direct and\nmeaningful contact with chymists. On a purely commercial level, artists would\nhave been in contact (possibly directly in some instances, but probably more\nfrequently indirectly through a retailer) with makers of chymically-prepared pigments such as vermilion or white lead, just as metalworkers and assayers would\nhave connected with producers of mineral acids, fabric-makers with dye manufacturers, and so forth. Yet none of these contacts tells us anything about possible\nepistemic exchanges or collaborations on the level of practical or theoretical\nknowledge.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=62\nPages: 62\npractica, all of which are delineated and separated by blank spaces or folios. These\ntexts were written by several hands, on paper from different origins dated from the\nfifteenth and the sixteenth centuries. The main contribution comes from an anonymous scribe who is responsible for a number of independent collections of recipes\nbut also for some additions throughout other parts of the volume.54 Perhaps this\ncontributor was at the root of both the (partial) writing and the collecting and\nassembling of these data into one single volume. This theory is supported by the\nfact that his hand dates from the sixteenth century, which coincides with the\nestimated date of the binding and the titles written on the cover. Once all the diverse\nparts were bound together, the manuscript was subject to later additions by the main\nscribe, who wrote these on previously blank space (fol. 143v\u2013144r and fol. 158r,\n163v), both at the beginning and the end of two distinct treatises.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=106\nPages: 106,107\nin Mathesius, Sarepta, fol. XXXIIIv).\n84\nH. Haug\nempirical knowledge within the limits of a regular and harmonic world, where\neverything points back to its origin, i.e. God.\nMathesius and other mineralogists of the sixteenth century could only rely on a\nfew preliminary works when they made their speculations on the Metallogenese, as\nAgricola regrets in the introduction to his De ortu et causis subterraneorum from\n1546:\nThe Greeks and Latins, however, who we see working for more than a thousand years to\nincrease scientific knowledge, all of them only interpreted the writings of Plato and\nAristotle and followed their views; they neither made inquiries about unsolved questions\nnor did they treat them scientifically. When our Albertus started to make observations about\nthe genesis of excavated materials, he blended the teachings of philosophers, astrologers\nand chymists into one.12\nTwo important preliminary writings, Aristotle\u2019s reflections on meteorology and]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=51\nPages: 51,52\nmediaeval and premodern times, the manuscripts examined were written by several\n17\nPrincipe, Secrets of Alchemy, 17; and Clarke, Art of All Colours, 37.\nSee in this volume Matteo Martelli.\n19\nBucklow, \u201cParadigms and Pigment Recipes\u201d; and Principe, Secrets of Alchemy, 35\u20136.\n20\nNeven, Recettes artistiques.\n18\n28\nS. Neven\nhands, and these hands are predominately anonymous. These works thus appear to\nbe the result of collaboration, or at least intervention, by several distinct persons.\nHowever, each person\u2019s contribution cannot necessarily be allocated according to\nthe different subjects in the book. The same hand might be responsible for both a\nmedical treatise and a collection of alchemical or art technological recipes.\nThe manuscripts under consideration were, in fact, the result of copying and\ncompiling of various sources and contributors. More precisely, these recipe books\nwere compiled from three different types of source:]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=60\nPages: 60,61\nhim as a better (method) is delivered on 219.51 Then on folio 219, he indicates\nanother method for the same technical procedure, giving as title \u201cHow one should\nmasterfully melt crystal.\u201d52\nIn this sense, the scribes at the root of these recipe books created not simply a\ncopy but a unique work, which reflected their own interests, their cultural and life\ncontext and sometimes their intention, which was to deliver practical and useful\ninstruction.\n49\nHalleux, Entre technologie et alchimie, 7.\nFor this definition of authorship, see notably Love, Attributing Authorship, 32\u201340.\n51\n\u201cDise kunst prauchet ich nit hinden amm 219 hastu vil pessere.\u201d (Munich, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Cgm 4117, fol. 53r)\n52\n\u201cWie man christallen maisterlich giessen soll.\u201d (Munich, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Cgm\n4117, fol. 219)\n50\nTransmission of Alchemical and Artistic Knowledge in German Mediaeval and. . .\n37\nReliability of Recipe Books]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=34\nPages: 34\nonly to the preparation of gold and silver. These different approaches to what was\nconsidered part of the alchemical art were inherited and discussed by Zosimus, a\nthird century author who clearly reused the Enochian myth in his own account of\nthe origins and developments of alchemy. In fact, Zosimus first introduced the term\nche\u0304meia with reference to fallen angels\u2019 revelation, which was written down in\nspecific and secret books. Regrettably, Zosimus\u2019s treatise is lost in its Greek\noriginal form, and just its beginning is quoted by Syncellus straight after the\nabove-mentioned passage taken from 1Enoch. However, a more complete version\nis preserved by an unedited Syriac translation handed down in the Cambridge\nmanuscript Mm. 6.29. The two versions read as follows:\n1. Sync. p. 14, ll. 2\u201314 Mosshammer:\nBut it is also fitting to cite a passage regarding them [i.e. the divine scriptures]\nfrom Zosimus, the philosopher of Panopolis, from his writings to Theosebeia in\n28]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=3\nPages: 3\nwith one another: to investigate the technical, social and practical histories of specific developments in science\nand technology; and finally, where possible and desirable, to bring the histories of science and technology\ninto closer contact with the philosophy of science. To these ends, each volume will have its own theme and\ntitle and will be planned by one or more members of the Advisory Board in consultation with the editor.\nAlthough the volumes have specific themes, the series itself will not be limited to one or even to a few\nparticular areas. Its subjects include any of the sciences, ranging from biology through physics, all aspects of\ntechnology, broadly construed, as well as historically-engaged philosophy of science or technology. Taken as\na whole, Archimedes will be of interest to historians, philosophers, and scientists, as well as to those in\nbusiness and industry who seek to understand how science and industry have come to be so strongly linked.\nFor further volumes:]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=36\nPages: 36\n\u2018they hid the writings on the natural substances under the multiplicity of matter.\u2019\nPerhaps they wanted to exercise our souls. Now, if they exercise the souls, well,\nphilosopher, why to deny it? But you know how to exercise either the body or the\nsoul, and it always leads you to achieve the perfection. In fact a wise saying\nreads: \u2018studying is everything.\u2019 And also Isidoros says: \u2018studying increases your\nwork.\u2019 I know, this is not beyond your understanding (my lady), but you know it\nwell, since you are one of those who would have liked to hide the art, if it had not\nbeen put in writing. For this reason you formed an assembly and administered\nthe oath to each other. But you (my lady) moved away from the various topics\n(of this book); you presented them in a shorter form and you taught them openly.\nBut you claim that this book cannot be possessed unless in secret. Now, even\nthough secrets are necessary, it is quite fair that anyone has a book of alchemy,]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=52\nPages: 52,53\nwhich, due to the processes of copying and compilation, circulated under various\ntitles and were sometimes attributed to diverse authorities.23\nAt this stage, it should be noted that there are also a significant number of texts\ndedicated to religious content bound together with the recipe books under scrutiny.\nThese are theological works, liturgies, extracts from the bible and hagiographies.\nIn fact, a great number of recipe books appear to have been written or compiled within\n21\nMinnis, Theory of Authorship. Concerning the alchemical works attributed to Albertus Magnus\nsee notably Kibre, \u201cAlchemical Writings.\u201d See also Newman, \u201cAlchemy of Roger Bacon.\u201d For\nArnaldus de Villa Nova, see notably Calvet, \u201cTradition alchimique latine.\u201d\n22\nMinnis, Theory of Authorship, 9.\n23\nCalvet, \u201cTradition alchimique latine,\u201d 42.\nTransmission of Alchemical and Artistic Knowledge in German Mediaeval and. . .\n29]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=169\nPages: 169\nsame building, only the 1604 frontispiece was printed (Fig. 11). Attached to it are\nnow four manuscript volumes containing some 6,000 alchemical and chemical\nrecipes collected by Don Antonio and his father. The complete publication of this\nambitious work may have been interrupted by Neri\u2019s travel to Antwerp in 1604 and\nthen never resumed after his return to Florence in 1611.58 However, an epitome of\nthe collection was published in a small 8\u0001 volume with the same title and date;\nunfortunately, this became so rare that the last trace of it is in a reference in a 1797\nnote published in L\u2019osservatore fiorentino.59\nThe authors of the recipes were both craftsmen employed in the Casino, such as\nNiccolo\u0300 Landi, and other experts from different parts of Italy and, in a few cases,\n55\nNeri announced at the beginning of his work a number of experiments revealing \u201cle pietre che\npossono trasmutarsi in vetro da quelle che non si possono trasmutare.\u201d (Neri, L\u2019arte vetraria, 38).]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=110\nPages: 110\nin motion to ensure their constant generation.19\nAnother important protagonist of early modern mineralogy, the metallurgist,\nM\u20ac\nunzmeister (moneyer) and Probierer (tester) Lazarus Ercker (1528\u20131594) says in\nhis Beschreibung allerf\u20ac\nurnemisten mineralischer Ertzt and Berckwercksarten\n(Description of the Most Distinguished Ores and Minerals), his Gro\u00dfes\nProbierbuch of 1574, that he will not discuss the writings of natural philosophers\non ores and metals, because:\n[their] thoughts and delusions are not only uncertain and often wrong, but frequently\ncontradict themselves [and] I want to simply believe that God, the almighty Creator, has\nreserved these secrets in his omnipotence and he created gold and silver as well as all other\nmetals through his word, through which also originates heaven and earth and everything\nthat is on it and in it.20\nFollowing this argument, Ercker assumes firstly that all metals were once]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=52\nPages: 52\nwere compiled from three different types of source:\n1. content produced by copying and compiling of other written sources;\n2. practical information obtained from personalities (practitioner or not) cited by\nthe scribes;\n3. content possibly derived from personal contributions made by the scribes.\nIn some instances, most of the content came from the copying and compilation of\nother written sources. This process can be followed by tracing the repeated appearances of certain popular texts found in the manuscripts of that period. Taking a\nwider view, these books have a great number of texts in common\u2014dedicated to\nmedicine, pharmacology, herbal, cosmetic, etc.\u2014which were widely copied and\ndisseminated in mediaeval and premodern times. These texts are quite often\nassociated with the name of older or quoted authorities. Within our corpus several\nalchemical treatises and recipes are attributed to (pseudo) Albertus Magnus\n(c.1190\u20131280), Arnaldus de Villa Nova (c.1240\u20131311) or Roger Bacon (1214\u2013]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=38\nPages: 38\nthe revealed books. In the same way as the demons (or maybe under their influence)\nsome people tried to hide the books, to summarize them, and disperse their content\nby focusing only on specific topics.\nIn this respect, the last part of the Syriac passage is particularly relevant, since\nZosimus explains that some alchemists narrowed their inquiry to the methods for\ngilding silver. Whereas, the art called che\u0304meia, at least in its original form, included\na wider set of dyeing techniques that were applied to all kinds of metals in order to\ndye them different colours. This explanation is consistent with Zosimus\u2019s other\n39\nFestugie\u0300re, Re\u0301ve\u0301lation d\u2019Herme\u0300s, 365, ll. 15\u201320 (\u00bc CAAG II 242,10\u20136). The name of Isidoros\nappears also in the list of alchemists handed down by the Marcianus gr. 299 (fol. 7v); see CAAG I\n110.\n40\nWe cannot exclude the possibility that other treatises circulating under the name of Hermes]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=18\nPages: 18,19\nWeinryb, Steve Wharton, and Alan Williams.\nThis book would not have been possible \u2013 and even less possible in such a short\ntime \u2013 without the efficient and magnificent editorial assistance of Gina Partridge\nGrzimek, Lea Poeschl and Celine Camps. My final thanks go to Jed Buchwald for\nhis trust in the project and for considering the book for his series Archimedes, and to\nLucy Fleet for her assistance, advice and patience throughout the several stages of\nthis edited book project.\nBerlin, Germany\nSven Dupre\u0301\nxviii\nIntroduction\nBibliography\nBeretta, Marco. 2009. The Alchemy of Glass. Counterfeit, Imitation and Transmutation in\nAncient Glass-Making. Sagamore Beach: Science History Publications.\nDavis, Lucy. 2009. Renaissance Inventions: Van Eyck\u2019s Workshop as a Site of Discovery and\nTransformation in Jan van der Straet\u2019s Nova Reperta. In Envisioning the Artist in the]"]}

{"result":["[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=5\nPages: 5\nmethodology now known or hereafter developed. Exempted from this legal reservation are brief excerpts\nin connection with reviews or scholarly analysis or material supplied specifically for the purpose of being\nentered and executed on a computer system, for exclusive use by the purchaser of the work. Duplication\nof this publication or parts thereof is permitted only under the provisions of the Copyright Law of the\nPublisher\u2019s location, in its current version, and permission for use must always be obtained from\nSpringer. Permissions for use may be obtained through RightsLink at the Copyright Clearance Center.\nViolations are liable to prosecution under the respective Copyright Law.\nThe use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this\npublication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt\nfrom the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=56\nPages: 56\nA small number of these writings are produced in the form of carefully presented\nand independent collections: they are written in metallogallic ink and are quite\noften embellished with titles in red, and rubrics. These examples may be relatively\nhomogeneous: usually, only one or two scribes (who are contemporaneous) can be\nidentified and the presentation of their texts is almost identical. Moreover, no\nadditional material modifies the original volume.\nOthers (though not the majority) are quite heterogeneous, both in their content\n(medical, theological, astronomical, technical, household) and in their physical\nappearance (diversity of format, dialect and handwriting). They are informally\nwritten, with no decoration, and are characterized by apparently random presentation\nand inconsistent structure.\nThe recipe titles, which do not always correspond to the procedure that follows\nthem, do not imply a coherent organization. This second type of manuscript was]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=52\nPages: 52\n(c.1190\u20131280), Arnaldus de Villa Nova (c.1240\u20131311) or Roger Bacon (1214\u2013\n1294). Previous studies have established that, quite often, such writings correspond\nto apocryphal or pseudepigraphical works.21 As most recipe books are compilations, it is possible that some anonymous texts were (sometimes involuntarily)\nassembled together under the name of an authority cited in another part of the\nmanuscript and subsequently disseminated under that name. Generally, these citations acted as a testimony of authority; they legitimised the alchemical knowledge\nrecorded in these books. No doubt, the typical attraction and reverence for ancient\nauthorities on the one hand, and the opportunity to record a (presumably) non\nanonymous text on the other hand, favoured the dissemination of these writings.22\nThe association with the name of an authority gave rise to a tradition of works\nwhich, due to the processes of copying and compilation, circulated under various]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=52\nPages: 52\nwere compiled from three different types of source:\n1. content produced by copying and compiling of other written sources;\n2. practical information obtained from personalities (practitioner or not) cited by\nthe scribes;\n3. content possibly derived from personal contributions made by the scribes.\nIn some instances, most of the content came from the copying and compilation of\nother written sources. This process can be followed by tracing the repeated appearances of certain popular texts found in the manuscripts of that period. Taking a\nwider view, these books have a great number of texts in common\u2014dedicated to\nmedicine, pharmacology, herbal, cosmetic, etc.\u2014which were widely copied and\ndisseminated in mediaeval and premodern times. These texts are quite often\nassociated with the name of older or quoted authorities. Within our corpus several\nalchemical treatises and recipes are attributed to (pseudo) Albertus Magnus\n(c.1190\u20131280), Arnaldus de Villa Nova (c.1240\u20131311) or Roger Bacon (1214\u2013]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=62\nPages: 62\npractica, all of which are delineated and separated by blank spaces or folios. These\ntexts were written by several hands, on paper from different origins dated from the\nfifteenth and the sixteenth centuries. The main contribution comes from an anonymous scribe who is responsible for a number of independent collections of recipes\nbut also for some additions throughout other parts of the volume.54 Perhaps this\ncontributor was at the root of both the (partial) writing and the collecting and\nassembling of these data into one single volume. This theory is supported by the\nfact that his hand dates from the sixteenth century, which coincides with the\nestimated date of the binding and the titles written on the cover. Once all the diverse\nparts were bound together, the manuscript was subject to later additions by the main\nscribe, who wrote these on previously blank space (fol. 143v\u2013144r and fol. 158r,\n163v), both at the beginning and the end of two distinct treatises.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=51\nPages: 51\nproduction behind these texts, as well as their compilation and dissemination,\nelucidates information about the former nature and the previous and current function of these writings.20 Answering these questions would: first, help to better\nestimate the relevance of these books when using them as a historical source for\nreconstructing part of mediaeval and premodern alchemical and artistic knowledge.\nAnd second, examining the various connections and similarities between these two\nfields, as described within recipe books, would serve to (re)situate them in their\nhistorical and cultural contexts.\nThe Sources and the Context of Production\nFirst of all, the wide diversity of subjects and fields embedded within the corpus begs\nthe question: were they written by several authors? A priori, palaeographical examination tends to confirm this: as with a large number of recipe books produced during\nmediaeval and premodern times, the manuscripts examined were written by several\n17]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=57\nPages: 57\nlater owner punctuate the distinct recipes within the manuscripts. In fact, these\nadditions mostly appear under the form of titles or details given as a counterpart to\nthe instructions. In the Ms. Vadiana 429 from St. Gallen, a great number of\nadditional notes consist of technical commentaries and supplementary notes\nadded to those of the compiler of the manuscript. In the Nuremberg Hs. 33733, a\nlater owner added several titles and remarks within the margins. Some of these\nmarginal additions also mention the name of the person from whom the scribe may\nhave obtained the data he is adding. For example, in the Vienna Ms. 5224, fol.\n74, the scribe indicated the name of a physician, \u201cDoctor Jorg erffordie,\u201d before the\ntitle of a recipe dedicated to the production of sal ammoniac. On folio 105 of the\nsame manuscript, the scribe associated an alchemical procedure with the name\n\u201cMarggrauff von Ro\u0308tell\u201d by mentioning him in the upper margin. This observation]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=60\nPages: 60\nSuch observations seem to argue against the view that sees these books as\nmanuals written for the practitioner. But neither were these compendium written\npurely for scholarly purposes, deprived of any practical function. In parallel to the\ndata that could be considered part of the technical heritage of a earlier period, these\nrecipe books also contain more recent practical instructions\u2014coming from contemporary artists and practicing scholars or from the scribe\u2019s own experiments, as the\nexamples of Seidel, Freising and Schobinger discussed above illustrate. Even when\nthe writing of these instructions, verbalized in the rhetoric of the recipes, was\ncarried out by scribes, data were not blindly copied. Scribes organised, assembled,\ncompleted or corrected when they felt it necessary. Thus, even if they were not the\nauthor per se, in the sense that they were not the origin or the source of the technical\nor chemical procedures they wrote down, they accomplished a set of activities]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=65\nPages: 65\nas experientia which are meant to serve as a rational demonstration of a preceding\ntheorica.59\nConclusion\nExamination of the processes of making, compiling and disseminating this corpus\nof mediaeval and premodern recipe books provides us with information concerning\ntheir nature and former function. One the one hand, it has been established that\nthese manuscripts were mostly written in religious centres and that they are largely\nthe result of the copying process undertaken by scribes. Moreover, within these\nbooks, alchemical and artistic recipes were frequently recorded alongside a wide\nrange of various\u2014and a priori unrelated\u2014subjects which may have been written\nby the same person. Both the context of their production and the similarities in\n58\nNewman, \u201cTechnology and Alchemical Debate,\u201d 434, 442\u20135. The author largely relies on Paul\nof Taranto, Theorica et practica, Paris, BN, Lat. 7159, fol. 1r\u201355r for which he delivers a partial\nedition and translation.\n59]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=60\nPages: 60,61\nhim as a better (method) is delivered on 219.51 Then on folio 219, he indicates\nanother method for the same technical procedure, giving as title \u201cHow one should\nmasterfully melt crystal.\u201d52\nIn this sense, the scribes at the root of these recipe books created not simply a\ncopy but a unique work, which reflected their own interests, their cultural and life\ncontext and sometimes their intention, which was to deliver practical and useful\ninstruction.\n49\nHalleux, Entre technologie et alchimie, 7.\nFor this definition of authorship, see notably Love, Attributing Authorship, 32\u201340.\n51\n\u201cDise kunst prauchet ich nit hinden amm 219 hastu vil pessere.\u201d (Munich, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Cgm 4117, fol. 53r)\n52\n\u201cWie man christallen maisterlich giessen soll.\u201d (Munich, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Cgm\n4117, fol. 219)\n50\nTransmission of Alchemical and Artistic Knowledge in German Mediaeval and. . .\n37\nReliability of Recipe Books]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=180\nPages: 180\nclearly aware of the figure of the alchemist and his iconic value.6 Likewise, the\nallegorical images of widely varying artistic quality in chymical books and manuscripts imply some sort of contact between author/practitioner and artist. Yet such\nartworks do not necessarily indicate that the artists were actually in direct and\nmeaningful contact with chymists. On a purely commercial level, artists would\nhave been in contact (possibly directly in some instances, but probably more\nfrequently indirectly through a retailer) with makers of chymically-prepared pigments such as vermilion or white lead, just as metalworkers and assayers would\nhave connected with producers of mineral acids, fabric-makers with dye manufacturers, and so forth. Yet none of these contacts tells us anything about possible\nepistemic exchanges or collaborations on the level of practical or theoretical\nknowledge.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=3\nPages: 3\nwith one another: to investigate the technical, social and practical histories of specific developments in science\nand technology; and finally, where possible and desirable, to bring the histories of science and technology\ninto closer contact with the philosophy of science. To these ends, each volume will have its own theme and\ntitle and will be planned by one or more members of the Advisory Board in consultation with the editor.\nAlthough the volumes have specific themes, the series itself will not be limited to one or even to a few\nparticular areas. Its subjects include any of the sciences, ranging from biology through physics, all aspects of\ntechnology, broadly construed, as well as historically-engaged philosophy of science or technology. Taken as\na whole, Archimedes will be of interest to historians, philosophers, and scientists, as well as to those in\nbusiness and industry who seek to understand how science and industry have come to be so strongly linked.\nFor further volumes:]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=51\nPages: 51,52\nmediaeval and premodern times, the manuscripts examined were written by several\n17\nPrincipe, Secrets of Alchemy, 17; and Clarke, Art of All Colours, 37.\nSee in this volume Matteo Martelli.\n19\nBucklow, \u201cParadigms and Pigment Recipes\u201d; and Principe, Secrets of Alchemy, 35\u20136.\n20\nNeven, Recettes artistiques.\n18\n28\nS. Neven\nhands, and these hands are predominately anonymous. These works thus appear to\nbe the result of collaboration, or at least intervention, by several distinct persons.\nHowever, each person\u2019s contribution cannot necessarily be allocated according to\nthe different subjects in the book. The same hand might be responsible for both a\nmedical treatise and a collection of alchemical or art technological recipes.\nThe manuscripts under consideration were, in fact, the result of copying and\ncompiling of various sources and contributors. More precisely, these recipe books\nwere compiled from three different types of source:]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=53\nPages: 53\nsame scriptorium, from similar written sources and by the same \u2018hand\u2019.\nReligious institutions may also appear as a contextual factor explaining the\nrapprochement of the various disciplines embedded within the manuscripts. Indeed,\nin general, medical and pharmaceutical recipes had an important place within\nreligious communities. In this regard, art\u2013technological recipes also found their\nplace and could be linked with the art of writing and illuminating involved in\nscriptorial activity. The tables of contents of recipe books can be quite edifying on\nthis point. For example, the table of contents in Munich Bayerische Staatsbibliothek\nClm 20174 informs us that the artistic instructions were intended for the use of the\nscribes and illuminators of the scriptorium (Et alia multa utilia per scriptoribus et\nilluministarum, Clm 20174, fol. 1). In this context, scribe and illuminator, when not\nrepresented by the same person, worked side by side to produce manuscripts.24 This]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=60\nPages: 60\nor chemical procedures they wrote down, they accomplished a set of activities\nlinked to \u2018authorship\u2019.50 Scribes also made attempts to ensure that the recipes could\nbe consulted at need: they composed tables of contents or indexes, they introduced\ntitles within the margins and many other details which attest to a real desire to\ndeliver usable information. In this context the marginal notes and additions made by\nthe scribes/authors of the recipe book are of interest as most of them are technical\ncomments testifying practical interest in both alchemical and artistic instructions.\nSeveral marginal annotations due to Seidel\u2019s hand punctuate the Cgm 4117 and\nconsist in personal commentaries regarding the technical procedures he records.\nFor example, on folio 53r, Seidel compares two ways for the melting of crystal.\nConcerning the first process he states in the margin that this \u2018art\u2019 was not of use to\nhim as a better (method) is delivered on 219.51 Then on folio 219, he indicates]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=18\nPages: 18\nconference hosted at the Max Planck Institute for the History of Science in March\n2013. Although this book contains only a selection of the papers presented at this\nconference, I would like to thank all presenters as well as all commentators and\ndiscussants for their contributions before during and after the conference. Their\ninterventions have made this a much better book. At the risk of forgetting someone,\nI would like to name and thank Marjolijn Bol, Suzanne Butters, David Brafman,\nSpike Bucklow, Mark Clarke, Teresa Esposito, Christine Goettler, Matthew Hunter,\nStephen Johnston, Didier Kahn, Martin Kemp, Ursula Klein, Karin Leonhard,\nWolfgang Lefe\u0300vre, Pamela Long, Alexander Marr, Tine Meganck, Bruce Moran,\nWilliam Newman, Tara Nummedal, Doris Oltrogge, Valentina Pugliano, Jennifer\nRampling, Marlise Rijks, Maurice Yves-Christian Sass, Lorenz Seelig, Pamela\nSmith, Anke Timmermann, Barbara Tramelli, Berit Wagner, Arie Wallert, Ittai\nWeinryb, Steve Wharton, and Alan Williams.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=62\nPages: 62\neither as independent pieces of work, or as isolated (groups of) recipe(s) embedded\nwith artistic or other types of instructions. In the first case, alchemical content may\nappear concurrently with an artist\u2019s recipe book within the same manuscript but in a\nseparate section. When this occurs, the texts mostly consist of quite theoretical\nalchemical treatises, often associated with the name of a former or contemporary\nauthority. Most of them are attributed to the (pseudo) Albertus Magnus, Roger Bacon\nand Arnaldus de Villa Nova whose writings date from an earlier period. These works\ncould also be \u2018physically\u2019 distinct works, delimited to a quire or a booklet\u2014or even a\nfolio\u2014and assembled with the rest of the manuscript at a contemporary or later\nperiod. Vienna Ms. 5224 contains various alchemical collections of recipes and\npractica, all of which are delineated and separated by blank spaces or folios. These]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=59\nPages: 59,60\ncontemporary workshop or laboratory practices.48\nFirst of all, the textual environment and the diversity of the subjects bound\ntogether with the artistic and alchemical recipes in a same book, lead to the\nconclusion that these compilations were mainly read by scholars primarily interested in natural philosophy and were not intended for contemporary practical use.\nMoreover, it has been frequently stated that craft practices were transmitted orally,\n48\nClarke, \u201cCodicological Indicators\u201d; and Neven, Recettes artistiques, 16\u201323.\n36\nS. Neven\nfrom the master to the apprentice.49 A large number of the manuscripts of this study\nresult from copying and compilation processes undertaken by scribes. As they were\ncopied in a context outside the workshop or the laboratory, these recipes were not\nrevised and, consequently, conveyed an anachronistic technical tradition that\nbecame more and more outdated.\nSuch observations seem to argue against the view that sees these books as]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=61\nPages: 61\nbooks, and in alchemical or magical texts. Frequently, the copyist was free to add,\nto remove or to omit some words or even some parts of the text. These modifications or omissions sometimes concern primary data, such as the name of the\ningredients or materials, or may be related to some of the steps of the procedure.\nAt each stage of the copying process, variations or errors can occur. This phenomenon can be explained in several ways: it could be an attempt to improve or to\ndiversify a previous formula; it could be a quid pro quo, in which an unknown or\nexpensive ingredient is substituted with a more well known or less expensive one; it\nmay have been a voluntary reduction of the recipe text.\nIf we suppose that the function of a recipe book was practical or instructive, this\nfunction could be the motivation behind changes to the recipes. An author or a scribe\nmay, voluntarily, have corrected the text, or added information to it. However,]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=64\nPages: 64\neasily fill in the lacuna that punctuated the text of the recipe.\nAs previously observed, citations of authority were frequently used by the scribes\nof the manuscripts. However, the tendency for an older authority to be cited in the\nrecipe books is particularly characteristic of the alchemical writings and less typical\nof the art-technological recipes. As stated above, such citations primarily served to\nlegitimate the technical and chemical procedures. In addition, most alchemical\nrecipes describe processes and practical results to validate previously enounced\ntheoretical principles. Thus, more than artistic recipes, alchemical instructions\nemphasize the efficacy of the procedure which is frequently confirmed through\nexpressions such as expertum es or probatum est which are placed at the beginning]"]}

{"result":["[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=52\nPages: 52\nwere compiled from three different types of source:\n1. content produced by copying and compiling of other written sources;\n2. practical information obtained from personalities (practitioner or not) cited by\nthe scribes;\n3. content possibly derived from personal contributions made by the scribes.\nIn some instances, most of the content came from the copying and compilation of\nother written sources. This process can be followed by tracing the repeated appearances of certain popular texts found in the manuscripts of that period. Taking a\nwider view, these books have a great number of texts in common\u2014dedicated to\nmedicine, pharmacology, herbal, cosmetic, etc.\u2014which were widely copied and\ndisseminated in mediaeval and premodern times. These texts are quite often\nassociated with the name of older or quoted authorities. Within our corpus several\nalchemical treatises and recipes are attributed to (pseudo) Albertus Magnus\n(c.1190\u20131280), Arnaldus de Villa Nova (c.1240\u20131311) or Roger Bacon (1214\u2013]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=62\nPages: 62\npractica, all of which are delineated and separated by blank spaces or folios. These\ntexts were written by several hands, on paper from different origins dated from the\nfifteenth and the sixteenth centuries. The main contribution comes from an anonymous scribe who is responsible for a number of independent collections of recipes\nbut also for some additions throughout other parts of the volume.54 Perhaps this\ncontributor was at the root of both the (partial) writing and the collecting and\nassembling of these data into one single volume. This theory is supported by the\nfact that his hand dates from the sixteenth century, which coincides with the\nestimated date of the binding and the titles written on the cover. Once all the diverse\nparts were bound together, the manuscript was subject to later additions by the main\nscribe, who wrote these on previously blank space (fol. 143v\u2013144r and fol. 158r,\n163v), both at the beginning and the end of two distinct treatises.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=51\nPages: 51\nproduction behind these texts, as well as their compilation and dissemination,\nelucidates information about the former nature and the previous and current function of these writings.20 Answering these questions would: first, help to better\nestimate the relevance of these books when using them as a historical source for\nreconstructing part of mediaeval and premodern alchemical and artistic knowledge.\nAnd second, examining the various connections and similarities between these two\nfields, as described within recipe books, would serve to (re)situate them in their\nhistorical and cultural contexts.\nThe Sources and the Context of Production\nFirst of all, the wide diversity of subjects and fields embedded within the corpus begs\nthe question: were they written by several authors? A priori, palaeographical examination tends to confirm this: as with a large number of recipe books produced during\nmediaeval and premodern times, the manuscripts examined were written by several\n17]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=45\nPages: 45\nGrado-Aquileia, 22\u201326 maggio 2001), ed. Alessandra Giumlia-Mair, 317\u2013323. Montagnac:\nE\u0301ditions Monique Mergoil.\nGoeje, Michael Jean de. 1885. Ibn al-Faq\u0003{n al-Hamada\u0304n\u0003{, Mukhtasar kita\u0304b al-bulda\u0304n. Leiden:\n\u00af\n\u02d9\nBibliotheca Geographorum Arabicorum.\nHalleux, Robert. 1981. Alchimistes grecs, vol. 1: Papyrus de Leyde. Papyrus de Stockholm.\nFragments de recettes. Paris: Les Belles Lettres.\nHalleux, Robert, and Paul Meyvaert. 1987. Les Origines de la Mappae clavicula. Archives\nd\u2019Histoire Doctrinale et Litte\u0301raire du Moyen-Age 54: 7\u201358.\nHallum, Bink. 2008. Theosebeia. In Encyclopedia of Ancient Natural Scientists, eds. Paul Keyser\nand Georgia Irby-Massie, 302\u2013303. London/New York: Routledge.\nHallum, Bink. 2009. The Tome of Images: An Arabic Compilation of Texts by Zosimus of\nPanopolis and a Source of the Turba Philosophorum. Ambix 56: 76\u201388.\nHunter, Erika C.D. 2002. Beautiful Black Bronzes. Zosimos\u2019 Treatises in Cam. Mm. 6.29. In I]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=44\nPages: 44,45\nCaley, Earle R. 1927. The Stockholm Papyrus: An English Translation with Brief Notes. Journal\nof Chemical Education 4: 979\u20131002.\nChabot, Jean-Baptiste. 1910. Chronique de Michel le Syrien, vol. 4: Texte syriaque. Paris: Pierre\nLeroux.\nChabot, Jean-Baptiste. 1933. Incerti auctoris Chronicum Pseudo-Dionysianum vulgo dictum, vol.\n2 (CSCO 104, syr. 53). Louvain: Peeters.\nDodge, Bayard. 1970. Abu\u0304 \u2019l-Faraj Muhammad ibn Isha\u0304q al-Nad\u0131\u0304m, The Fihrist, a 10th Century\n\u02d9 University Press.\nAD Survey of Islamic Culture. New \u02d9York: Columbia\nDuffy, John M. 1992. Michaelis Pselli philosophica minora. Leipzig: Teubner.\nThe Alchemical Art of Dyeing: The Fourfold Division of Alchemy. . .\n21\nDuval, Rubens. 1888\u20131901. Lexicon Syriacum auctore Hassano bar Bahlule, 3 vols. Paris:\nE. Reipublicae typographaeo.\nFestugie\u0300re, Andre\u0301-Jean. 1950. La Re\u0301ve\u0301lation d\u2019Herme\u0300s Trisme\u0301giste, vol. 1: L\u2019Astrologie et les\nsciences occultes. Paris: J. Gabalda et Cie.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=74\nPages: 74\nDe Graaf.\nJohnson, Rozelle P. 1939. The Compositiones Variae from Codex 490, Biblioteca Capitolare,\nLucc. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.\nKahn, Didier. 2007. Alchimie et paracelsisme en France a\u0300 la fin de la Renaissance (1567\u20131625).\nGene\u0300ve: Droz.\nKibre, Pearl. 1942. Alchemical Writings Ascribed to Albertus Magnus. Speculum 17: 499\u2013518.\nKoelsch, Franz. 1967. Beitr\u20ac\nage zur Geschichte des Arbeitsmedizin. Munich: Bayerische\nLandesa\u0308rztekammer.\nLaurioux, Bruno. 1997. Les Livres de cuisine me\u0301die\u0301vaux. Turnhout: Brepols.\nLove, Harold. 2002. Attributing Authorship: An Introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University\nPress.\nMartelli, Matteo. 2011. Pseudo-Democrito. Scritti alchemici con il commentario di Sinesio. Paris/\nMilan: S.E\u0301.H.A.-Arche\u0300.\nMeier, Pirmin. 2004. Paracelsus. Arzt und Prophet. Zu\u0308rich: Ammann.\nMinnis, Alastair. 2010. Medieval Theory of Authorship. Scholastic Literary Attitudes in the\nLater Middle Ages. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=57\nPages: 57\nthey collected their data and specify the dates of these events, which span several\nyears. Notably there are several mentions of the \u201cmagistri Johannis Bog\u201d and places\nsuch as \u201cErffordie\u201d (Erfurt), and \u201cKo\u0308ln\u201d (Cologne).43\nMoreover, later additions or annotations found within the manuscripts tend to\nsuggest that these books have been handled, manipulated and passed from one\nowner to another, sometimes over a long period. The Prager Malerbuch had several\nowners and circulated through several localities before entering the monastery of\nZlata\u0301 Koruna. According to a note written by Federl Mir, the main scribe of the\nPrager Malerbuch, this manuscript was written c.1452, in Tittmoning in the district\nof Traunstein (Bavaria). This place probably corresponds to the original provenance\nof the recipe book. Moreover, the scribe tells us that he has gathered data from\nMichel Schril, a professor in Vienna, who passed away in 1472. We also know that]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=65\nPages: 65\nas experientia which are meant to serve as a rational demonstration of a preceding\ntheorica.59\nConclusion\nExamination of the processes of making, compiling and disseminating this corpus\nof mediaeval and premodern recipe books provides us with information concerning\ntheir nature and former function. One the one hand, it has been established that\nthese manuscripts were mostly written in religious centres and that they are largely\nthe result of the copying process undertaken by scribes. Moreover, within these\nbooks, alchemical and artistic recipes were frequently recorded alongside a wide\nrange of various\u2014and a priori unrelated\u2014subjects which may have been written\nby the same person. Both the context of their production and the similarities in\n58\nNewman, \u201cTechnology and Alchemical Debate,\u201d 434, 442\u20135. The author largely relies on Paul\nof Taranto, Theorica et practica, Paris, BN, Lat. 7159, fol. 1r\u201355r for which he delivers a partial\nedition and translation.\n59]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=56\nPages: 56\nA small number of these writings are produced in the form of carefully presented\nand independent collections: they are written in metallogallic ink and are quite\noften embellished with titles in red, and rubrics. These examples may be relatively\nhomogeneous: usually, only one or two scribes (who are contemporaneous) can be\nidentified and the presentation of their texts is almost identical. Moreover, no\nadditional material modifies the original volume.\nOthers (though not the majority) are quite heterogeneous, both in their content\n(medical, theological, astronomical, technical, household) and in their physical\nappearance (diversity of format, dialect and handwriting). They are informally\nwritten, with no decoration, and are characterized by apparently random presentation\nand inconsistent structure.\nThe recipe titles, which do not always correspond to the procedure that follows\nthem, do not imply a coherent organization. This second type of manuscript was]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=52\nPages: 52\n(c.1190\u20131280), Arnaldus de Villa Nova (c.1240\u20131311) or Roger Bacon (1214\u2013\n1294). Previous studies have established that, quite often, such writings correspond\nto apocryphal or pseudepigraphical works.21 As most recipe books are compilations, it is possible that some anonymous texts were (sometimes involuntarily)\nassembled together under the name of an authority cited in another part of the\nmanuscript and subsequently disseminated under that name. Generally, these citations acted as a testimony of authority; they legitimised the alchemical knowledge\nrecorded in these books. No doubt, the typical attraction and reverence for ancient\nauthorities on the one hand, and the opportunity to record a (presumably) non\nanonymous text on the other hand, favoured the dissemination of these writings.22\nThe association with the name of an authority gave rise to a tradition of works\nwhich, due to the processes of copying and compilation, circulated under various]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=72\nPages: 72,71\nLanguage:\nBavarian\nPrevious owner: fol. 1r \u201815R74 Siluester Schafman von Hamerberg I-B-G (?)\u2019\n\u2013 141871, 16th century (beginning)\nLanguage: Middle German\n\u2013 147699, c.1488\u20131490\nLanguage: Swabian and Bavarian dialects\nPrague, Narodni Knihovna\n\u2013 Cod. XI D 10, c.1452\u20131477\nScribe:\nFederl Mir (1452)\nLanguage:\nBavarian and Latin\nOrigin:\nTittmoning\nPrevious\nPreisinger Family (1529\u20131599) from Zettwing, Sancta Corona\nowner:\nmonastery (1649)\nSt Gallen, Kantonsbibliothek\n\u2013 Vad. 395, 15th and 16th century\nLanguage: German and Latin\n\u2013 Vad. 407, c.1522\nThe main scribe signed at fol. 155: \u2018Michel Cochemus 1522\u2019 and fol. 253v :\n\u2018Michael Cochemus 1522\u2019.\nLanguage: German\n\u2013 Vad. 429, c.1465\nOrigin:\nSouth of Germany\nPrevious owner: Ulrich Ellenbog\n48\nS. Neven\nTrier, Stadtbibliothek\n\u2013 1024/1936, (\u2018De coloribus et mixtionibus-Incipit libellus Mappe clauicula\ndictus\u2019), 15th century, mention of 1437\nOrigin: Trier (?)\nVaticano, Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana\n\u2013 Pal. Lat. 1330, 1463\u201364\nScribe:]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=51\nPages: 51,52\nmediaeval and premodern times, the manuscripts examined were written by several\n17\nPrincipe, Secrets of Alchemy, 17; and Clarke, Art of All Colours, 37.\nSee in this volume Matteo Martelli.\n19\nBucklow, \u201cParadigms and Pigment Recipes\u201d; and Principe, Secrets of Alchemy, 35\u20136.\n20\nNeven, Recettes artistiques.\n18\n28\nS. Neven\nhands, and these hands are predominately anonymous. These works thus appear to\nbe the result of collaboration, or at least intervention, by several distinct persons.\nHowever, each person\u2019s contribution cannot necessarily be allocated according to\nthe different subjects in the book. The same hand might be responsible for both a\nmedical treatise and a collection of alchemical or art technological recipes.\nThe manuscripts under consideration were, in fact, the result of copying and\ncompiling of various sources and contributors. More precisely, these recipe books\nwere compiled from three different types of source:]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=45\nPages: 45,46\nMilan: S.E\u0301.H.A.-Arche\u0300.\nMasse\u0301, Henry. 1973. Ibn al-Faq\u0003{n al-Hamada\u0304n\u0003{. Abre\u0301ge\u0301 du livre de Pays. Damascus.\n\u00af\nMertens, Miche\u0300le. 1983\u20131984. Un traite\u0301 gre\u0301co-e\u0301gyptien\nd\u2019alchimie: la lettre d\u2019Isis a\u0300 Horus. Texte\ne\u0301tabli et traduit avec introduction et notes. Universite\u0301 de Lie\u0300ge: Me\u0301moire de licence.\nMertens, Miche\u0300le. 1995. Zosime de Panopolis. Me\u0301moires authentiques. Paris: Les Belles Lettres.\nMertens, Miche\u0300le. 2006. Greco-Egyptian Alchemy in Byzantium. In The Occult Sciences in\nByzantium, eds. Paul Magdalino and Maria Mawroudi, 205\u2013229. Geneva: La Pomme d\u2019Or.\nMilik, Jazef T. 1976. The Books of Enoch, Aramaic Fragments of Qumra\u0302n Cave 4. Oxford:\nClarendon.\nReitzenstein, Richard. 1904. Poimandres. Studien zur griechsch-\u20ac\nagyptischen und fr\u20ac\nuhchristlichen\nLiteratur. Leipzig: B.G. Teubner.\nRoberto, Umberto. 2005. Ioannis Antiocheni Fragmenta ex Historia Chronica. Berlin: De Gruyter.\n22\nM. Martelli]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=32\nPages: 32,31\n\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03ba\u03b1\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03bb\u03ac.\u201d\n19\nSee Martelli, Pseudo-Democrito, 180\u2013205 (and 73\u20139) \u00bc CAAG II 41\u20139.\n20\nSee Martelli, Pseudo-Democrito, 206\u201316 (and 79\u201383) \u00bc CAAG II 49\u201353.\n21\nEdited in CAAG II 350\u201364; the Greek title reads: \u201c\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03b2\u03b1\u03c6\u1f74 \u03bb\u03af\u03b8\u03c9\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c3\u03bc\u03b1\u03c1\u03ac\u03b3\u03b4\u03c9\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76\n\u1f51\u03b1\u03ba\u03af\u03bd\u03b8\u03c9\u03bd \u1f10\u03ba \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u1f00\u03b4\u03cd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f31\u03b5\u03c1\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f10\u03ba\u03b4\u03bf\u03b8\u03b5\u0002\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b2\u03b9\u03b2\u03bb\u03af\u03bf\u03c5.\u201d The earliest testimonies are the\nmanuscripts Parisinus gr. 2325 (13th century; fols. 160v\u2013173v), and Parisinus gr. 2327 (15th\ncentury; fol. 147r\u2013159r).\n22\nSee, in particular, for Democritus: CAAG II 353,11\u201325, and 354,12\u2013357,19; for Ostanes:\nCAAG II 351,16\u201328, and 352,10 (fragments reedited by Bidez & Cumont, Mages helle\u0301nise\u0301s,\nvol. II, 323\u20134); for Moses: CAAG II 353,19; for Maria: CAAG II 351,23; 352,2\u20138; 355,1, and\n257,19.\n8\nM. Martelli\nthat hands down the above-mentioned recipe book on precious stones preserves\nanother important treatise that introduces a new important element into the discussion. The Parisinus gr. 2325 (fols. 256r\u2013258v), in fact, contains a book ascribed to]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=75\nPages: 75,76\nWilliam R. Newman and Anthony Grafton, 385\u2013431. Cambridge: MIT Press.\nSchobinger, Viktor. 1978. Die Schowinger von St. Gallen, Bartlome Schowingers B\u20ac\nucher.\nZu\u0308rich: Schobinger.\nSinger, Dorothea W. 1928\u20131931. Catalogue of Latin and Vernacular Alchemical Manuscripts in\nGreat Britain and Ireland, 3 vols. Brussels: Lamertin.\nSmith, Pamela H. 2004. The Body of the Artisan: Art and Experience in the Scientific Revolution.\nChicago: University of Chicago Press.\nSmith, Cyril S., and John G. Hawthorne. 1974. Mappae Clavicula. A Little Key to the World of\nMedieval Technique. Philadelphia: American Philosophical Society.\nTeleky, Ludwig. 1948. History of Factory and Mine Hygie\u0300ne. New York: Columbia University\nPress.\nTheisen, Wilfrid. 1995. The Attraction of Alchemy for Monks and Friars in the 13th\u201314th\ncenturies. The American Benedictine Review 46: 239\u2013253.\nArtisanal Processes and Epistemological\nDebate in the Works of Leonardo Da Vinci\nand Vannoccio Biringuccio\nAndrea Bernardoni]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=73\nPages: 73,74\nClarke, Mark. 2001. The Art of All colours. Medieval Recipe Books for Painters and Illuminators.\nLondon: Archetype Publications.\nClarke, Mark. 2009. Codicological Indicators of Practical Medieval Artists\u2019 Recipes. In\nSources and Serendipity. Testimonies of Artists\u2019 Practice, ed. Erma Hermens and Joyce\nTownsend, 8\u201317. London: Archetype Publications.\nCorbett, James A. 1936. L\u2019Alchimiste Le\u0301onard de Maurperg (XIVe sie\u0300cle). Sa collection de\nrecettes et ses voyages. Bibliothe\u0300que de l\u2019e\u0301cole des chartes 97: 131\u2013141.\nEamon, William. 1994. Science and the Secrets of Nature. Books of Secrets in Medieval and\nEarly Modern Culture. Princeton: Princeton University Press.\nEis, Gerhard. 1962. Mittelalterliche Fachliteratur. Stuttgart: Metzler.\n50\nS. Neven\nEisermann, Falk, and Eckhard Graf. 1998. Johannes Hartlieb: Das Buch der verbotenen K\u20ac\nunste.\nMu\u0308nchen: Diederichs.\nFox, Adam, and Daniel Woolf. 2002. The Spoken Word. Oral Culture in Britain, 1500\u20131850.\nManchester: Manchester University Press.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=100\nPages: 100\nLeonardo da Vinci. 2002b. The Manuscripts of Leonardo da Vinci in the Institut de France:\nManuscript F, ed. and trans. John Venerella. Milan: Castello sforzesco.\nLeonardo da Vinci. 2003. The Manuscripts of Leonardo da Vinci in the Institut de France:\nManuscript B, ed. and trans. John Venerella. Milan: Ente raccolta vinciana.\nLong, Pamela O. 2001. Openness, Secrecy, Authorship: Technical Arts and the Culture of\nKnowledge from Antiquity to the Renaissance. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.\nLong, Pamela O. 2002. Objects of Art/Objects of Nature: Visual Representation and the Investigation of Nature. In Merchants and Marvels: Commerce, Science and Art in Early Modern\nEurope, eds. Pamela H. Smith and Paula Findlen, 63\u201382. New York: Routledge.\nLong, Pamela O. 2011. Artisan/Practitioners and the Rise of the New Sciences, 1400\u20131600.\nCorvallis: Oregon State University Press.\nMaccagni, Carlo. 1993. Leggere, scrivere e disegnare la \u201cscienza volgare\u201d nel Rinascimento.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=125\nPages: 125\nLaube, Stefan. 2010. Wissenswelten sinnlicher Fro\u0308mmigkeit. Theatrale Antriebsmomente in der\nNaturanschauung von Bernard Palissy und Jacob Bo\u0308hme. In Religion und Naturwissenschaften\nim 16. und 17. Jahrhundert, ed. Kaspar von Greyerz, 217\u2013236. Gu\u0308thersloh: Gu\u0308tersloher\nVerlagshaus.\nLoesche, Georg. 1909. Johannes Mathesius. In Die Wunderstadt St. Joachimsthal. Eine\nMonographie, ed. Karl Knopf, 55\u2013127. Weipert/Leipzig: Deutschbo\u0308hmische Verlagsanstalt\nSonnenwirbel.\nLong, Pamela O. 2011. Artisan/Practitioners and the Rise of the New Sciences 1400\u20131600.\nCorvallis: Oregon State University Press.\nLudwig, Karl-Heinz. 1992. Technik im hohen Mittelalter zwischen 1000 und 1350/1400. Metalle\nund Macht 1000 bis 160, eds. Ludwig, Karl-Heinz und Volker Schmidtchen. Propyla\u0308en\nTechnikgeschichte 2: 11\u2013205. Berlin: Propyla\u0308en.\nMathesius, Johannes. 1564. Sarepta oder Bergpostill sampt der Joachimsthalischen kurzen\nChronicken. Nuremberg: J. vom Berg und U. Newbar.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=33\nPages: 33,34\ncentury AD). However, the major part of it is much earlier, as one can infer from\nvarious sections that have been preserved by the Aramaic manuscripts discovered\nin Qumran\u2019s caves.26 In particular the first part, usually called The Book of\nWatchers (\u00bc 1Enoch, chap. 1\u201336), is handed down in several Dead Sea scrolls\nand in all likelihood dates back to the third century BC.27 Moreover, this book has\nMertens, Lettre d\u2019Isis, 134\u20138 \u00bc CAAG II 31\u20133.\nMertens, Lettre d\u2019Isis, 138, ll. 113\u20136 \u00bc CAAG II 33, \u00a7 16.\n26\nThe secondary literature on 1Enoch is vast; for a general introduction on its content, see, for\nexample, Knibb, Book of Enoch, 7\u201335. For a recent English translation of the Ethiopic text, see\nBlack, Book of Enoch.\n27\nThese manuscripts have been found in cave 4; the Aramaic text has been edited and translated by\nMilik, Books of Enoch, Aramaic fragments.\n24\n25\n10\nM. Martelli\nbeen translated into Greek quite early, probably already in the second century BC,]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=70\nPages: 70,71\nlaminas plumbeas vel stagneas\u2019), 14th\u201315th century\nLanguage: Latin\n\u2013 Clm. 7623, 14th century (beginning)\nLanguage: Latin and German\n\u2013 Clm. 20174, 1464\u20131473\nLanguage: Latin and German\nOrigin:\nEx-libris of Tegernsee Monastery, 1482\nNuremberg, Germanische Nationalmuseum\n\u2013 3227a, c.1389 (additions from 15th century)\nScribe/\npartly written by \u2018Hanko pfaffen Doebringers\u2019 (according to a\nauthor:\nmention on fol. 43r)\nLanguage:\nLatin, Bavarian and Middle German dialects\nProvenance: Cologne/ mention of \u2018Nicolaus Pol doctor 1494\u2019\n\u2013 5078b, 15th century\nLanguage: Middle Bavarian\nOrigin:\nBavaria\n\u2013 9715, 15th century\nOrigin: Bavaria\n\u2013 27773, c.1260 (addition in mid-14th century)\nOrigin: Marbach\u2014the manuscript was bound before 1354 in the canon order of\nSt Augustin in Marbach\nTransmission of Alchemical and Artistic Knowledge in German Mediaeval and. . .\n47\n\u2013 33733, c.1455\u20131457\nLanguage:\nBavarian\nPrevious owner: fol. 1r \u201815R74 Siluester Schafman von Hamerberg I-B-G (?)\u2019]"]}

{"result":["[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=203\nPages: 203,204\nthe decorative arts before the early modern period is worthwhile. Prior to its\ninteraction with chymistry, the relationship between the potter\u2019s craft and fire was\nprincipally of a mechanical, fixative nature. As the heat of the kiln was known to\nremove the water from earthen bodies, its ability to affect permanent transformation\non the materials placed in the kiln was its principal contribution to the success of\nceramic production. Those objects existed first as trade goods rather than artisanal\nobjects and only later became valued as aesthetic products. Vannoccio\nBiringuccio\u2019s (1480\u2013c.1539) introduction to his brief \u201cdiscourse on the art of the\npotter\u201d from his Pirotechnia of 1540, encapsulates both the recent recognition\nreceived by ceramic craft and its inseparability from fire:\n184\nM. Wesley\nHaving started to tell you of working potter\u2019s clay for making crucibles and shells, the wish\ncame to me to tell you of the practice of this art also. Although it may seem at first glance to]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=19\nPages: 19\nEarly Industrialisation, eds. Lissa Roberts, Simon Schaffer, and Peter Dear, 247\u2013276. Amsterdam: Koninklijke Nederlandse Akademie van Wetenschappen.\nKlein, Ursula. 2008. The Laboratory Challenge: Some Revisions of the Standard View of\nEarly Modern Experimentation. Isis 99: 769\u2013782.\nKlein, Ursula. 2012. Artisanal-Scientific Experts in Eighteenth-Century France and Germany.\nAnnals of Science 69: 303\u2013306.\nKlein, Ursula. 2013. Chemical Experts at the Royal Prussian Porcelain Manufactory. Ambix 60:\n99\u2013121.\nKlein, Ursula. Forthcoming. Depersonalizing the Arcanum. Technology and Culture.\nLibavius, Andreas. 1606. Commentariorum alchymiae Andreae Libavii Med. D. Pars prima,\nsex libris declarata. In Alchymia. Andreae Libavii recognita, emendata, et aucta. Frankfurt:\nJ Saurius.\nLong, Pamela O. 2011. Artisan/Practitioners and the Rise of the New Sciences, 1400\u20131600.\nCorvallis: Oregon State University Press.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=51\nPages: 51\nproduction behind these texts, as well as their compilation and dissemination,\nelucidates information about the former nature and the previous and current function of these writings.20 Answering these questions would: first, help to better\nestimate the relevance of these books when using them as a historical source for\nreconstructing part of mediaeval and premodern alchemical and artistic knowledge.\nAnd second, examining the various connections and similarities between these two\nfields, as described within recipe books, would serve to (re)situate them in their\nhistorical and cultural contexts.\nThe Sources and the Context of Production\nFirst of all, the wide diversity of subjects and fields embedded within the corpus begs\nthe question: were they written by several authors? A priori, palaeographical examination tends to confirm this: as with a large number of recipe books produced during\nmediaeval and premodern times, the manuscripts examined were written by several\n17]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=52\nPages: 52\nwere compiled from three different types of source:\n1. content produced by copying and compiling of other written sources;\n2. practical information obtained from personalities (practitioner or not) cited by\nthe scribes;\n3. content possibly derived from personal contributions made by the scribes.\nIn some instances, most of the content came from the copying and compilation of\nother written sources. This process can be followed by tracing the repeated appearances of certain popular texts found in the manuscripts of that period. Taking a\nwider view, these books have a great number of texts in common\u2014dedicated to\nmedicine, pharmacology, herbal, cosmetic, etc.\u2014which were widely copied and\ndisseminated in mediaeval and premodern times. These texts are quite often\nassociated with the name of older or quoted authorities. Within our corpus several\nalchemical treatises and recipes are attributed to (pseudo) Albertus Magnus\n(c.1190\u20131280), Arnaldus de Villa Nova (c.1240\u20131311) or Roger Bacon (1214\u2013]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=125\nPages: 125\nLaube, Stefan. 2010. Wissenswelten sinnlicher Fro\u0308mmigkeit. Theatrale Antriebsmomente in der\nNaturanschauung von Bernard Palissy und Jacob Bo\u0308hme. In Religion und Naturwissenschaften\nim 16. und 17. Jahrhundert, ed. Kaspar von Greyerz, 217\u2013236. Gu\u0308thersloh: Gu\u0308tersloher\nVerlagshaus.\nLoesche, Georg. 1909. Johannes Mathesius. In Die Wunderstadt St. Joachimsthal. Eine\nMonographie, ed. Karl Knopf, 55\u2013127. Weipert/Leipzig: Deutschbo\u0308hmische Verlagsanstalt\nSonnenwirbel.\nLong, Pamela O. 2011. Artisan/Practitioners and the Rise of the New Sciences 1400\u20131600.\nCorvallis: Oregon State University Press.\nLudwig, Karl-Heinz. 1992. Technik im hohen Mittelalter zwischen 1000 und 1350/1400. Metalle\nund Macht 1000 bis 160, eds. Ludwig, Karl-Heinz und Volker Schmidtchen. Propyla\u0308en\nTechnikgeschichte 2: 11\u2013205. Berlin: Propyla\u0308en.\nMathesius, Johannes. 1564. Sarepta oder Bergpostill sampt der Joachimsthalischen kurzen\nChronicken. Nuremberg: J. vom Berg und U. Newbar.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=198\nPages: 198\nsource of random observations made casually in the course of exercising their\ncraft, they initiated projects, conducted experiments, made innovations, read\nlearned treatises, and communicated or collaborated with more traditionallyeducated or more natural philosophically inclined members. While someone like\nAnthoni Grill was undoubtedly an exceptional figure, he nevertheless serves to\nillustrate one end of the spectrum of possible social and intellectual positions\noccupied by early modern gold- and silversmiths. His active participation and\neventual notoriety and success indicate the social boundaries that were crossed\nwithin the network, a situation that also existed with Caillart and Roussel and others\nin the French context as well. These examples thus begin to resituate the role of\nsuch artisan-chymists within the larger ambit of chymistry. While not erased, the\nneat division of artisan and natural philosopher emerges considerably blurred.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=65\nPages: 65\nas experientia which are meant to serve as a rational demonstration of a preceding\ntheorica.59\nConclusion\nExamination of the processes of making, compiling and disseminating this corpus\nof mediaeval and premodern recipe books provides us with information concerning\ntheir nature and former function. One the one hand, it has been established that\nthese manuscripts were mostly written in religious centres and that they are largely\nthe result of the copying process undertaken by scribes. Moreover, within these\nbooks, alchemical and artistic recipes were frequently recorded alongside a wide\nrange of various\u2014and a priori unrelated\u2014subjects which may have been written\nby the same person. Both the context of their production and the similarities in\n58\nNewman, \u201cTechnology and Alchemical Debate,\u201d 434, 442\u20135. The author largely relies on Paul\nof Taranto, Theorica et practica, Paris, BN, Lat. 7159, fol. 1r\u201355r for which he delivers a partial\nedition and translation.\n59]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=199\nPages: 199\ninfluences. Brussels: E\u0301ditions Meddens.\nLorm, Jan Rudolph de. 1999. Amsterdams goud en zilver. Amsterdam: Waanders Uitgevers.\nMarolles, Michel de. 1872. Le livre des peintres et graveurs. Paris: Daffis.\nMoran, Bruce T. 2005. Distilling Knowledge: Alchemy, Chemistry, and the Scientific Revolution.\nCambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.\nMu\u0308ller, Leos. 1998. The Merchant Houses of Stockholm c.1640\u20131800: A Comparative Study of\nEarly-Modern Entrepreneurial Behaviour. Uppsala: Uppsala University Library.\nNewman, William R. 1994. Gehennical Fire: The Lives of George Starkey an American Alchemist\nin the Scientific Revolution. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.\nNewman, William R., and Lawrence M. Principe. 1998. Alchemy vs. Chemistry: The Etymological Origins of a Historiographic Mistake. Early Science and Medicine 3: 32\u201365.\nNewman, William R., and Lawrence M. Principe. 2002. Alchemy Tried in the Fire: Starkey, Boyle,]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=198\nPages: 198,199\nhumanism as sooty chymistry.\n178\nL.M. Principe\nBibliography\n1855\u20131856. Archive de l\u2019art franc\u0327ais, 6 vols, ed. Anatole de Montaiglon. Paris: Dumoulin.\nAnrep, Gabriel. 1871\u20131875. Svenska Sl\u20ac\nagtboken, 3 vols. Stockholm: Haeggstro\u0308m.\nBimbenet-Privat, Miche\u0301le. 2002. Les Orfe\u0300vres et l\u2019orfe\u0300vrerie de Paris au XVIIe sie\u0300cle, 2 vols.\nParis: Commission des Travaux Historiques de la Ville de Paris.\nBorrichius, Olaus. 1983. Itinerarium 1660\u20131665, 4 vols. Copenhagen: Danish Society of\nLanguage and Literature.\nBrinkman, A.A.A.M. 1982. De Alchemist in de prentkunst. Amsterdam: Rodopi.\nBrown, Harcourt. 1934. Scientific Organizations in Seventeenth Century France. Baltimore:\nWilliams & Wilkins.\nCaillard, Jacques. 1627. Livre de toutes sortes de feuilles pour servir a\u0300 l\u2019art d\u2019 orfevrie de\nl\u2019invention de Jacques Caillard. Paris.\nEeghen, I.H van. 1970. Het Grill\u2019s Hofje. Jaarboek van het Genootschap Amstelodamum 62:\n49\u201386.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=203\nPages: 203\ntransmutational alchemy on more than an individual level, the origination of the\nterm in the late seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries is clearly linked to those\npursuits. Further, it should be noted that these first arcanists are entirely separate\nfrom communities and guilds of potters in their various regions, offering an entirely\nnovel actor class that appears at the end of the seventeenth century, chymists whose\nfocus was on the production of translucent ceramics rather than metallurgical,\nmedical, or other natural philosophical avenues.\nNo evidence towards production of a hard-paste porcelain body by European\npotters before the eighteenth century is extant, leaving the chymist\u2019s laboratory as\nthe principle space of ceramic innovation. Specific investigation of the physical\nproperties of Chinese porcelain undertaken by John Dwight (c.1633\u20131704) and\nEhrenfried Walther von Tschirnhaus (1651\u20131708) represent the first successful]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=49\nPages: 49,50\nvol. I.\n26\nS. Neven\nand descriptions of miscellaneous chemical operations, including instructions for\nthe manufacture of dyes and pigments, for the gilding and painting on glass, as well\nas, among others, metalwork, chrysography, distilling alcohol, making candy, and\ncreating military devices.12\nMediaeval and Premodern Recipe Books\nIn mediaeval and premodern times, artistic and alchemical procedures were often\ndescribed within compilations of texts that may concurrently address various fields\nsuch as medicine, cooking, botany or pharmacology. They also include magical\nrecipes, dietetical instructions or advice on home-economics. All these various\ndisciplines are embedded within the genre of the Fachliteratur.13 This kind of\nliterature regroups all texts of a utilitarian and informative nature whose content\ndoes not principally concern aesthetic or religious issues, or matters relating to\nemotional purpose.14 A great number of these writings share the same format and]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=22\nPages: 22,23\nthe Technical University, Berlin. Her dissertation focussed on forms and media of\nhistorical memory in medieval sea republics (Pisa, Genoa, Venice). Her current\nresearch interest centres around early modern goldsmiths and their role within the\nscholarly network of early modern natural philosophers. Her recent publications\ninclude: \u201cMaterie als Prinzip und Ursache der Individuation. A\u0308hnlichkeit und\nxxi\nxxii\nAbout the Authors\nBildnis in der Plastik des 13. Jahrhunderts\u201d (2012); \u201cWunderbarliche Gewechse.\nBergbau und Goldschmiedekunst im 16. Jahrhundert\u201d (2012).\nFanny Kieffer is an associate researcher at the Centre d\u2019E\u0301tudes Supe\u0301rieures de la\nRenaissance in Tours and teaches art history at the universities of Tours and\nPoitiers. She has been a Vittore Branca fellow of the Fondazione Cini and a Frances\nYates fellow at the Warburg Institute. Her primary research focus is the interaction\nbetween arts and sciences in Renaissance Italy and France. She is about to publish a]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=179\nPages: 179\nearly modern chymical publications, since those sources were the most obvious and\nmost readily available. Further inquiries began to explore the vast bulk of manuscript and archival materials, with the result that the ambit of \u201cthe alchemist\u201d has\nbeen broadened to include practitioners representing the broadest possible range of\nearly modern people.4 University-educated physicians, natural philosophers, and\nscholars busied themselves with chymistry, as did a range of empirics, entrepreneurs, and enthusiasts, as well as an assortment of artisans that included artists,\nmetalworkers, brewers, and cobblers. Chymical discourse and practice took place\nin academic chambers, in courtly settings, in private homes, in commercial\n1\nFor an overview of the history of alchemy, see Principe, Secrets of Alchemy. On the use of the\nterm \u2018chymistry\u2019. see 84\u20135. For a study of the words chemistry and alchemy and their changing\nreferents, see Newman & Principe, \u201cAlchemy vs. Chemistry.\u201d\n2]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=107\nPages: 107\nTwo important preliminary writings, Aristotle\u2019s reflections on meteorology and\nAlbertus Magnus\u2019s (1193\u20131280) Libri cinque de mineralibus et rebus metallicis,\nare considered by Agricola and other early modern authors and are present in\nalmost all theories of the sixteenth century. With Albertus\u2019s De mineralibus an\nimportant testimony to the transmission of antique metallurgic knowledge and its\ncombination with alchemical concepts has been preserved. That Albertus\u2019s knowledge was not out of date in the early modern period is attested by the two prints of\nhis works by Giovanni and Gregorius de Gregoriis in Venice (De mineralibus,\n1495) and of Jacob Ko\u0308bel (Liber mineralium, 1518) in Oppenheim. His amalgamation had a great influence and contributed strongly to the work of several natural\nphilosophers and alchemists of the sixteenth century. It found its way equally into\nalchemical practices as well as the theoretical concepts of \u2018modern\u2019 metallurgists]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=201\nPages: 201\nto frame the initial comparisons of the technological differences between the\nEuropean and Far Eastern productions, and serve to pose further questions regarding the impact of experimental techniques and limitations on European porcelain\narcanistry.\nUntil recently the study of early modern ceramics was principally the domain of art\nhistorians and archaeologists, limiting the scope of questions being posed by\nacademics. Increasingly the role of natural philosophy, medieval alchemy and\nnascent chemistry in ceramic evolution has been revealed, bringing with it the\nnecessity to align discourse on ceramic practice with the discipline of history of\nscience, as art history lacks the framework to pose questions that would advance the\ndiscussion. This paper is an exploratory work that builds the foundations to bridge\nthose separate traditions to expedite a more consilient examination of ceramic\ntechnology and innovation. The principal focus is on the adoption of specific\nM. Wesley (*)]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=179\nPages: 179\nauthors themselves would have us believe of their art, and what much of the earlier\nsecondary literature claimed, the sages did not \u201call say one thing.\u201d Moving beyond\nthe rhetorical representations of alchemy as a largely monolithic and static tradition, scholars now recognize that early modern chymical thought was both diverse\nand dynamic. Vigorous disagreements and successive innovations characterized\nvirtually its entire history, and most of all, its early modern existence. On the\nbroadest scale, opinions varied in regard to what chymistry\u2019s main goals should\ninclude\u2014chrysopoeia (metallic transmutation), chemiatria (medicinal applications), commercial production, and so on. Even within any one of these important\nbranches, both theoretical frameworks and practical approaches varied widely.\nWhat was the correct hidden composition of metals, and of matter more generally?\nWhat was the correct starting material for the Philosophers\u2019 Stone and how should]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=117\nPages: 117\nthus the loss of the \u2018uncultivated\u2019, i.e. pre-cultural status of humanity.\nNot only iconographical programs, such as the reliefs at the foot of the Florentine Campanile (which might go back to a design by Giotto (1266\u20131337)) or the\ndepictions on the city palace of Ancona, assert this connection between the Fall and\nthe onset of \u2018artificial\u2019 human activity.39 This connection was often emphasized,\nespecially in texts that were aimed at artists and artisans. An early example is found\nin the preface to the chapter on painting by Theophilus Presbyter in De diversis\nartibus where he writes:\nWe read in the exordium of mundane creation that man, made after the image and likeness\nof God and animated by the inspiration of the Divine breath, was also, by the excellence of\nso much dignity, raised above other living creatures; as capable of reason, he merited to\nparticipate in the counsel and genius of Divine providence, and, gifted with free-will, he]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=51\nPages: 51,52\nmediaeval and premodern times, the manuscripts examined were written by several\n17\nPrincipe, Secrets of Alchemy, 17; and Clarke, Art of All Colours, 37.\nSee in this volume Matteo Martelli.\n19\nBucklow, \u201cParadigms and Pigment Recipes\u201d; and Principe, Secrets of Alchemy, 35\u20136.\n20\nNeven, Recettes artistiques.\n18\n28\nS. Neven\nhands, and these hands are predominately anonymous. These works thus appear to\nbe the result of collaboration, or at least intervention, by several distinct persons.\nHowever, each person\u2019s contribution cannot necessarily be allocated according to\nthe different subjects in the book. The same hand might be responsible for both a\nmedical treatise and a collection of alchemical or art technological recipes.\nThe manuscripts under consideration were, in fact, the result of copying and\ncompiling of various sources and contributors. More precisely, these recipe books\nwere compiled from three different types of source:]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=204\nPages: 204\nby the Benedictine monk Theophilus, thoroughly introduces the full range of\nartisanal productions valued in Europe in its first book.6 Pottery is entirely absent\nfrom this discussion of laudable arts and only appears once in the text as a canvas\nfor enameling.7 This is a continuation of pottery\u2019s position in the classical period,\nwhen earthen objects were valued as trade goods, everyday wares, or a medium for\nother decoration, not for their individual aesthetic form.8\nIt was not until advancements in the production of luxury quality European\npottery during the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries that the cultural perception of\nthe material changed significantly, driving engagement by the upper classes and\nnatural philosophers. An example can be found in a letter from Lorenzo de Medici\n(1449\u20131492) to the Malatesta family in 1490, favorably comparing their gift of\nmaiolica to silver objects, which is one of the earliest pieces of documentary\n4\nBiringuccio, Pirotechnia (1942), 392.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=219\nPages: 219\nBiringuccio, Vannoccio. [1540] 1942. The Pirotechnia of Vannoccio Biriniguccio: The Classic\nSixteenth-Century Treatise on Metals and Metallurgy, eds. and trans. Cyril Stanley Smith and\nMarta Teach Gnudi. New York: Dover Publications.\nBoardman, John. 1988. Trade in Greek Decorated Pottery. Oxford Journal of Archaeology 7: 27\u2013\n33.\nBoyle, Robert. 1661. The Sceptical Chymist or Chymico-Physical Doubts and Paradoxes, Touching the Spagyrists Principles Commonly call\u2019d Hypostatical: As They Are Wont To Be\nPropos\u2019d and Defended by the Generality of Alchymists. Whereunto is Premis\u2019d Part of\nAnother Discourse Relating To the Same Subject. London: J. Cadwell for Crooke.\nBoyle, Robert. 1691. Will of the Hon. Robert Boyle, F.R.S, July 1691. The National Archives,\nManuscript PROB 11/408/169.\nCarswell, John. 2000. Blue and White: Chinese Porcelain Around the World. London: British\nMuseum Press.\nChaffers, William. 1870. Marks and Monograms on Pottery and Porcelain, 3rd ed. London: J\nDavy and Sons.]"]}

{"result":["[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=203\nPages: 203,204\nthe decorative arts before the early modern period is worthwhile. Prior to its\ninteraction with chymistry, the relationship between the potter\u2019s craft and fire was\nprincipally of a mechanical, fixative nature. As the heat of the kiln was known to\nremove the water from earthen bodies, its ability to affect permanent transformation\non the materials placed in the kiln was its principal contribution to the success of\nceramic production. Those objects existed first as trade goods rather than artisanal\nobjects and only later became valued as aesthetic products. Vannoccio\nBiringuccio\u2019s (1480\u2013c.1539) introduction to his brief \u201cdiscourse on the art of the\npotter\u201d from his Pirotechnia of 1540, encapsulates both the recent recognition\nreceived by ceramic craft and its inseparability from fire:\n184\nM. Wesley\nHaving started to tell you of working potter\u2019s clay for making crucibles and shells, the wish\ncame to me to tell you of the practice of this art also. Although it may seem at first glance to]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=125\nPages: 125\nLaube, Stefan. 2010. Wissenswelten sinnlicher Fro\u0308mmigkeit. Theatrale Antriebsmomente in der\nNaturanschauung von Bernard Palissy und Jacob Bo\u0308hme. In Religion und Naturwissenschaften\nim 16. und 17. Jahrhundert, ed. Kaspar von Greyerz, 217\u2013236. Gu\u0308thersloh: Gu\u0308tersloher\nVerlagshaus.\nLoesche, Georg. 1909. Johannes Mathesius. In Die Wunderstadt St. Joachimsthal. Eine\nMonographie, ed. Karl Knopf, 55\u2013127. Weipert/Leipzig: Deutschbo\u0308hmische Verlagsanstalt\nSonnenwirbel.\nLong, Pamela O. 2011. Artisan/Practitioners and the Rise of the New Sciences 1400\u20131600.\nCorvallis: Oregon State University Press.\nLudwig, Karl-Heinz. 1992. Technik im hohen Mittelalter zwischen 1000 und 1350/1400. Metalle\nund Macht 1000 bis 160, eds. Ludwig, Karl-Heinz und Volker Schmidtchen. Propyla\u0308en\nTechnikgeschichte 2: 11\u2013205. Berlin: Propyla\u0308en.\nMathesius, Johannes. 1564. Sarepta oder Bergpostill sampt der Joachimsthalischen kurzen\nChronicken. Nuremberg: J. vom Berg und U. Newbar.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=52\nPages: 52\nwere compiled from three different types of source:\n1. content produced by copying and compiling of other written sources;\n2. practical information obtained from personalities (practitioner or not) cited by\nthe scribes;\n3. content possibly derived from personal contributions made by the scribes.\nIn some instances, most of the content came from the copying and compilation of\nother written sources. This process can be followed by tracing the repeated appearances of certain popular texts found in the manuscripts of that period. Taking a\nwider view, these books have a great number of texts in common\u2014dedicated to\nmedicine, pharmacology, herbal, cosmetic, etc.\u2014which were widely copied and\ndisseminated in mediaeval and premodern times. These texts are quite often\nassociated with the name of older or quoted authorities. Within our corpus several\nalchemical treatises and recipes are attributed to (pseudo) Albertus Magnus\n(c.1190\u20131280), Arnaldus de Villa Nova (c.1240\u20131311) or Roger Bacon (1214\u2013]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=51\nPages: 51\nproduction behind these texts, as well as their compilation and dissemination,\nelucidates information about the former nature and the previous and current function of these writings.20 Answering these questions would: first, help to better\nestimate the relevance of these books when using them as a historical source for\nreconstructing part of mediaeval and premodern alchemical and artistic knowledge.\nAnd second, examining the various connections and similarities between these two\nfields, as described within recipe books, would serve to (re)situate them in their\nhistorical and cultural contexts.\nThe Sources and the Context of Production\nFirst of all, the wide diversity of subjects and fields embedded within the corpus begs\nthe question: were they written by several authors? A priori, palaeographical examination tends to confirm this: as with a large number of recipe books produced during\nmediaeval and premodern times, the manuscripts examined were written by several\n17]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=19\nPages: 19\nEarly Industrialisation, eds. Lissa Roberts, Simon Schaffer, and Peter Dear, 247\u2013276. Amsterdam: Koninklijke Nederlandse Akademie van Wetenschappen.\nKlein, Ursula. 2008. The Laboratory Challenge: Some Revisions of the Standard View of\nEarly Modern Experimentation. Isis 99: 769\u2013782.\nKlein, Ursula. 2012. Artisanal-Scientific Experts in Eighteenth-Century France and Germany.\nAnnals of Science 69: 303\u2013306.\nKlein, Ursula. 2013. Chemical Experts at the Royal Prussian Porcelain Manufactory. Ambix 60:\n99\u2013121.\nKlein, Ursula. Forthcoming. Depersonalizing the Arcanum. Technology and Culture.\nLibavius, Andreas. 1606. Commentariorum alchymiae Andreae Libavii Med. D. Pars prima,\nsex libris declarata. In Alchymia. Andreae Libavii recognita, emendata, et aucta. Frankfurt:\nJ Saurius.\nLong, Pamela O. 2011. Artisan/Practitioners and the Rise of the New Sciences, 1400\u20131600.\nCorvallis: Oregon State University Press.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=198\nPages: 198,199\nhumanism as sooty chymistry.\n178\nL.M. Principe\nBibliography\n1855\u20131856. Archive de l\u2019art franc\u0327ais, 6 vols, ed. Anatole de Montaiglon. Paris: Dumoulin.\nAnrep, Gabriel. 1871\u20131875. Svenska Sl\u20ac\nagtboken, 3 vols. Stockholm: Haeggstro\u0308m.\nBimbenet-Privat, Miche\u0301le. 2002. Les Orfe\u0300vres et l\u2019orfe\u0300vrerie de Paris au XVIIe sie\u0300cle, 2 vols.\nParis: Commission des Travaux Historiques de la Ville de Paris.\nBorrichius, Olaus. 1983. Itinerarium 1660\u20131665, 4 vols. Copenhagen: Danish Society of\nLanguage and Literature.\nBrinkman, A.A.A.M. 1982. De Alchemist in de prentkunst. Amsterdam: Rodopi.\nBrown, Harcourt. 1934. Scientific Organizations in Seventeenth Century France. Baltimore:\nWilliams & Wilkins.\nCaillard, Jacques. 1627. Livre de toutes sortes de feuilles pour servir a\u0300 l\u2019art d\u2019 orfevrie de\nl\u2019invention de Jacques Caillard. Paris.\nEeghen, I.H van. 1970. Het Grill\u2019s Hofje. Jaarboek van het Genootschap Amstelodamum 62:\n49\u201386.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=65\nPages: 65\nas experientia which are meant to serve as a rational demonstration of a preceding\ntheorica.59\nConclusion\nExamination of the processes of making, compiling and disseminating this corpus\nof mediaeval and premodern recipe books provides us with information concerning\ntheir nature and former function. One the one hand, it has been established that\nthese manuscripts were mostly written in religious centres and that they are largely\nthe result of the copying process undertaken by scribes. Moreover, within these\nbooks, alchemical and artistic recipes were frequently recorded alongside a wide\nrange of various\u2014and a priori unrelated\u2014subjects which may have been written\nby the same person. Both the context of their production and the similarities in\n58\nNewman, \u201cTechnology and Alchemical Debate,\u201d 434, 442\u20135. The author largely relies on Paul\nof Taranto, Theorica et practica, Paris, BN, Lat. 7159, fol. 1r\u201355r for which he delivers a partial\nedition and translation.\n59]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=198\nPages: 198\nsource of random observations made casually in the course of exercising their\ncraft, they initiated projects, conducted experiments, made innovations, read\nlearned treatises, and communicated or collaborated with more traditionallyeducated or more natural philosophically inclined members. While someone like\nAnthoni Grill was undoubtedly an exceptional figure, he nevertheless serves to\nillustrate one end of the spectrum of possible social and intellectual positions\noccupied by early modern gold- and silversmiths. His active participation and\neventual notoriety and success indicate the social boundaries that were crossed\nwithin the network, a situation that also existed with Caillart and Roussel and others\nin the French context as well. These examples thus begin to resituate the role of\nsuch artisan-chymists within the larger ambit of chymistry. While not erased, the\nneat division of artisan and natural philosopher emerges considerably blurred.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=117\nPages: 117\nthus the loss of the \u2018uncultivated\u2019, i.e. pre-cultural status of humanity.\nNot only iconographical programs, such as the reliefs at the foot of the Florentine Campanile (which might go back to a design by Giotto (1266\u20131337)) or the\ndepictions on the city palace of Ancona, assert this connection between the Fall and\nthe onset of \u2018artificial\u2019 human activity.39 This connection was often emphasized,\nespecially in texts that were aimed at artists and artisans. An early example is found\nin the preface to the chapter on painting by Theophilus Presbyter in De diversis\nartibus where he writes:\nWe read in the exordium of mundane creation that man, made after the image and likeness\nof God and animated by the inspiration of the Divine breath, was also, by the excellence of\nso much dignity, raised above other living creatures; as capable of reason, he merited to\nparticipate in the counsel and genius of Divine providence, and, gifted with free-will, he]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=219\nPages: 219\nBiringuccio, Vannoccio. [1540] 1942. The Pirotechnia of Vannoccio Biriniguccio: The Classic\nSixteenth-Century Treatise on Metals and Metallurgy, eds. and trans. Cyril Stanley Smith and\nMarta Teach Gnudi. New York: Dover Publications.\nBoardman, John. 1988. Trade in Greek Decorated Pottery. Oxford Journal of Archaeology 7: 27\u2013\n33.\nBoyle, Robert. 1661. The Sceptical Chymist or Chymico-Physical Doubts and Paradoxes, Touching the Spagyrists Principles Commonly call\u2019d Hypostatical: As They Are Wont To Be\nPropos\u2019d and Defended by the Generality of Alchymists. Whereunto is Premis\u2019d Part of\nAnother Discourse Relating To the Same Subject. London: J. Cadwell for Crooke.\nBoyle, Robert. 1691. Will of the Hon. Robert Boyle, F.R.S, July 1691. The National Archives,\nManuscript PROB 11/408/169.\nCarswell, John. 2000. Blue and White: Chinese Porcelain Around the World. London: British\nMuseum Press.\nChaffers, William. 1870. Marks and Monograms on Pottery and Porcelain, 3rd ed. London: J\nDavy and Sons.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=203\nPages: 203\ntransmutational alchemy on more than an individual level, the origination of the\nterm in the late seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries is clearly linked to those\npursuits. Further, it should be noted that these first arcanists are entirely separate\nfrom communities and guilds of potters in their various regions, offering an entirely\nnovel actor class that appears at the end of the seventeenth century, chymists whose\nfocus was on the production of translucent ceramics rather than metallurgical,\nmedical, or other natural philosophical avenues.\nNo evidence towards production of a hard-paste porcelain body by European\npotters before the eighteenth century is extant, leaving the chymist\u2019s laboratory as\nthe principle space of ceramic innovation. Specific investigation of the physical\nproperties of Chinese porcelain undertaken by John Dwight (c.1633\u20131704) and\nEhrenfried Walther von Tschirnhaus (1651\u20131708) represent the first successful]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=32\nPages: 32,31\n\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03ba\u03b1\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03bb\u03ac.\u201d\n19\nSee Martelli, Pseudo-Democrito, 180\u2013205 (and 73\u20139) \u00bc CAAG II 41\u20139.\n20\nSee Martelli, Pseudo-Democrito, 206\u201316 (and 79\u201383) \u00bc CAAG II 49\u201353.\n21\nEdited in CAAG II 350\u201364; the Greek title reads: \u201c\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03b2\u03b1\u03c6\u1f74 \u03bb\u03af\u03b8\u03c9\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c3\u03bc\u03b1\u03c1\u03ac\u03b3\u03b4\u03c9\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76\n\u1f51\u03b1\u03ba\u03af\u03bd\u03b8\u03c9\u03bd \u1f10\u03ba \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u1f00\u03b4\u03cd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f31\u03b5\u03c1\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f10\u03ba\u03b4\u03bf\u03b8\u03b5\u0002\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b2\u03b9\u03b2\u03bb\u03af\u03bf\u03c5.\u201d The earliest testimonies are the\nmanuscripts Parisinus gr. 2325 (13th century; fols. 160v\u2013173v), and Parisinus gr. 2327 (15th\ncentury; fol. 147r\u2013159r).\n22\nSee, in particular, for Democritus: CAAG II 353,11\u201325, and 354,12\u2013357,19; for Ostanes:\nCAAG II 351,16\u201328, and 352,10 (fragments reedited by Bidez & Cumont, Mages helle\u0301nise\u0301s,\nvol. II, 323\u20134); for Moses: CAAG II 353,19; for Maria: CAAG II 351,23; 352,2\u20138; 355,1, and\n257,19.\n8\nM. Martelli\nthat hands down the above-mentioned recipe book on precious stones preserves\nanother important treatise that introduces a new important element into the discussion. The Parisinus gr. 2325 (fols. 256r\u2013258v), in fact, contains a book ascribed to]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=107\nPages: 107\nTwo important preliminary writings, Aristotle\u2019s reflections on meteorology and\nAlbertus Magnus\u2019s (1193\u20131280) Libri cinque de mineralibus et rebus metallicis,\nare considered by Agricola and other early modern authors and are present in\nalmost all theories of the sixteenth century. With Albertus\u2019s De mineralibus an\nimportant testimony to the transmission of antique metallurgic knowledge and its\ncombination with alchemical concepts has been preserved. That Albertus\u2019s knowledge was not out of date in the early modern period is attested by the two prints of\nhis works by Giovanni and Gregorius de Gregoriis in Venice (De mineralibus,\n1495) and of Jacob Ko\u0308bel (Liber mineralium, 1518) in Oppenheim. His amalgamation had a great influence and contributed strongly to the work of several natural\nphilosophers and alchemists of the sixteenth century. It found its way equally into\nalchemical practices as well as the theoretical concepts of \u2018modern\u2019 metallurgists]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=49\nPages: 49,50\nvol. I.\n26\nS. Neven\nand descriptions of miscellaneous chemical operations, including instructions for\nthe manufacture of dyes and pigments, for the gilding and painting on glass, as well\nas, among others, metalwork, chrysography, distilling alcohol, making candy, and\ncreating military devices.12\nMediaeval and Premodern Recipe Books\nIn mediaeval and premodern times, artistic and alchemical procedures were often\ndescribed within compilations of texts that may concurrently address various fields\nsuch as medicine, cooking, botany or pharmacology. They also include magical\nrecipes, dietetical instructions or advice on home-economics. All these various\ndisciplines are embedded within the genre of the Fachliteratur.13 This kind of\nliterature regroups all texts of a utilitarian and informative nature whose content\ndoes not principally concern aesthetic or religious issues, or matters relating to\nemotional purpose.14 A great number of these writings share the same format and]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=51\nPages: 51,52\nmediaeval and premodern times, the manuscripts examined were written by several\n17\nPrincipe, Secrets of Alchemy, 17; and Clarke, Art of All Colours, 37.\nSee in this volume Matteo Martelli.\n19\nBucklow, \u201cParadigms and Pigment Recipes\u201d; and Principe, Secrets of Alchemy, 35\u20136.\n20\nNeven, Recettes artistiques.\n18\n28\nS. Neven\nhands, and these hands are predominately anonymous. These works thus appear to\nbe the result of collaboration, or at least intervention, by several distinct persons.\nHowever, each person\u2019s contribution cannot necessarily be allocated according to\nthe different subjects in the book. The same hand might be responsible for both a\nmedical treatise and a collection of alchemical or art technological recipes.\nThe manuscripts under consideration were, in fact, the result of copying and\ncompiling of various sources and contributors. More precisely, these recipe books\nwere compiled from three different types of source:]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=123\nPages: 123\nalchemist and Pr\u20ac\nufer (assayer) all were employed in the processes of melting,\npurifying, and re-forming ores.48 The examples cited from the treatise as well as\nfrom the sermon text of Mathesius showed that there was a common Vorstellungshorizont, culturally anchored in the Christian faith, that facilitated exchange and\ndiscourse among the different professional groups.\nWith the help of the coconut vessel and comparable objects, by the transformation of the ore into a Handstein and the translocation from its natural environment\nin the context of the court, these metallurgical discourses materialized and could be\nstaged in the present of the ruler, who was\u2014due to political and economic reasons\u2014also interested in montanistic research.\nThe Doppelscheuer\u2014an object between art and science\u2014thus appears to be a\nlink between the mine and the workshop of the goldsmith, between scholarly\ndiscourse and the ordered world of the princely Kunstkammer.\nBibliography]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=199\nPages: 199\ninfluences. Brussels: E\u0301ditions Meddens.\nLorm, Jan Rudolph de. 1999. Amsterdams goud en zilver. Amsterdam: Waanders Uitgevers.\nMarolles, Michel de. 1872. Le livre des peintres et graveurs. Paris: Daffis.\nMoran, Bruce T. 2005. Distilling Knowledge: Alchemy, Chemistry, and the Scientific Revolution.\nCambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.\nMu\u0308ller, Leos. 1998. The Merchant Houses of Stockholm c.1640\u20131800: A Comparative Study of\nEarly-Modern Entrepreneurial Behaviour. Uppsala: Uppsala University Library.\nNewman, William R. 1994. Gehennical Fire: The Lives of George Starkey an American Alchemist\nin the Scientific Revolution. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.\nNewman, William R., and Lawrence M. Principe. 1998. Alchemy vs. Chemistry: The Etymological Origins of a Historiographic Mistake. Early Science and Medicine 3: 32\u201365.\nNewman, William R., and Lawrence M. Principe. 2002. Alchemy Tried in the Fire: Starkey, Boyle,]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=52\nPages: 52\n(c.1190\u20131280), Arnaldus de Villa Nova (c.1240\u20131311) or Roger Bacon (1214\u2013\n1294). Previous studies have established that, quite often, such writings correspond\nto apocryphal or pseudepigraphical works.21 As most recipe books are compilations, it is possible that some anonymous texts were (sometimes involuntarily)\nassembled together under the name of an authority cited in another part of the\nmanuscript and subsequently disseminated under that name. Generally, these citations acted as a testimony of authority; they legitimised the alchemical knowledge\nrecorded in these books. No doubt, the typical attraction and reverence for ancient\nauthorities on the one hand, and the opportunity to record a (presumably) non\nanonymous text on the other hand, favoured the dissemination of these writings.22\nThe association with the name of an authority gave rise to a tradition of works\nwhich, due to the processes of copying and compilation, circulated under various]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=193\nPages: 193\nmanuscripts also reveal a wider circle of closely-knit chymists active in Paris\nthroughout the 1650s and 1660s. This circle included, besides Duclos and Digby,\nthe abbe\u0301 Jullien de Loberie (chaplain of the Colle\u0300ge Fortet) and an abbe\u0301 Boucaud,\nThomas Gobelin (member of a prominent family and counselor to the Paris\nParlement), the chymical authors Jean-Baptiste de la Noue, Pierre Borel, and\nFranc\u0327ois de Soucy, Sieur de Gerzan, as well as a host of others. The group shared\nmanuscripts, processes, and other information gathered from books or private\ncorrespondence, and collaborated (in various combinations) on practical chymical\nprocesses, most frequently of a transmutational nature. Some of them frequented\nwell-known intellectual groupings such as the academy of the abbe\u0301 Bourdelot.43\nThe travelling savants Borrichius and Henry Oldenburg (1619\u20131677) also\ninteracted with the group during their visits to Paris.\nSeveral documents record the participation of goldsmiths in this Parisian]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=106\nPages: 106\nMathesius\u2019s texts interweave preaching and scientific imagination and thus attest\nto how strongly early modern natural philosophy and metallurgic research are\ninfluenced by the Christian episteme:\nBut my undertaking shall conduct to that effect, to show to you, my parishioners, the\nalmighty and wonderful hand of God and his immeasurable abundance and his inscrutable\nwisdom and his merciful and fatherly heart in his creation and revelation of all kinds of\nminerals and metals, to make you recognize your God in his gifts and teach you to praise\nhim, which he conveys to you in this mountain in clement benevolence.11\nThis juxtaposition of empirical knowledge based on experience next to philosophical and theological reflections of the causes of things is typical for Mathesius\nand many other writers of the sixteenth century, as they interpret their increasing\n9\nThis concept can be found in medieval authors writing on natura as goddess, as pro-dea and as]"]}

{"result":["[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=13\nPages: 13\nusing materials and chemical procedures to make both everyday items and objects\nof the visual and decorative arts, the activity known as alchemy encompassed more\nthan attempts to make gold.14 Transmutational alchemy was about the transmutation of all base metals into more noble ones, but chrysopoeia was only one\naspect of alchemy. Alchemy also touched on medicine and chemical manufacture.\nIt was about the chemical production of things\u2014medicines, porcelain, dyes, and\nother products as well as the precious metals\u2014and about the knowledge of how to\nproduce them. In this sense, \u201cart technologies\u201d\u2014materials and techniques to make\nart and knowledge of these materials and techniques\u2014overlapped with alchemy.\nAlchemy has deep roots in writings on material transformation from Antiquity.\nThe productive knowledge associated with material transformation was written\ndown in recipe books. The Leiden and Stockholm Papyri date to the third century]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=179\nPages: 179,180\nreferents, see Newman & Principe, \u201cAlchemy vs. Chemistry.\u201d\n2\nPrincipe, \u201cDiversity in Alchemy,\u201d and \u201cRobert Boyle and Isaac Newton.\u201d\n3\nOn the interplay of theory and practice in alchemy, see Newman & Principe, Alchemy Tried in the\nFire, esp. 92\u2013206.\n4\nFor example, see Nummedal, Alchemy and Authority, which details the roles and status of\n\u2018entrepreneurial\u2019 chymists in German courts. For a sense of the broad sweep of early modern\nalchemical practice, see Moran, Distilling Knowledge.\nGoldsmiths and Chymists: The Activity of Artisans Within Alchemical Circles\n159\nestablishments, and in noisy workshops. Most recently there has been particular\ninterest in exploring alchemy\u2019s place among artists and artisans, an investigation\nthat rightly reflects the crucial position of material production within chymistry\nthroughout its history. Important questions remain however in regard to demonstrating the specific theoretical and practical content of such artisanal endeavors,]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=48\nPages: 48,49\nof Alchemy.\u201d\n4\nHalleux, \u201cAlchimie,\u201d 336\u20137; Newman, \u201cTechnology and Alchemical Debate,\u201d 432\u20133; Pereira,\n\u201cUse of Vernacular Languages,\u201d 336; and Kahn, Alchimie et paracelsisme, 7\u20138.\n5\nHalleux, Savoir de la main, 134.\n2\nTransmission of Alchemical and Artistic Knowledge in German Mediaeval and. . .\n25\nof base or impure matter (often metal or stone) into a noble or perfect one.6 To do\nso, alchemists used to perform chemical processes and manipulations which resembled those practiced by contemporary artists and artisans.\nThus, in both fields particular importance is placed on craft practices. Both\nalchemical and artistic recipe books describe various processes for purifying and\ntransforming materials, either for improving their properties or in order to use them\nfor specific purposes. In this context, from a technological point of view, the term\n\u2018transmutation\u2019 could refer to the colouring of glass, the melting and tinting of]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=79\nPages: 79\nthe field of \u2018science and technology of matter\u2019.\nIf we focus our attention on all the artisanal processes of substance transformation known and practiced during the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries it is easy to\nshow that they do not fit perfectly within the domain traced by alchemy. This\nepistemological tension is usually neutralized by saying that alchemical and metallurgical disciplines are intricately interwoven and alchemists were involved in the\ndevelopment of metallurgy.11 If one supposes chemistry did not exist as an independent and autonomous discipline before the end of the seventeenth century then\nspeaking on this topic from a historical perspective in an Italian technical cultural\ncontext, some \u2018superior artisans\u2019 or \u2018artist-engineers\u2019 can be seen as having distanced themselves from alchemy by relocating its technology inside a new epistemological context in which chemical arts were developed and codified separately.12]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=14\nPages: 14\nconcern with the same materials and artisanal processes. The focus on chromatic\ntransformation already found in the Papyri continues in fifteenth-century recipes.\nAlthough related to laboratory practices, Neven emphasizes that these recipe\ncollections are the products of scribal compilation and copying processes. Words\nand works are equally important elements of alchemical practices.15 Next to\nlaboratories, medieval religious institutions were also important sites of alchemical\nand art technological practice. However, as Neven points out, this does not exclude\nthat some scribes, such as the Benedictine monk Wolfgang Seidel (1491\u20131562),\ntried out recipes.\nThe scope of alchemy was from its very beginnings contested, and remained so\nthroughout its long history. Especially its boundaries with art technology were fluid.\nThroughout the Middle Ages and the Renaissance, the distinction between alchemy\nas strictly goldmaking and a more encompassing definition overlapping with art]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=178\nPages: 178\nGoldsmiths and Chymists: The Activity\nof Artisans Within Alchemical Circles\nLawrence M. Principe\nAbstract The study of early modern alchemical practitioners has recently\nexpanded from the work and writings of natural philosophers to include the labors\nof artisans. Yet there remains relatively little clear documentation about the specifics\nof such artisanal chymical practices or about the degree of significant epistemic\nexchange that may have taken place between artisans and better-known chymists.\nThis paper examines several gold- and silversmiths who were part of an extended\nalchemical network that stretched across the Netherlands, France, and England in\nthe mid-seventeenth century. The silversmith Anthoni Grill (and to a lesser extent\nhis brother Andries) worked on refining and transmutational processes with impressive chymical expertise and eventually achieved international notoriety and social\nand financial success. Grill built large laboratories, managed laborants, engaged in]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=180\nPages: 180,181\n5\nSee Smith, Body of the Artisan.\nPrincipe & DeWitt, Transmutations; and Brinkman, Alchemist in de prentkunst. Lennep, Art et\nalchimie, is also useful, especially for its illustrations, but suffers from an inaccurate understanding\nof alchemy and its practice.\n6\n160\nL.M. Principe\nposition in chymistry, that is to say, in the transmutational endeavors that figured so\nprominently in early modern chymistry and that promised such highly profitable\nreturns. Thus, the artisanal experience of gold- and silversmithing provided a\ncertain commonality with the pursuit of metallic chymistry, and might easily\nhave inclined such artisans toward transmutational endeavors, and hence toward\ncontact with other aspiring transmuters who were not themselves artisans. The\npractical experience of gold- and silversmiths also rendered them sources of\ninformation for those wishing to know more about the properties and potentialities]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=9\nPages: 9,10\n\u201cmade by alchemy\u201d according to Cennino Cennini (c.1370\u2013c.1440). However, this\n3\n4\nDavis, \u201cRenaissance Inventions.\u201d\nMander, Het schilder-boeck, 199v. Translation in Melion, Shaping the Netherlandish Canon, 79.\nIntroduction\nix\nbook is not concerned with travelling materials and shared material culture.\nShifting the focus from painting to the decorative arts, this book scrutinizes\nepistemic exchanges between producers of the arts of fire and alchemists.\nLaboratories and Workshops\nWhat can the evolution of the laboratory, and its shifting relation to the artisanal\nworkshop, tell us about epistemic exchanges between the arts and alchemy? In the\nfifteenth and sixteenth centuries, the term laboratorium uniquely referred to workplaces in which \u201cchemical\u201d operations were performed: smelting, combustion,\ndistillation, dissolution, and precipitation. Matteo Martelli has convincingly\nshown that no such term was available in Antiquity.5 The Papyri, containing recipes]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=77\nPages: 77\nAgricola talked about a generic art of metal as a separate activity from alchemy:\n\u201cBut concerning the art of alchemy, if it be an art, I will speak further elsewhere. I\nwill now return to the art of mining.\u201d7\nWhen talking about chemistry in the Renaissance we have to consider a variegated tradition of non-mechanical arts where chemical processes developed: pharmacy, metallurgy, glass making, dyeing, spirits distillation, agriculture cultivations\nand the preparation of colours for painting and drawing; each of these professional\nactivities involve chemical processes that are not necessarily involved in alchemical transmutation. The difference between the purpose of chemical arts and\nalchemy was also the cause of cultural and epistemological tension during the\nMiddle Ages and Renaissance. The medieval technological debate during the\nfifteenth and sixteenth centuries went beyond the traditional Quaestio de alchimia]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=200\nPages: 200,199\nApproaches and Divergent Deployments. In Rethinking the Scientific Revolution,\ned. Margaret J. Osler, 201\u2013220. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.\nPrincipe, Lawrence M. 2013a. The Secrets of Alchemy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.\nGoldsmiths and Chymists: The Activity of Artisans Within Alchemical Circles\n179\nPrincipe, Lawrence M. 2013b. Sir Kenelm Digby and His Alchemical Circle in 1650s Paris: Newly\nDiscovered Manuscripts. Ambix 60: 3\u201324.\nPrincipe, Lawrence M., and Lloyd DeWitt. 2002. Transmutations: Alchemy in Art. Philadelphia:\nChemical Heritage Foundation.\nSmith, Pamela H. 2000. Vital Spirits: Redemption, Artisanship, and the New Philosophy in Early\nModern Europe. In Rethinking the Scientific Revolution, ed. Margaret J. Osler, 119\u2013135.\nCambridge: Cambridge University Press.\nSmith, Pamela H. 2004. The Body of the Artisan: Art and Experience in the Scientific Revolution.\nChicago: University of Chicago Press.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=81\nPages: 81\nactivity: heating systems, smelting furnaces, cucurbits, alembics and balanced\nscales (Fig. 1).21 Alchemists used the same technological apparatuses and devices\nas artisans and alchemical research was often carried out along with chemical and\nmetallurgical activities, for instance, at the Fonderia by the Medici family in\nFlorence, or several other places in sixteenth- and seventeenth-century Europe.22\nLeonardo and the \u2018Chemical\u2019 Arts\nVery rarely have historians seen Leonardo from the perspective of his direct\ninvolvement in the chemicals arts. Apart from Ladislao Reti and a few others,\nLeonardo\u2019s observations and studies on matter transformation are usually seen in\nthe context of his natural philosophy, with few references to his practical involvement as a painter and engineer during his entire career, including his vision and\nrelationship with occult science and alchemy.23\nIf we focus our attention on Leonardo\u2019s notes and drawings about substance]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=65\nPages: 65\nParticular interest in the empirical aspects of the technical procedures is also\nmore perceptible within alchemical instructions, in comparison to artistic recipes.\nThe former pay greater attention to the chemical aspects of the craft process they\ndetail and describe more precisely each stage of the transformation of matter, from\noriginal to final (and more perfect) form. Whereas artists such as painters were\ninterested in the physical appearance of their materials, alchemists were more\ninterested in the fundamental changes that might occur within the matter. This\ncould perhaps be related to Paul of Taranto\u2019s description in the Theorica et practica\nof primary and secondary qualities and the distinct ways artists and alchemists\nworked on substances. He considered artists capable of producing only \u2018extrinsic\u2019\nor external changes as they operate on secondary or \u2018artificial\u2019 qualities such as\ncolors. In contrast, alchemical attempts to manipulate primary qualities transmute]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=47\nPages: 47\nfraught with difficulty. Alchemy can be defined as the \u2018art of transmutation\u2019,\nreferring to the perfection of base or impure matter (often metal or stone) into\nperfect substances. Alchemical procedures thus rely on artisanal/craft practices.\nAny overlap between alchemy and art-technological procedures can be explained\nby the use of identical materials and substances. Both are concerned with the\ndescription of colours\u2014especially in processes of change, the making of pigments,\nthe production of artificial gemstones, the imitation of gold and silver and the\ntransmutation of materials. Both require procedures involving precise and specifically defined actions, prescriptions and ingredients. So both ultimately use identical\nrhetorical formulations that reflect a \u2018step by step\u2019 procedure. Assuming that\nalchemical and artistic texts have the same textual format, raises the question: did\nthey also have the same types of production and dissemination? Using a corpus of]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=178\nPages: 178\nand financial success. Grill built large laboratories, managed laborants, engaged in\ncollaborations, mined texts for information, and shared results. Several Parisian\ngoldsmiths were likewise tied into this chymical network where they exchanged\nexperimental and theoretical information with such figures as Kenelm Digby,\nSamuel Cottereau Duclos, and Johann Rudolf Glauber. In England, George Starkey\nfound that the expertise of gold- and silversmiths could, alternatively, be inconvenient when trying to sell alchemical metals. The documentation provided here blurs\nthe boundary between artisans and natural philosophers, at least in chymistry.\nAlchemy, or to speak more inclusively and less anachronistically, chymistry was a\nfamiliar topic in early modern Europe. Despite its well-established culture of\nsecrecy, it was not only highly visible and widely-known, but widely-practiced]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=180\nPages: 180\nepistemic exchanges or collaborations on the level of practical or theoretical\nknowledge.\nDocumented examples of extended collaborations or exchanges between artisans and natural philosophers would be both more interesting and more informative\nfor mapping out the domains and dynamics of early modern alchemical practice. A\npromising locus for such study is to be found particularly among gold- and\nsilversmiths. On the one hand, their trade regularly involved chymical processes\nsuch as assaying, refining, and so forth, and they were thus more or less conversant\nwith chymical substances (acids, salts, metals, amalgams, etc.) and chymical\noperations (fusion, quartation, distillation, etc.) and would frequently have\nmaintained workshops equipped with the necessary equipment (furnaces, flues,\nfuel, retorts, crucibles, etc.) needed for chymical work generally. On the other\nhand, the basic materials of their artisanal labors\u2014gold and silver\u2014held a central\n5\nSee Smith, Body of the Artisan.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=156\nPages: 156\ncrucial period we should look at disciplines, such as alchemy, which had few\nacademic ties and, at the same time, established close connections with the arts.\nThe connection between alchemical pursuits and the artisanal ateliers of glazers,\nsmiths, goldsmiths and apothecaries favored the introduction of significant innovations in the laboratory or, as it was called at the Medici court, of the fonderia.25\n22\nBerti, Principe dello Studiolo; Heikamp, Antica sistemazione, and Studien; Butters, Triumph of\nVulcan; Conticelli, \u2018Guardaroba di cose rare\u2019, and Alchimia e le arti.\n23\nShaw & Welch, Making and Marketing Medicine.\n24\nPerifano, Alchimie a\u0300 la Cour.\n25\nAccording to Rinuccio Galluzzi, Cosimo\u2019s interest in alchemy originated in his efforts to exploit\nTuscan mines: \u201cQuesto esercizio delle miniere inspiro\u0300 al Duca il gusto dominante del secolo di\nformar l\u2019oro con la combinazione di diversi metalli. Siccome le semplici ed evidenti teorie della]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=81\nPages: 81,82\nGombrich, \u201cLeonardo and the Magicians\u201d; Vasoli, Leonardo e l\u2019alchimia, 69\u201377; Kiang,\n\u201cLeonardo and Alchemy\u201d; Frosini, \u201cPittura come filosofia\u201d; Kemp, Leonardo da Vinci, 293\u2013\n329; Galluzzi, \u201cVinci\u2019s Concept of \u2018Nature\u2019,\u201d; Beretta, \u201cLeonardo and Lucretius\u201d; Bernardoni,\n\u201cElementi, sostanze naturali\u201d; and Nanni, \u201cLucrezio.\u201d For Leonardo\u2019s involvement in the chemical arts, see Schneider, Chemische Wissen Leonardo, 40\u20133, 87\u201392; Partington, History of Chemistry, vol. II, 1\u20138; Taylor, \u201cVinci et la chimie\u201d; Reti, \u201cArti chimiche di Leonardo\u201d (1952a; 1952b);\nBernardoni, \u201cLeonardo and the \u2018chemical arts\u2019,\u201d and Esplosioni, fusioni e trasmutazioni, 38\u201341.\nArtisanal Processes and Epistemological Debate in the Works of Leonardo. . .\n59\nFig. 1 D. Beccafumi,\nFoundry workshop;\ncourtesy of Accademia\nCarrara, Bergamo\ntension between mechanical arts and alchemy during the Renaissance period. His\nattention was specifically focused on alchemy\u2019s claims to overturn the relationship]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=14\nPages: 14\n300 AD, a distinction was introduced between a limited definition of alchemy as\nmetallic transmutation and a more encompassing definition including productive\nknowledge and various artisanal technologies.\nTransmitted to Europe, and translated into Latin and the vernaculars, several of\nthe recipes in the Papyri are still found in collections of recipes in the fifteenth and\nsixteenth centuries. More importantly, as Martelli remarks in his essay, the scope of\na recipe collection such as the Mappae clavicula, compiled between the ninth and\nthe twelfth centuries, is as encompassing as that of the Papyri despite the earlier\nattempts to limit alchemy to metallic transmutation only. It should not come as a\nsurprise then that Sylvie Neven finds it difficult to demarcate between alchemical\nand art technological recipes in late medieval collections of recipes. Her contribution to this volume shows that alchemical and art technological recipes shared a]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=199\nPages: 199\ninfluences. Brussels: E\u0301ditions Meddens.\nLorm, Jan Rudolph de. 1999. Amsterdams goud en zilver. Amsterdam: Waanders Uitgevers.\nMarolles, Michel de. 1872. Le livre des peintres et graveurs. Paris: Daffis.\nMoran, Bruce T. 2005. Distilling Knowledge: Alchemy, Chemistry, and the Scientific Revolution.\nCambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.\nMu\u0308ller, Leos. 1998. The Merchant Houses of Stockholm c.1640\u20131800: A Comparative Study of\nEarly-Modern Entrepreneurial Behaviour. Uppsala: Uppsala University Library.\nNewman, William R. 1994. Gehennical Fire: The Lives of George Starkey an American Alchemist\nin the Scientific Revolution. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.\nNewman, William R., and Lawrence M. Principe. 1998. Alchemy vs. Chemistry: The Etymological Origins of a Historiographic Mistake. Early Science and Medicine 3: 32\u201365.\nNewman, William R., and Lawrence M. Principe. 2002. Alchemy Tried in the Fire: Starkey, Boyle,]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=156\nPages: 156\nIn this process of reconfiguring Florentine arts and crafts, alchemy played an\nexceedingly important role, both as a fashionable scientific discipline with not\nparticularly strong academic ties and as a useful set of experimental practices in\nwhich several crafts helped artisans quench their thirst for innovation and realize\ntheir socio-cultural ambitions. I shall not explore here the spread of interest in\nalchemy in Florence at beginning of the sixteenth century, a theme already effectively surveyed in Alfredo Perifano\u2019s book on Cosimo I\u2019s alchemical passion.24\nI shall instead take into consideration the development of alchemy in the Palazzo\nVecchio\u2019s fonderia and the Casino, sites where its relation with the chemical arts\nand technological innovations became apparent. Indeed, it is my impression that if\nwe want to understand the metamorphosis of the sciences in Florence during this\ncrucial period we should look at disciplines, such as alchemy, which had few]"]}

{"result":["[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=5\nPages: 5\nmethodology now known or hereafter developed. Exempted from this legal reservation are brief excerpts\nin connection with reviews or scholarly analysis or material supplied specifically for the purpose of being\nentered and executed on a computer system, for exclusive use by the purchaser of the work. Duplication\nof this publication or parts thereof is permitted only under the provisions of the Copyright Law of the\nPublisher\u2019s location, in its current version, and permission for use must always be obtained from\nSpringer. Permissions for use may be obtained through RightsLink at the Copyright Clearance Center.\nViolations are liable to prosecution under the respective Copyright Law.\nThe use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this\npublication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt\nfrom the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=20\nPages: 20\nPrinceton: Princeton University Press.\nSmith, Pamela H. 2004. The Body of the Artisan: Art and Experience in the Scientific Revolution.\nChicago: University of Chicago Press.\nSmith, Pamela H. 2006. Laboratories. In The Cambridge History of Science, 7 vols,\nvol. 3, Early Modern Science, eds. Lorraine Daston and Katharine Park, 289\u2013305. Cambridge:\nCambridge University Press.\nSoukup, Rudolf Werner, and Helmut Mayer. 1997. Alchemistisches Gold: Paracelsistische\nPharmaka: Laboratoriumstechnik im 16. Jahrhundert. Chemiegeschichtliche und arch\u20ac\naometrische Untersuchungen am Inventar des Laboratoriums von Oberstockstall/Kirchberg am\nWagram. Vienna: Bohlau Verlag.\nSoukop, Rudolf Werner, Sigrid von Osten, and Helmut Mayer. 1993. Alembics, Cucurbits, Phials,\nCrucibles: A 16th-Century Docimastic Laboratory Excavated in Austria. Ambix 40: 25.\nWerrett, Simon. 2010. Fireworks: Pyrotechnic Arts and Sciences in European History.\nChicago/London: University of Chicago Press.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=198\nPages: 198\nneat division of artisan and natural philosopher emerges considerably blurred.\nThe diversity of characters within the network and their various connections and\ncollaborations revises still-prevalent views of alchemical laborers as characteristically solitary, secretive, and isolated. Indeed, when we consider the reports of\nGrill\u2019s multiple laboratories staffed with at least 16 operators, it is hard not to recall\nthe contemporaneous depictions of chymical laboratories in Netherlandish genre\npainting that almost always depict a foregrounded main experimenter with a group\nof other workers in the background tending various processes. While there are\ncertainly purely stylistic and iconographic motivations behind such depictions\n(similar layouts are used in other genre paintings not showing chymists), the\naccounts of Grill\u2019s workshop do add a level of verisimilitude to these artistic\nrepresentations that we might not otherwise have attributed to them. The image]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=185\nPages: 185\nYou would really be astonished if you saw the supplies, instruments, and beautiful order of\nthe laboratories! He [Grill] and his wife now spend the nights in the new lodgings so that\nthey can be with the workers morning and evening; the building is progressing quickly, but\nso much construction nevertheless requires a reasonable amount of time.15\nGrill also displayed his knowledge and experience by critiquing several\nchymical processes that the chymical entrepreneur Johann Rudolf Glauber\n(c.1604\u20131670) had boasted about and endeavored to sell.16 In particular, Grill\ndetermined that Glauber\u2019s process for separating gold and silver \u201cdoes not excel\nthat which is customary to him [Grill] in regard to either the labor or the cost.\u201d\nGrill\u2019s own method, which he probably developed in the course of his assaying\nwork, used special vessels (made of gold!) to limit breakage and loss and cleverly\nrecovered and recycled the acid necessary for the process, thus cutting costs by]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=79\nPages: 79\nchemical laboratory are in the Astronomiae instauratae mechanica (Wandsbek,\n1598) by Tycho Brahe (1546\u20131601) and in the Commentariorum alchymiae (Frankfurt, 1606) by Andreas Libavius (1560\u20131616), \u2018chemical operations\u2019 could be\nfound everywhere \u2018perfective arts\u2019 were practiced.15 This was in alchemist\u2019s\nlaboratories, such as the one in Schloss Oberstockstall (Austria) in the sixteenth\ncentury, and assaying workshops, described in the anonymous Probierbuchlein\n11\nHalleux, \u201cAlchimiste et l\u2019essayeur.\u201d; and Nummedal, Alchemy and Authority, 85\u201391.\nFor more on the technical cultural context in the history of science and technology, see Zilsel,\nSocial Origins of Modern Science; Maccagni, \u201cLeggere, scrivere e disegnare\u201d; Galluzzi, \u201cPortraits\nof Machines; Smith, Body of the Artisan; Halleux, Savoir de la main, 102\u201339; and Long, Artisan/\nPractitioners, 10\u201329.\n13\nNewman, Promethean Ambitions, 17\u201320.\n14\nLong, Artisan/Practitioners, 94\u20136. See also, Galison, \u201cTrading Zone.\u201d\n15]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=133\nPages: 133\nThe first room housed the dispensary, where medicines were weighed and\npacked before shipment. It was also here that raw material arrived to be transformed\nin the fonderia. The dispensary was fitted with cabinets, a counter with two scales,\nspoons and funnels, a bench and storage cases. This room was the only one\naccessible to people who did not belong to the fonderia.10 The three following\nrooms included a terrace, a \u2018tower\u2019 (a blast furnace) and other furnaces, and housed\na complete set of copper distillation tools: eight bains-marie, stoves, plates with\ncovers, basins, bell-jars, mortars and many other small instruments.11 These were\n8\nOn scientific illustration in late sixteenth-century Florence, see Ligozzi, I ritratti; Tongiorgi\nTomasi & Tosi, \u201cFlora e Pomona\u201d; Bassani Pacht et al., Marie de Me\u0301dicis; and Garfagnini,\nFirenze e la Toscana, vol. II. Some of those objects conceived by clock-makers and scientific]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=19\nPages: 19\nEarly Industrialisation, eds. Lissa Roberts, Simon Schaffer, and Peter Dear, 247\u2013276. Amsterdam: Koninklijke Nederlandse Akademie van Wetenschappen.\nKlein, Ursula. 2008. The Laboratory Challenge: Some Revisions of the Standard View of\nEarly Modern Experimentation. Isis 99: 769\u2013782.\nKlein, Ursula. 2012. Artisanal-Scientific Experts in Eighteenth-Century France and Germany.\nAnnals of Science 69: 303\u2013306.\nKlein, Ursula. 2013. Chemical Experts at the Royal Prussian Porcelain Manufactory. Ambix 60:\n99\u2013121.\nKlein, Ursula. Forthcoming. Depersonalizing the Arcanum. Technology and Culture.\nLibavius, Andreas. 1606. Commentariorum alchymiae Andreae Libavii Med. D. Pars prima,\nsex libris declarata. In Alchymia. Andreae Libavii recognita, emendata, et aucta. Frankfurt:\nJ Saurius.\nLong, Pamela O. 2011. Artisan/Practitioners and the Rise of the New Sciences, 1400\u20131600.\nCorvallis: Oregon State University Press.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=11\nPages: 11\nfurnaces and fire in which \u201cchemical\u201d operations were performed were also\nknown as laboratories. For example, the places in which sixteenth-century producers of fireworks developed their materials were called laboratories.9 In terms of\nmaterial culture the laboratorium, for example, one designed and equipped by\nCount Wolfgang II von Hohenlohe-Weidersheim (1546\u20131610) in the early seventeenth century, was remarkably similar to the workplaces of apothecaries, metalworkers and glassmakers.10\nBefore the emergence of mercantilist states, Renaissance courts were the most\nimportant agents in establishing laboratories. The laboratories of Rudolf II (1552\u2013\n1612) in Prague and Landgrave Moritz von Hessen-Kassel (1572\u20131632) were\nthought to bring material and intellectual rewards.11 Moritz even founded a chair\nof chymiatria at the University of Marburg in 1609.12 The teaching of Johannes\nHartmann (1561\u20131631), who was appointed to the chair, included work in the]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=17\nPages: 17,18\nat Renaissance courts. Laboratories and artisanal workshops shared a material\n25\nSee also Pietsch, \u201cTschirnhaus,\u201d and Klein, \u201cChemical Experts.\u201d\nIntroduction\nxvii\nculture. In fact, in the early modern period, they were often so similar in terms of the\ninstruments they contained that they carried the same name. This material culture\nremained largely the same. A change took place at another level: the increasing\npresence of books and texts in laboratories and workshops populated by figures who\nmerged artisanal and scholarly cultures. This book suggests that this shift in\nworkshop culture facilitated the epistemic exchanges between alchemists and producers of the decorative arts.\nAcknowledgements\nThis book was conceived and written in dialogue with an exhibition project \u201cArt\nand Alchemy. The Mystery of Transformation.\u201d The exhibition is on view at the\nMuseum Kunstpalast in Du\u0308sseldorf from April to August 2014. I would like to]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=3\nPages: 3,5\nFor further volumes:\nhttp://www.springer.com/series/5644\nSven Dupre\u0301\nEditor\nLaboratories of Art\nAlchemy and Art Technology from\nAntiquity to the 18th Century\nEditor\nSven Dupre\u0301\nFreie Universita\u0308t\nMax Planck Institute for the History of Science\nBerlin, Germany\nISSN 1385-0180\nISSN 2215-0064 (electronic)\nISBN 978-3-319-05064-5\nISBN 978-3-319-05065-2 (eBook)\nDOI 10.1007/978-3-319-05065-2\nSpringer Cham Heidelberg New York Dordrecht London\nLibrary of Congress Control Number: 2014937822\n\u00a9 Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014\nThis work is subject to copyright. All rights are reserved by the Publisher, whether the whole or part\nof the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations,\nrecitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or\ninformation storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=173\nPages: 173\nalchemical laboratory. The small, limping man with a stick looks like Don Antonio:\nhe is holding a luminescent substance probably taken from the furnace, with a\nnipper in his right hand. Next to Antonio we see an elegantly dressed older man,\nprobably the superintendent of the laboratory, who is looking at the substance held\nby Antonio. The open door on the left shows the beginning of a descending\nstaircase, suggesting that the laboratory was on the first floor. The rest of\nNapoletano\u2019s workshop offers the usual picture of an alchemical laboratory, with\nits disorderly arrangement of equipment, its furnace in a poor state, and its dirty\nfloor. Whether authentic or not, Napoletano\u2019s representation strongly suggests that\nby 1619, at the height of Galileo\u2019s success, the activities promoted in the Casino\nwere still an important feature of Medici scientific patronage. However, in comparison to the Francesco dominated era, the chemical arts seem to have lost their]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=132\nPages: 132,133\non chalcedony,\n95 \u0001 84 cm, Jacopo\nLigozzi and Daniel Froeschl\nfrom Bernardino Poccetti\u2019s\ndesign. 1597\u20131604\n(Courtesy of Galleria\nPalatina, inv. Oggetti d\u2019Arte\n1911, n. 1512)\nFig. 5 Mandragora\n(Atropia Mandragora),\nJacopo Ligozzi. c. 1577\u2013\n1627 (Courtesy of\nGabinetto Disegni e Stampe\ndegli Uffizi, 1915 Orn)\nF. Kieffer\nThe Laboratories of Art and Alchemy at the Uffizi Gallery in Renaissance. . .\n111\nfor painting; clock-makers worked together with scientific instrument builders to\nconceive automata or musical instruments for the Uffizi theatre.8\nTo our knowledge, no other example of such a governmental system can be\nfound in Europe. Indeed, although most of the European courts were equipped with\nartistic workshops or laboratories, or even sometimes with both\u2014the courts of\nMantua, Prague, Kassel or Munich spring to mind\u2014none of these were subject to\nsuch administrative rules and restrictions. Neither did their production serve exactly]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=198\nPages: 198,199\nrepresentations that we might not otherwise have attributed to them. The image\nof a busy, and presumably compartmentalized and hierarchical, chymical workshop\npulls our understanding of these locales towards a comparison with contemporaneous artisanal ateliers, which, if the principals involved were themselves artisans,\nwould have been the obvious model upon which to draw virtually automatically.\n(Interestingly, a modern academic chemical research group retains much of this\ncharacter and structure.) The transconfessional and international character of the\nlarger network\u2014which included Catholics and assorted types of Protestants, as well\nas Dutch, French, English, Danes, Swedes, and Germans\u2014parallels the way in\nwhich it cut across social levels. This situation complicates some of the standard\nways in which historians are accustomed to draw reckoning lines, and recalls the\nideal of a respublica litterarum even in a subject as distant from traditional\nhumanism as sooty chymistry.\n178]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=80\nPages: 80,79\n14\nLong, Artisan/Practitioners, 94\u20136. See also, Galison, \u201cTrading Zone.\u201d\n15\nHannaway, \u201cLaboratory Design.\u201d\n12\nArtisanal Processes and Epistemological Debate in the Works of Leonardo. . .\n57\n(1513), in Biringuccio\u2019s Pirotechnia, and in Agricola\u2019s De re metallica.16 Further\nnascent signs of a distinct and autonomous chemical laboratory with purpose-built\n\u2018chemical\u2019 equipment can be found in the more general context of the Renaissance\nartist\u2019s workshop culture. Here, together with the fine arts such as painting, sculpture, architecture and jewelry making, metal carpentry, and gun casting, we find\noperations that use substance transformation, such as distillation and sublimation.\nThere is evidence that even the most important names in the history of art were\ninvolved in such workshop activities, for instance Michelangelo (1475\u20131564),\nwhose Florentine workshop, as mentioned in his correspondence with his brother,\nwas involved in generic metal carpentry such as the casting and welding of]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=201\nPages: 201,202\ntechnology and innovation. The principal focus is on the adoption of specific\nM. Wesley (*)\nDepartment of History, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK\ne-mail: thenex@mac.com\nS. Dupre\u0301 (ed.), Laboratories of Art, Archimedes 37,\n181\nDOI 10.1007/978-3-319-05065-2_8, \u00a9 Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014\n182\nM. Wesley\nchymical practices in early modern ceramic innovation that lead to a drastic\nreshaping of the experimental landscape. While many adopted practices flowed\nseamlessly between the two disciplines through shared tools and techniques developed by generations of practitioners working with fire, the specific nature of\nceramics forced adaptations on other practices. Elements borrowed from controversial chymical fire analysis found more specific application in investigating\nthermal qualities of ceramic bodies in laboratory experimentation. Used in ceramic]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=133\nPages: 133,134\nFirenze e la Toscana, vol. II. Some of those objects conceived by clock-makers and scientific\ninstrument builders can be seen in the exhibition catalogue: Acidini, Magnificenza alla Corte.\n9\nFor more information on the differences and similarities between the Galleria dei lavori and the\nother European court\u2019s workshops, see Kieffer, Ferdinando I de Me\u0301dicis.\n10\n\u201cChe nessuno pratichi in detta Fonderia eccetto nella prima stanza dove si distribuischono li\nmedicamenti.\u201d (ASF, GM 403, ins. 2, fol. 120).\n11\nThe \u201cterraces\u201d mentioned in the inventory don\u2019t exist anymore, but we can deduce from the\narchival sources they were little open rooms made of wood.\n112\nF. Kieffer\nfollowed by a huge distillation laboratory including an ordigno (machine) to distil\nacquavite composed of 60 glass balls, a bain-marie, pallets full of glass pots of all\nkind and a pierced bench to place the separatoie (separators). The following room]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=11\nPages: 11,12\nAlchemistenlaboratorium Oberstockstall; Soukup & Mayer, Alchemistisches Gold, and the shorter\nreport, Soukop, Osten & Mayer, \u201cAlembics, Cucurbits, Phials,\u201d 25; Howard, La Bibliothe\u0300que et le\nlaboratoire; Pereira, \u201cUtili segreti\u201d; Rouaze, \u201cAtelier de distillation\u201d; and Joly, \u201cLaboratoire\nalchimique.\u201d\n11\nAmong the numerous publications on court alchemy, see two foundational studies: Moran,\nThe Alchemical World; and Evans, Rudolf II.\n12\nGanzenmu\u0308ller, \u201cDas chemische Laboratorium.\u201d\n13\nSmith, Business of Alchemy, 190\u20138.\nIntroduction\nxi\nhouse. These laboratories were intended to specialize in salts and acids used in the\nproduction of mineral dyes. Becher envisioned that the manufacture and export of\nthese dyes would finance the other operations of the Kunst- und Werckhaus. He also\nenvisaged the house attracting artisans from various crafts and that it would\nfunction as a deposit of recipes and descriptions of techniques. Trained artisans]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=200\nPages: 200\nChicago: University of Chicago Press.\nSorbie\u0300re, Samuel J. 1660. Relations, lettres, et discours sur diverses matieres curieuses. Paris.\nStarkey, George [Eirenaeus Philalethes]. 1669. Secrets Reveal\u2019d, or an Open Entrance to the ShutPalace of the King. London.\nStarkey, George. 2004. The Alchemical Laboratory Notebooks and Correspondence, eds. and\ntrans. William R. Newman and Lawrence M. Principe. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.\nStroup, Alice. 1990. A Company of Scientists: Botany, Patronage, and Community at the\nSeventeenth-Century Parisian Royal Academy of Sciences. Berkeley: University of California\nPress.\nStroup, Alice. 2002. Censure ou querelles scientifiques: L\u2019affaire Duclos (1675\u20131685). In\nRe\u0300glement, usages et science dans la France de l\u2019absolutisme, eds. Christiane DemeulenaereDouye\u0300re and E\u0301ric Brian, 435\u2013452. Paris: Tec et Doc Lavoisier.\nSturdy, David. 1995. Science and Social Status: The Members of the Acade\u0301mie Royale des]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=211\nPages: 211\nthrough Christie\u2019s, likely in 1888 or 1889. Notices seeking their recovery have\nbeen remarked on as early as 30 June, 1894, but no indication as to their location has\nsurfaced.29\nWhile no contemporary records of the tests conducted between 1672 and 1675\nare known to exist, laboratory testing of the composition of the sherds found from\nthis period coincide broadly with the recipes given for porcelain in the later texts.\nThis methodology demonstrates the connection between Dwight\u2019s laboratory practice to that employed by Boyle in the late 1650s, and echoes the laboratory books of\nStarkey.30 Similar to the annotations and refinements demonstrated in Starkey\u2019s\nlaboratory books, we see Dwight actively editing his working notebook with\ncommentary on the effectiveness of recipes and the striking through of less effective formula. Lady Schreiber was rigorous in her transcriptions, making note of\npages torn out, recipes struck through, and duplicating marginalia such as a \u201cnot]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=11\nPages: 11\ncontinuing laboratory tradition reaching into the eighteenth century.8 According to\nKlein, in contrast to experimental philosophy, work in the laboratory was characterized by continuous experimentation with material substances. The material\nculture supporting this laboratory work remained largely unchanged. The exception\nis the material equipment for transmutational alchemy and the making of the\nPhilosophers\u2019 Stone, which generally disappeared from laboratories together with\ntransmutational alchemy itself in the eighteenth century. Laboratories were places\nin which the study of nature and technical innovation went hand in hand.\nAs already mentioned, the term \u201claboratory\u201d was not only used to refer to the\nworkplace of the alchemist. All workplaces in which \u201cchemical\u201d operations were\nperformed were known as laboratories, and as such, artisanal workshops with\nfurnaces and fire in which \u201cchemical\u201d operations were performed were also]"]}

{"result":["[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=48\nPages: 48,47\n23\n24\nS. Neven\nwritings describe processes for the manufacture, preparation and application of\nvarious types of materials and substances. The majority are anonymous compilations of texts, which may originate from older or undetermined authorities.\nHundreds of such collections of recipes dealing both with alchemical and\nart-technological procedures were produced and disseminated in Northern Europe\nfrom the fourteenth century on, especially in German-speaking countries.\nDrawing on a delimited corpus of about 40 representative German manuscripts\ndated from the fourteenth to the sixteenth century, this paper investigates the\nconnections and similarities between these two fields and examines the various\nways alchemical and artistic instructions were embedded within recipe books.1 It\nargues that textual form and lexical proximities within recipes from these different\ndisciplines may lead to association, contamination and confusion within this textual]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=49\nPages: 49,50\nvol. I.\n26\nS. Neven\nand descriptions of miscellaneous chemical operations, including instructions for\nthe manufacture of dyes and pigments, for the gilding and painting on glass, as well\nas, among others, metalwork, chrysography, distilling alcohol, making candy, and\ncreating military devices.12\nMediaeval and Premodern Recipe Books\nIn mediaeval and premodern times, artistic and alchemical procedures were often\ndescribed within compilations of texts that may concurrently address various fields\nsuch as medicine, cooking, botany or pharmacology. They also include magical\nrecipes, dietetical instructions or advice on home-economics. All these various\ndisciplines are embedded within the genre of the Fachliteratur.13 This kind of\nliterature regroups all texts of a utilitarian and informative nature whose content\ndoes not principally concern aesthetic or religious issues, or matters relating to\nemotional purpose.14 A great number of these writings share the same format and]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=120\nPages: 120\nartworks that imitate nature\u2019s processes. This seems to be the basic assumption that\nunderlies all early modern manipulation of and acting with metals: naturally formed\nminerals are presented in the Kunstkammern next to artificialia to exhibit not only\nthe mimicry skills of the artists to imitate the natural forms used as models, but also\nto imitate the natural processes. The discussion of early modern theories on\nmetallogenesis has shown, that the creative process of the human artist and artisan\nwas compared to the natural genesis of the divine artifex. The same primordial\nmatters are available to the goldsmith and the metalworker, to the alchemist and to\n\u2018nature\u2019. All four follow the same working processes, only their ability differentiates the final products. The juxtaposition of form and matter, which is thought of as\na dichotomy of active force-shaping power and passive shape-receiving material, is]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=64\nPages: 64\nink are written in the form of a very short list of ingredients. It is less common for\nthe alchemical recipes to be presented this way.\nThe title of a recipe may also give an indication of the final product to be obtained\nand, in some cases, specify the use of the product. Again, this is particularly true for\nartistic instructions and is less observable for alchemical ones.\nFor both types of instructions (alchemical or artistic), some steps could be\nomitted or were left to the interpretation of the reader. Specified quantities may\nbe missing in both fields. When quantities are given, artistic recipes are far more\nlikely to use local measurements, whereas in alchemical instructions, the quantities\u2014if mentioned at all\u2014are more often expressed in terms of ratio or proportions.\nIn some cases, these proportions are not \u2018practically\u2019 correct. A very well-known\nexample is the proportion of mercury and sulphur proposed by mediaeval recipes]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=180\nPages: 180\nclearly aware of the figure of the alchemist and his iconic value.6 Likewise, the\nallegorical images of widely varying artistic quality in chymical books and manuscripts imply some sort of contact between author/practitioner and artist. Yet such\nartworks do not necessarily indicate that the artists were actually in direct and\nmeaningful contact with chymists. On a purely commercial level, artists would\nhave been in contact (possibly directly in some instances, but probably more\nfrequently indirectly through a retailer) with makers of chymically-prepared pigments such as vermilion or white lead, just as metalworkers and assayers would\nhave connected with producers of mineral acids, fabric-makers with dye manufacturers, and so forth. Yet none of these contacts tells us anything about possible\nepistemic exchanges or collaborations on the level of practical or theoretical\nknowledge.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=47\nPages: 47\nfraught with difficulty. Alchemy can be defined as the \u2018art of transmutation\u2019,\nreferring to the perfection of base or impure matter (often metal or stone) into\nperfect substances. Alchemical procedures thus rely on artisanal/craft practices.\nAny overlap between alchemy and art-technological procedures can be explained\nby the use of identical materials and substances. Both are concerned with the\ndescription of colours\u2014especially in processes of change, the making of pigments,\nthe production of artificial gemstones, the imitation of gold and silver and the\ntransmutation of materials. Both require procedures involving precise and specifically defined actions, prescriptions and ingredients. So both ultimately use identical\nrhetorical formulations that reflect a \u2018step by step\u2019 procedure. Assuming that\nalchemical and artistic texts have the same textual format, raises the question: did\nthey also have the same types of production and dissemination? Using a corpus of]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=203\nPages: 203,204\nthe decorative arts before the early modern period is worthwhile. Prior to its\ninteraction with chymistry, the relationship between the potter\u2019s craft and fire was\nprincipally of a mechanical, fixative nature. As the heat of the kiln was known to\nremove the water from earthen bodies, its ability to affect permanent transformation\non the materials placed in the kiln was its principal contribution to the success of\nceramic production. Those objects existed first as trade goods rather than artisanal\nobjects and only later became valued as aesthetic products. Vannoccio\nBiringuccio\u2019s (1480\u2013c.1539) introduction to his brief \u201cdiscourse on the art of the\npotter\u201d from his Pirotechnia of 1540, encapsulates both the recent recognition\nreceived by ceramic craft and its inseparability from fire:\n184\nM. Wesley\nHaving started to tell you of working potter\u2019s clay for making crucibles and shells, the wish\ncame to me to tell you of the practice of this art also. Although it may seem at first glance to]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=157\nPages: 157\nthe chemical arts was visually displayed in the series of paintings hanging in the\nStudiolo of Palazzo Vecchio, a small dark room decorated with a complex iconographic narrative. Designed for the then Prince Francesco by Vincenzo Borghini\n(1515\u20131580) and Giorgio Vasari (1511\u20131574), its cabinets seem to have included\nsome of the most valuable treasures produced in the fonderia. In addition to all sorts\nof precious stones, glass and porcelain, they carefully stored the rarest natural\nspecimens and the products of alchemical experiments.26 The meaning of this\nroom and its intimate connection with Francesco I\u2019s interest in alchemy, has been\ndiscussed by many, and most recently reconstructed in the comprehensive work by\nValentina Conticelli. Thirty-two artists were employed and coordinated by Vasari\nto accomplish the work. Benvenuto Cellini (1500\u20131571), who shared with his\npatron a keen interest in alchemy, was meant to have taken part\u2014but his premature]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=204\nPages: 204\ncame to me to tell you of the practice of this art also. Although it may seem at first glance to\nbe outside the order and purpose of my writing, he who considers well will see that it is not\nunrelated to it but proper, since it is wholly dependent on the agency and power of fire if it is\nto be brought to its perfection. Moreover, the potter\u2019s glazes and colors are all substances of\nvarious metals or impure minerals and therefore belong to fire. Since it is my intention to\ntreat of fire, minerals, and metals for you, I surely should not have omitted this, particularly\nbecause it is a necessary art which enriches and is greatly praised both for its ingenuity and\nits beauty.4\nLike the other arts treated in the Pirotechnia, the action of the fire on base earths\nand minerals provided integral transformation in the objects shaped by the potter\u2019s\nhands. At the time of Biringuccio\u2019s writing, the potter\u2019s art was on the threshold of a]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=80\nPages: 80,79\n14\nLong, Artisan/Practitioners, 94\u20136. See also, Galison, \u201cTrading Zone.\u201d\n15\nHannaway, \u201cLaboratory Design.\u201d\n12\nArtisanal Processes and Epistemological Debate in the Works of Leonardo. . .\n57\n(1513), in Biringuccio\u2019s Pirotechnia, and in Agricola\u2019s De re metallica.16 Further\nnascent signs of a distinct and autonomous chemical laboratory with purpose-built\n\u2018chemical\u2019 equipment can be found in the more general context of the Renaissance\nartist\u2019s workshop culture. Here, together with the fine arts such as painting, sculpture, architecture and jewelry making, metal carpentry, and gun casting, we find\noperations that use substance transformation, such as distillation and sublimation.\nThere is evidence that even the most important names in the history of art were\ninvolved in such workshop activities, for instance Michelangelo (1475\u20131564),\nwhose Florentine workshop, as mentioned in his correspondence with his brother,\nwas involved in generic metal carpentry such as the casting and welding of]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=103\nPages: 103\n(Ore Mountains), Harz and other regions through the methods of observation, of\ncollecting and of categorization\u2014was incorporated into scientific treatises on the\nformation of metals and helped to change and develop this domain. The artisan\u2019s\ncraft knowledge about matter and materials rarely found its way into a written form.\nIt was most commonly expressed in its suitable mode, the accomplished work of\nart.2\nThe second part of the article analyses the materials and shape of a coconut\nvessel on display in the Kunsthistorisches Museum in Vienna (Fig. 1) to see if the\naforementioned metallogenetical theories could have had an impact on the form of\na sixteenth-century art object: in this Kunstkammer object an unknown goldsmith\nfrom the Erzgebirge created a mountainous landscape, simultaneously a representation of paradise with Adam and Eve eating from the tree of knowledge and the\ndepiction of a post-expulsion mining area populated by contemporary miners. This]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=17\nPages: 17,18\nat Renaissance courts. Laboratories and artisanal workshops shared a material\n25\nSee also Pietsch, \u201cTschirnhaus,\u201d and Klein, \u201cChemical Experts.\u201d\nIntroduction\nxvii\nculture. In fact, in the early modern period, they were often so similar in terms of the\ninstruments they contained that they carried the same name. This material culture\nremained largely the same. A change took place at another level: the increasing\npresence of books and texts in laboratories and workshops populated by figures who\nmerged artisanal and scholarly cultures. This book suggests that this shift in\nworkshop culture facilitated the epistemic exchanges between alchemists and producers of the decorative arts.\nAcknowledgements\nThis book was conceived and written in dialogue with an exhibition project \u201cArt\nand Alchemy. The Mystery of Transformation.\u201d The exhibition is on view at the\nMuseum Kunstpalast in Du\u0308sseldorf from April to August 2014. I would like to]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=122\nPages: 122\nareas. But this corresponds with the interconnected nature of these fields, as\npreviously outlined: early modern concepts of metallogenesis must be understood\nas a mixture of religious connotations, their dependency on antique montanistic\ntheories as well as on alchemical lore adopted through medieval Islamic mediation.\nBeyond that, a work of art communicates in different ways than a text. The object\ntransforms the know how of the artisan as it is performed in the working process and\nblends it with the lore of the scholar into embodied, visual knowledge. This\nknowledge, encapsulated in the work of art can then be exhibited in the surroundings of the ruler, in his Kunstkammer collection as well as in processions and\ncourtly festivities.47 It is\u2014apart from instruments to measure natural phenomena,\nwhich Baird puts in the focus of his analysis \u2014not \u2018useful\u2019 in the sense that it\nembodied knowledge which can be used to gain and widen existent knowledge. But]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=206\nPages: 206\nof those materials, even though other artisans were making use of them. The failure\nwas thus not connected to any form of geological predetermination, but entirely by\nsocial constraints limiting the application of knowledge to the problem.\nThe speculation that porcelain was comprised of either special clay, fermented\nfor generations, or of crushed shell incorporated in its manufacture, was a direct\nindication that similar materials were outside the realm of contemporary craft\nknowledge.14 In order to successfully move past these limitations, the experimental\ntechniques of the natural philosophers allowed objects from China to serve as\nprototypes for interrogation towards their properties and composition. It is at this\npoint that the techniques employed by chymistry, some borrowed from metallurgical assaying and the furnaces of the glassmakers in the centuries-long discourse\nbetween the disciplines, came into full application in the pursuit of ceramic\ninnovation.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=79\nPages: 79\nThis context applies not only to metallurgical assaying but, more generally, it\ndefines the area of the \u2018perfective arts\u2019, including all arts that use fire to work and\ntransform matter.13 In this trading zone, where Latin was scarcely known and where\ncompetition with alchemists was felt more keenly, a sub-group of artisans, artists\nand engineers kept their distance from alchemy to define a new field of \u2018chemical\ntechnology\u2019.14\nArtisanal processes could be seen as a sort of \u2018melting pot\u2019 of interwoven\npractical and theoretical knowledge coming from the world of crafts, including\nalchemy. It is prevalently in the world of artisans that we find references to\n\u2018chemical activity\u2019 during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. Before there\nwere signs of a laboratory as a separate place\u2014the most ancient plans to build a\nchemical laboratory are in the Astronomiae instauratae mechanica (Wandsbek,]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=65\nPages: 65\nParticular interest in the empirical aspects of the technical procedures is also\nmore perceptible within alchemical instructions, in comparison to artistic recipes.\nThe former pay greater attention to the chemical aspects of the craft process they\ndetail and describe more precisely each stage of the transformation of matter, from\noriginal to final (and more perfect) form. Whereas artists such as painters were\ninterested in the physical appearance of their materials, alchemists were more\ninterested in the fundamental changes that might occur within the matter. This\ncould perhaps be related to Paul of Taranto\u2019s description in the Theorica et practica\nof primary and secondary qualities and the distinct ways artists and alchemists\nworked on substances. He considered artists capable of producing only \u2018extrinsic\u2019\nor external changes as they operate on secondary or \u2018artificial\u2019 qualities such as\ncolors. In contrast, alchemical attempts to manipulate primary qualities transmute]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=204\nPages: 204\nby the Benedictine monk Theophilus, thoroughly introduces the full range of\nartisanal productions valued in Europe in its first book.6 Pottery is entirely absent\nfrom this discussion of laudable arts and only appears once in the text as a canvas\nfor enameling.7 This is a continuation of pottery\u2019s position in the classical period,\nwhen earthen objects were valued as trade goods, everyday wares, or a medium for\nother decoration, not for their individual aesthetic form.8\nIt was not until advancements in the production of luxury quality European\npottery during the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries that the cultural perception of\nthe material changed significantly, driving engagement by the upper classes and\nnatural philosophers. An example can be found in a letter from Lorenzo de Medici\n(1449\u20131492) to the Malatesta family in 1490, favorably comparing their gift of\nmaiolica to silver objects, which is one of the earliest pieces of documentary\n4\nBiringuccio, Pirotechnia (1942), 392.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=65\nPages: 65\ncolors. In contrast, alchemical attempts to manipulate primary qualities transmute\nsubstances intrinsically and operate fundamental change.58\nAccordingly, alchemical recipes also dedicate a large part of their text to the\ndescription of chemical apparatus, tools and containers. These writings pay particular\nattention to the use of a variety of containers and receptacles and their specific\npurposes. Moreover, in several manuscripts, such as Seidel, Vienna Ms. 5224 or\nCod. Helm. 627 from Wolfenbu\u0308ttel (to cite but a few), the text is punctuated by\nillustrations of these (Fig. 2). This is rare, if not non-existent in artistic instructions.\nThese last distinguishing features of alchemical, as opposed to art-technological\ntexts, go hand in hand with the fact that practical alchemy relies on theoretical\n(or speculative) principles. Quite often, these recipes should be seen and understood\nas experientia which are meant to serve as a rational demonstration of a preceding\ntheorica.59]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=83\nPages: 83,84\n26\nThese admonitions against alchemy, presented for the first time by Avicenna, were known\nduring the Middle Ages as sciant artifices, see Avicenna, De congelatione et conglutinatione\nlapidum, 53\u20135; Newman, \u201cTechnology and Alchemical Debate.\u201d; and Halleux, \u201cAlchimiste et\nl\u2019essayeur,\u201d 211.\nArtisanal Processes and Epistemological Debate in the Works of Leonardo. . .\n61\nLeonardo\u2019s manuscripts are one of the best sources to study the chemical\nequipment of Renaissance. His tireless sketching during his entire career produced\na very large and uncommon collection of manuscripts that allow us to understand\nand visualize many tools, instruments and chemical processes studied, developed\nand used during the Renaissance.\nAn activity that was a sort of flywheel in involving Leonardo in the study of the\nmany aspects of bronze casting was the project of the Equestrian monument for\nFrancesco Sforza. This was a very large bronze statue that was never cast but]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=81\nPages: 81\nactivity: heating systems, smelting furnaces, cucurbits, alembics and balanced\nscales (Fig. 1).21 Alchemists used the same technological apparatuses and devices\nas artisans and alchemical research was often carried out along with chemical and\nmetallurgical activities, for instance, at the Fonderia by the Medici family in\nFlorence, or several other places in sixteenth- and seventeenth-century Europe.22\nLeonardo and the \u2018Chemical\u2019 Arts\nVery rarely have historians seen Leonardo from the perspective of his direct\ninvolvement in the chemicals arts. Apart from Ladislao Reti and a few others,\nLeonardo\u2019s observations and studies on matter transformation are usually seen in\nthe context of his natural philosophy, with few references to his practical involvement as a painter and engineer during his entire career, including his vision and\nrelationship with occult science and alchemy.23\nIf we focus our attention on Leonardo\u2019s notes and drawings about substance]"]}

{"result":["[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=48\nPages: 48,47\n23\n24\nS. Neven\nwritings describe processes for the manufacture, preparation and application of\nvarious types of materials and substances. The majority are anonymous compilations of texts, which may originate from older or undetermined authorities.\nHundreds of such collections of recipes dealing both with alchemical and\nart-technological procedures were produced and disseminated in Northern Europe\nfrom the fourteenth century on, especially in German-speaking countries.\nDrawing on a delimited corpus of about 40 representative German manuscripts\ndated from the fourteenth to the sixteenth century, this paper investigates the\nconnections and similarities between these two fields and examines the various\nways alchemical and artistic instructions were embedded within recipe books.1 It\nargues that textual form and lexical proximities within recipes from these different\ndisciplines may lead to association, contamination and confusion within this textual]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=49\nPages: 49,50\nvol. I.\n26\nS. Neven\nand descriptions of miscellaneous chemical operations, including instructions for\nthe manufacture of dyes and pigments, for the gilding and painting on glass, as well\nas, among others, metalwork, chrysography, distilling alcohol, making candy, and\ncreating military devices.12\nMediaeval and Premodern Recipe Books\nIn mediaeval and premodern times, artistic and alchemical procedures were often\ndescribed within compilations of texts that may concurrently address various fields\nsuch as medicine, cooking, botany or pharmacology. They also include magical\nrecipes, dietetical instructions or advice on home-economics. All these various\ndisciplines are embedded within the genre of the Fachliteratur.13 This kind of\nliterature regroups all texts of a utilitarian and informative nature whose content\ndoes not principally concern aesthetic or religious issues, or matters relating to\nemotional purpose.14 A great number of these writings share the same format and]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=120\nPages: 120\nartworks that imitate nature\u2019s processes. This seems to be the basic assumption that\nunderlies all early modern manipulation of and acting with metals: naturally formed\nminerals are presented in the Kunstkammern next to artificialia to exhibit not only\nthe mimicry skills of the artists to imitate the natural forms used as models, but also\nto imitate the natural processes. The discussion of early modern theories on\nmetallogenesis has shown, that the creative process of the human artist and artisan\nwas compared to the natural genesis of the divine artifex. The same primordial\nmatters are available to the goldsmith and the metalworker, to the alchemist and to\n\u2018nature\u2019. All four follow the same working processes, only their ability differentiates the final products. The juxtaposition of form and matter, which is thought of as\na dichotomy of active force-shaping power and passive shape-receiving material, is]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=64\nPages: 64\nink are written in the form of a very short list of ingredients. It is less common for\nthe alchemical recipes to be presented this way.\nThe title of a recipe may also give an indication of the final product to be obtained\nand, in some cases, specify the use of the product. Again, this is particularly true for\nartistic instructions and is less observable for alchemical ones.\nFor both types of instructions (alchemical or artistic), some steps could be\nomitted or were left to the interpretation of the reader. Specified quantities may\nbe missing in both fields. When quantities are given, artistic recipes are far more\nlikely to use local measurements, whereas in alchemical instructions, the quantities\u2014if mentioned at all\u2014are more often expressed in terms of ratio or proportions.\nIn some cases, these proportions are not \u2018practically\u2019 correct. A very well-known\nexample is the proportion of mercury and sulphur proposed by mediaeval recipes]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=180\nPages: 180\nclearly aware of the figure of the alchemist and his iconic value.6 Likewise, the\nallegorical images of widely varying artistic quality in chymical books and manuscripts imply some sort of contact between author/practitioner and artist. Yet such\nartworks do not necessarily indicate that the artists were actually in direct and\nmeaningful contact with chymists. On a purely commercial level, artists would\nhave been in contact (possibly directly in some instances, but probably more\nfrequently indirectly through a retailer) with makers of chymically-prepared pigments such as vermilion or white lead, just as metalworkers and assayers would\nhave connected with producers of mineral acids, fabric-makers with dye manufacturers, and so forth. Yet none of these contacts tells us anything about possible\nepistemic exchanges or collaborations on the level of practical or theoretical\nknowledge.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=47\nPages: 47\nfraught with difficulty. Alchemy can be defined as the \u2018art of transmutation\u2019,\nreferring to the perfection of base or impure matter (often metal or stone) into\nperfect substances. Alchemical procedures thus rely on artisanal/craft practices.\nAny overlap between alchemy and art-technological procedures can be explained\nby the use of identical materials and substances. Both are concerned with the\ndescription of colours\u2014especially in processes of change, the making of pigments,\nthe production of artificial gemstones, the imitation of gold and silver and the\ntransmutation of materials. Both require procedures involving precise and specifically defined actions, prescriptions and ingredients. So both ultimately use identical\nrhetorical formulations that reflect a \u2018step by step\u2019 procedure. Assuming that\nalchemical and artistic texts have the same textual format, raises the question: did\nthey also have the same types of production and dissemination? Using a corpus of]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=203\nPages: 203,204\nthe decorative arts before the early modern period is worthwhile. Prior to its\ninteraction with chymistry, the relationship between the potter\u2019s craft and fire was\nprincipally of a mechanical, fixative nature. As the heat of the kiln was known to\nremove the water from earthen bodies, its ability to affect permanent transformation\non the materials placed in the kiln was its principal contribution to the success of\nceramic production. Those objects existed first as trade goods rather than artisanal\nobjects and only later became valued as aesthetic products. Vannoccio\nBiringuccio\u2019s (1480\u2013c.1539) introduction to his brief \u201cdiscourse on the art of the\npotter\u201d from his Pirotechnia of 1540, encapsulates both the recent recognition\nreceived by ceramic craft and its inseparability from fire:\n184\nM. Wesley\nHaving started to tell you of working potter\u2019s clay for making crucibles and shells, the wish\ncame to me to tell you of the practice of this art also. Although it may seem at first glance to]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=157\nPages: 157\nthe chemical arts was visually displayed in the series of paintings hanging in the\nStudiolo of Palazzo Vecchio, a small dark room decorated with a complex iconographic narrative. Designed for the then Prince Francesco by Vincenzo Borghini\n(1515\u20131580) and Giorgio Vasari (1511\u20131574), its cabinets seem to have included\nsome of the most valuable treasures produced in the fonderia. In addition to all sorts\nof precious stones, glass and porcelain, they carefully stored the rarest natural\nspecimens and the products of alchemical experiments.26 The meaning of this\nroom and its intimate connection with Francesco I\u2019s interest in alchemy, has been\ndiscussed by many, and most recently reconstructed in the comprehensive work by\nValentina Conticelli. Thirty-two artists were employed and coordinated by Vasari\nto accomplish the work. Benvenuto Cellini (1500\u20131571), who shared with his\npatron a keen interest in alchemy, was meant to have taken part\u2014but his premature]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=204\nPages: 204\ncame to me to tell you of the practice of this art also. Although it may seem at first glance to\nbe outside the order and purpose of my writing, he who considers well will see that it is not\nunrelated to it but proper, since it is wholly dependent on the agency and power of fire if it is\nto be brought to its perfection. Moreover, the potter\u2019s glazes and colors are all substances of\nvarious metals or impure minerals and therefore belong to fire. Since it is my intention to\ntreat of fire, minerals, and metals for you, I surely should not have omitted this, particularly\nbecause it is a necessary art which enriches and is greatly praised both for its ingenuity and\nits beauty.4\nLike the other arts treated in the Pirotechnia, the action of the fire on base earths\nand minerals provided integral transformation in the objects shaped by the potter\u2019s\nhands. At the time of Biringuccio\u2019s writing, the potter\u2019s art was on the threshold of a]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=80\nPages: 80,79\n14\nLong, Artisan/Practitioners, 94\u20136. See also, Galison, \u201cTrading Zone.\u201d\n15\nHannaway, \u201cLaboratory Design.\u201d\n12\nArtisanal Processes and Epistemological Debate in the Works of Leonardo. . .\n57\n(1513), in Biringuccio\u2019s Pirotechnia, and in Agricola\u2019s De re metallica.16 Further\nnascent signs of a distinct and autonomous chemical laboratory with purpose-built\n\u2018chemical\u2019 equipment can be found in the more general context of the Renaissance\nartist\u2019s workshop culture. Here, together with the fine arts such as painting, sculpture, architecture and jewelry making, metal carpentry, and gun casting, we find\noperations that use substance transformation, such as distillation and sublimation.\nThere is evidence that even the most important names in the history of art were\ninvolved in such workshop activities, for instance Michelangelo (1475\u20131564),\nwhose Florentine workshop, as mentioned in his correspondence with his brother,\nwas involved in generic metal carpentry such as the casting and welding of]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=103\nPages: 103\n(Ore Mountains), Harz and other regions through the methods of observation, of\ncollecting and of categorization\u2014was incorporated into scientific treatises on the\nformation of metals and helped to change and develop this domain. The artisan\u2019s\ncraft knowledge about matter and materials rarely found its way into a written form.\nIt was most commonly expressed in its suitable mode, the accomplished work of\nart.2\nThe second part of the article analyses the materials and shape of a coconut\nvessel on display in the Kunsthistorisches Museum in Vienna (Fig. 1) to see if the\naforementioned metallogenetical theories could have had an impact on the form of\na sixteenth-century art object: in this Kunstkammer object an unknown goldsmith\nfrom the Erzgebirge created a mountainous landscape, simultaneously a representation of paradise with Adam and Eve eating from the tree of knowledge and the\ndepiction of a post-expulsion mining area populated by contemporary miners. This]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=17\nPages: 17,18\nat Renaissance courts. Laboratories and artisanal workshops shared a material\n25\nSee also Pietsch, \u201cTschirnhaus,\u201d and Klein, \u201cChemical Experts.\u201d\nIntroduction\nxvii\nculture. In fact, in the early modern period, they were often so similar in terms of the\ninstruments they contained that they carried the same name. This material culture\nremained largely the same. A change took place at another level: the increasing\npresence of books and texts in laboratories and workshops populated by figures who\nmerged artisanal and scholarly cultures. This book suggests that this shift in\nworkshop culture facilitated the epistemic exchanges between alchemists and producers of the decorative arts.\nAcknowledgements\nThis book was conceived and written in dialogue with an exhibition project \u201cArt\nand Alchemy. The Mystery of Transformation.\u201d The exhibition is on view at the\nMuseum Kunstpalast in Du\u0308sseldorf from April to August 2014. I would like to]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=122\nPages: 122\nareas. But this corresponds with the interconnected nature of these fields, as\npreviously outlined: early modern concepts of metallogenesis must be understood\nas a mixture of religious connotations, their dependency on antique montanistic\ntheories as well as on alchemical lore adopted through medieval Islamic mediation.\nBeyond that, a work of art communicates in different ways than a text. The object\ntransforms the know how of the artisan as it is performed in the working process and\nblends it with the lore of the scholar into embodied, visual knowledge. This\nknowledge, encapsulated in the work of art can then be exhibited in the surroundings of the ruler, in his Kunstkammer collection as well as in processions and\ncourtly festivities.47 It is\u2014apart from instruments to measure natural phenomena,\nwhich Baird puts in the focus of his analysis \u2014not \u2018useful\u2019 in the sense that it\nembodied knowledge which can be used to gain and widen existent knowledge. But]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=206\nPages: 206\nof those materials, even though other artisans were making use of them. The failure\nwas thus not connected to any form of geological predetermination, but entirely by\nsocial constraints limiting the application of knowledge to the problem.\nThe speculation that porcelain was comprised of either special clay, fermented\nfor generations, or of crushed shell incorporated in its manufacture, was a direct\nindication that similar materials were outside the realm of contemporary craft\nknowledge.14 In order to successfully move past these limitations, the experimental\ntechniques of the natural philosophers allowed objects from China to serve as\nprototypes for interrogation towards their properties and composition. It is at this\npoint that the techniques employed by chymistry, some borrowed from metallurgical assaying and the furnaces of the glassmakers in the centuries-long discourse\nbetween the disciplines, came into full application in the pursuit of ceramic\ninnovation.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=79\nPages: 79\nThis context applies not only to metallurgical assaying but, more generally, it\ndefines the area of the \u2018perfective arts\u2019, including all arts that use fire to work and\ntransform matter.13 In this trading zone, where Latin was scarcely known and where\ncompetition with alchemists was felt more keenly, a sub-group of artisans, artists\nand engineers kept their distance from alchemy to define a new field of \u2018chemical\ntechnology\u2019.14\nArtisanal processes could be seen as a sort of \u2018melting pot\u2019 of interwoven\npractical and theoretical knowledge coming from the world of crafts, including\nalchemy. It is prevalently in the world of artisans that we find references to\n\u2018chemical activity\u2019 during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. Before there\nwere signs of a laboratory as a separate place\u2014the most ancient plans to build a\nchemical laboratory are in the Astronomiae instauratae mechanica (Wandsbek,]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=65\nPages: 65\nParticular interest in the empirical aspects of the technical procedures is also\nmore perceptible within alchemical instructions, in comparison to artistic recipes.\nThe former pay greater attention to the chemical aspects of the craft process they\ndetail and describe more precisely each stage of the transformation of matter, from\noriginal to final (and more perfect) form. Whereas artists such as painters were\ninterested in the physical appearance of their materials, alchemists were more\ninterested in the fundamental changes that might occur within the matter. This\ncould perhaps be related to Paul of Taranto\u2019s description in the Theorica et practica\nof primary and secondary qualities and the distinct ways artists and alchemists\nworked on substances. He considered artists capable of producing only \u2018extrinsic\u2019\nor external changes as they operate on secondary or \u2018artificial\u2019 qualities such as\ncolors. In contrast, alchemical attempts to manipulate primary qualities transmute]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=204\nPages: 204\nby the Benedictine monk Theophilus, thoroughly introduces the full range of\nartisanal productions valued in Europe in its first book.6 Pottery is entirely absent\nfrom this discussion of laudable arts and only appears once in the text as a canvas\nfor enameling.7 This is a continuation of pottery\u2019s position in the classical period,\nwhen earthen objects were valued as trade goods, everyday wares, or a medium for\nother decoration, not for their individual aesthetic form.8\nIt was not until advancements in the production of luxury quality European\npottery during the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries that the cultural perception of\nthe material changed significantly, driving engagement by the upper classes and\nnatural philosophers. An example can be found in a letter from Lorenzo de Medici\n(1449\u20131492) to the Malatesta family in 1490, favorably comparing their gift of\nmaiolica to silver objects, which is one of the earliest pieces of documentary\n4\nBiringuccio, Pirotechnia (1942), 392.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=65\nPages: 65\ncolors. In contrast, alchemical attempts to manipulate primary qualities transmute\nsubstances intrinsically and operate fundamental change.58\nAccordingly, alchemical recipes also dedicate a large part of their text to the\ndescription of chemical apparatus, tools and containers. These writings pay particular\nattention to the use of a variety of containers and receptacles and their specific\npurposes. Moreover, in several manuscripts, such as Seidel, Vienna Ms. 5224 or\nCod. Helm. 627 from Wolfenbu\u0308ttel (to cite but a few), the text is punctuated by\nillustrations of these (Fig. 2). This is rare, if not non-existent in artistic instructions.\nThese last distinguishing features of alchemical, as opposed to art-technological\ntexts, go hand in hand with the fact that practical alchemy relies on theoretical\n(or speculative) principles. Quite often, these recipes should be seen and understood\nas experientia which are meant to serve as a rational demonstration of a preceding\ntheorica.59]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=83\nPages: 83,84\n26\nThese admonitions against alchemy, presented for the first time by Avicenna, were known\nduring the Middle Ages as sciant artifices, see Avicenna, De congelatione et conglutinatione\nlapidum, 53\u20135; Newman, \u201cTechnology and Alchemical Debate.\u201d; and Halleux, \u201cAlchimiste et\nl\u2019essayeur,\u201d 211.\nArtisanal Processes and Epistemological Debate in the Works of Leonardo. . .\n61\nLeonardo\u2019s manuscripts are one of the best sources to study the chemical\nequipment of Renaissance. His tireless sketching during his entire career produced\na very large and uncommon collection of manuscripts that allow us to understand\nand visualize many tools, instruments and chemical processes studied, developed\nand used during the Renaissance.\nAn activity that was a sort of flywheel in involving Leonardo in the study of the\nmany aspects of bronze casting was the project of the Equestrian monument for\nFrancesco Sforza. This was a very large bronze statue that was never cast but]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=81\nPages: 81\nactivity: heating systems, smelting furnaces, cucurbits, alembics and balanced\nscales (Fig. 1).21 Alchemists used the same technological apparatuses and devices\nas artisans and alchemical research was often carried out along with chemical and\nmetallurgical activities, for instance, at the Fonderia by the Medici family in\nFlorence, or several other places in sixteenth- and seventeenth-century Europe.22\nLeonardo and the \u2018Chemical\u2019 Arts\nVery rarely have historians seen Leonardo from the perspective of his direct\ninvolvement in the chemicals arts. Apart from Ladislao Reti and a few others,\nLeonardo\u2019s observations and studies on matter transformation are usually seen in\nthe context of his natural philosophy, with few references to his practical involvement as a painter and engineer during his entire career, including his vision and\nrelationship with occult science and alchemy.23\nIf we focus our attention on Leonardo\u2019s notes and drawings about substance]"]}

{"result":["[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=11\nPages: 11\nfurnaces and fire in which \u201cchemical\u201d operations were performed were also\nknown as laboratories. For example, the places in which sixteenth-century producers of fireworks developed their materials were called laboratories.9 In terms of\nmaterial culture the laboratorium, for example, one designed and equipped by\nCount Wolfgang II von Hohenlohe-Weidersheim (1546\u20131610) in the early seventeenth century, was remarkably similar to the workplaces of apothecaries, metalworkers and glassmakers.10\nBefore the emergence of mercantilist states, Renaissance courts were the most\nimportant agents in establishing laboratories. The laboratories of Rudolf II (1552\u2013\n1612) in Prague and Landgrave Moritz von Hessen-Kassel (1572\u20131632) were\nthought to bring material and intellectual rewards.11 Moritz even founded a chair\nof chymiatria at the University of Marburg in 1609.12 The teaching of Johannes\nHartmann (1561\u20131631), who was appointed to the chair, included work in the]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=17\nPages: 17,18\nat Renaissance courts. Laboratories and artisanal workshops shared a material\n25\nSee also Pietsch, \u201cTschirnhaus,\u201d and Klein, \u201cChemical Experts.\u201d\nIntroduction\nxvii\nculture. In fact, in the early modern period, they were often so similar in terms of the\ninstruments they contained that they carried the same name. This material culture\nremained largely the same. A change took place at another level: the increasing\npresence of books and texts in laboratories and workshops populated by figures who\nmerged artisanal and scholarly cultures. This book suggests that this shift in\nworkshop culture facilitated the epistemic exchanges between alchemists and producers of the decorative arts.\nAcknowledgements\nThis book was conceived and written in dialogue with an exhibition project \u201cArt\nand Alchemy. The Mystery of Transformation.\u201d The exhibition is on view at the\nMuseum Kunstpalast in Du\u0308sseldorf from April to August 2014. I would like to]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=185\nPages: 185\nYou would really be astonished if you saw the supplies, instruments, and beautiful order of\nthe laboratories! He [Grill] and his wife now spend the nights in the new lodgings so that\nthey can be with the workers morning and evening; the building is progressing quickly, but\nso much construction nevertheless requires a reasonable amount of time.15\nGrill also displayed his knowledge and experience by critiquing several\nchymical processes that the chymical entrepreneur Johann Rudolf Glauber\n(c.1604\u20131670) had boasted about and endeavored to sell.16 In particular, Grill\ndetermined that Glauber\u2019s process for separating gold and silver \u201cdoes not excel\nthat which is customary to him [Grill] in regard to either the labor or the cost.\u201d\nGrill\u2019s own method, which he probably developed in the course of his assaying\nwork, used special vessels (made of gold!) to limit breakage and loss and cleverly\nrecovered and recycled the acid necessary for the process, thus cutting costs by]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=20\nPages: 20\nPrinceton: Princeton University Press.\nSmith, Pamela H. 2004. The Body of the Artisan: Art and Experience in the Scientific Revolution.\nChicago: University of Chicago Press.\nSmith, Pamela H. 2006. Laboratories. In The Cambridge History of Science, 7 vols,\nvol. 3, Early Modern Science, eds. Lorraine Daston and Katharine Park, 289\u2013305. Cambridge:\nCambridge University Press.\nSoukup, Rudolf Werner, and Helmut Mayer. 1997. Alchemistisches Gold: Paracelsistische\nPharmaka: Laboratoriumstechnik im 16. Jahrhundert. Chemiegeschichtliche und arch\u20ac\naometrische Untersuchungen am Inventar des Laboratoriums von Oberstockstall/Kirchberg am\nWagram. Vienna: Bohlau Verlag.\nSoukop, Rudolf Werner, Sigrid von Osten, and Helmut Mayer. 1993. Alembics, Cucurbits, Phials,\nCrucibles: A 16th-Century Docimastic Laboratory Excavated in Austria. Ambix 40: 25.\nWerrett, Simon. 2010. Fireworks: Pyrotechnic Arts and Sciences in European History.\nChicago/London: University of Chicago Press.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=198\nPages: 198\nneat division of artisan and natural philosopher emerges considerably blurred.\nThe diversity of characters within the network and their various connections and\ncollaborations revises still-prevalent views of alchemical laborers as characteristically solitary, secretive, and isolated. Indeed, when we consider the reports of\nGrill\u2019s multiple laboratories staffed with at least 16 operators, it is hard not to recall\nthe contemporaneous depictions of chymical laboratories in Netherlandish genre\npainting that almost always depict a foregrounded main experimenter with a group\nof other workers in the background tending various processes. While there are\ncertainly purely stylistic and iconographic motivations behind such depictions\n(similar layouts are used in other genre paintings not showing chymists), the\naccounts of Grill\u2019s workshop do add a level of verisimilitude to these artistic\nrepresentations that we might not otherwise have attributed to them. The image]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=11\nPages: 11\nHartmann (1561\u20131631), who was appointed to the chair, included work in the\nlaboratory, likewise established at the university. Courts also developed workplaces\nin which the work of artisans could be tested. Most famously, in the 1670s, Johann\nJoachim Becher (1635\u20131682) proposed the establishment of a Kunst- und\nWerckhaus at the court in Vienna.13 It would have included several different sorts\nof manufactures: porcelain making, silk and wool weaving, the production of\nmedicines and glassmaking. Chemical laboratories were to form the core of the\n8\nKlein, \u201cLaboratory Challenge,\u201d and \u201cApothecary Shops.\u201d For the dissociation of experimental\nphilosophy from the alchemical laboratory, see Shapin, \u201cHouse of Experiment.\u201d\n9\nWerrett, Fireworks, 29\u201330.\n10\nWeyer, Graf Wolfgang II. von Hohenlohe. For material culture of laboratories, see also Osten,\nAlchemistenlaboratorium Oberstockstall; Soukup & Mayer, Alchemistisches Gold, and the shorter]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=133\nPages: 133\nThe first room housed the dispensary, where medicines were weighed and\npacked before shipment. It was also here that raw material arrived to be transformed\nin the fonderia. The dispensary was fitted with cabinets, a counter with two scales,\nspoons and funnels, a bench and storage cases. This room was the only one\naccessible to people who did not belong to the fonderia.10 The three following\nrooms included a terrace, a \u2018tower\u2019 (a blast furnace) and other furnaces, and housed\na complete set of copper distillation tools: eight bains-marie, stoves, plates with\ncovers, basins, bell-jars, mortars and many other small instruments.11 These were\n8\nOn scientific illustration in late sixteenth-century Florence, see Ligozzi, I ritratti; Tongiorgi\nTomasi & Tosi, \u201cFlora e Pomona\u201d; Bassani Pacht et al., Marie de Me\u0301dicis; and Garfagnini,\nFirenze e la Toscana, vol. II. Some of those objects conceived by clock-makers and scientific]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=79\nPages: 79\nchemical laboratory are in the Astronomiae instauratae mechanica (Wandsbek,\n1598) by Tycho Brahe (1546\u20131601) and in the Commentariorum alchymiae (Frankfurt, 1606) by Andreas Libavius (1560\u20131616), \u2018chemical operations\u2019 could be\nfound everywhere \u2018perfective arts\u2019 were practiced.15 This was in alchemist\u2019s\nlaboratories, such as the one in Schloss Oberstockstall (Austria) in the sixteenth\ncentury, and assaying workshops, described in the anonymous Probierbuchlein\n11\nHalleux, \u201cAlchimiste et l\u2019essayeur.\u201d; and Nummedal, Alchemy and Authority, 85\u201391.\nFor more on the technical cultural context in the history of science and technology, see Zilsel,\nSocial Origins of Modern Science; Maccagni, \u201cLeggere, scrivere e disegnare\u201d; Galluzzi, \u201cPortraits\nof Machines; Smith, Body of the Artisan; Halleux, Savoir de la main, 102\u201339; and Long, Artisan/\nPractitioners, 10\u201329.\n13\nNewman, Promethean Ambitions, 17\u201320.\n14\nLong, Artisan/Practitioners, 94\u20136. See also, Galison, \u201cTrading Zone.\u201d\n15]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=19\nPages: 19\nEarly Industrialisation, eds. Lissa Roberts, Simon Schaffer, and Peter Dear, 247\u2013276. Amsterdam: Koninklijke Nederlandse Akademie van Wetenschappen.\nKlein, Ursula. 2008. The Laboratory Challenge: Some Revisions of the Standard View of\nEarly Modern Experimentation. Isis 99: 769\u2013782.\nKlein, Ursula. 2012. Artisanal-Scientific Experts in Eighteenth-Century France and Germany.\nAnnals of Science 69: 303\u2013306.\nKlein, Ursula. 2013. Chemical Experts at the Royal Prussian Porcelain Manufactory. Ambix 60:\n99\u2013121.\nKlein, Ursula. Forthcoming. Depersonalizing the Arcanum. Technology and Culture.\nLibavius, Andreas. 1606. Commentariorum alchymiae Andreae Libavii Med. D. Pars prima,\nsex libris declarata. In Alchymia. Andreae Libavii recognita, emendata, et aucta. Frankfurt:\nJ Saurius.\nLong, Pamela O. 2011. Artisan/Practitioners and the Rise of the New Sciences, 1400\u20131600.\nCorvallis: Oregon State University Press.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=10\nPages: 10\nBy the early modern period, the alchemist had acquired a specific place of work.\nAccording to Pamela Smith, by the mid-sixteenth century, these laboratories were\nreferred to formally as laboratorium and officina.6 The ubiquity of furnaces and the\nuse of fire demanded a specific workplace, whereas experimental philosophy still\nlacked specific places of experimentation in the seventeenth century. Laboratories\nwere associated with secretive practices. When in the early seventeenth century\nAndreas Libavius described the ideal workplace of the chemist, he emphasized how\nit differed from the dark, smelly, secretive laboratory that was noticeably lacking in\ndecorum:\nWe do not want the chemist to neglect the exercises of piety or exempt himself from other\nduties of an upright life, simply pining away amidst his dark furnaces [. . .]. Thus we are not\ngoing to devise from him just a chymeion or laboratory to use as a private study and]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=11\nPages: 11,12\nAlchemistenlaboratorium Oberstockstall; Soukup & Mayer, Alchemistisches Gold, and the shorter\nreport, Soukop, Osten & Mayer, \u201cAlembics, Cucurbits, Phials,\u201d 25; Howard, La Bibliothe\u0300que et le\nlaboratoire; Pereira, \u201cUtili segreti\u201d; Rouaze, \u201cAtelier de distillation\u201d; and Joly, \u201cLaboratoire\nalchimique.\u201d\n11\nAmong the numerous publications on court alchemy, see two foundational studies: Moran,\nThe Alchemical World; and Evans, Rudolf II.\n12\nGanzenmu\u0308ller, \u201cDas chemische Laboratorium.\u201d\n13\nSmith, Business of Alchemy, 190\u20138.\nIntroduction\nxi\nhouse. These laboratories were intended to specialize in salts and acids used in the\nproduction of mineral dyes. Becher envisioned that the manufacture and export of\nthese dyes would finance the other operations of the Kunst- und Werckhaus. He also\nenvisaged the house attracting artisans from various crafts and that it would\nfunction as a deposit of recipes and descriptions of techniques. Trained artisans]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=80\nPages: 80,79\n14\nLong, Artisan/Practitioners, 94\u20136. See also, Galison, \u201cTrading Zone.\u201d\n15\nHannaway, \u201cLaboratory Design.\u201d\n12\nArtisanal Processes and Epistemological Debate in the Works of Leonardo. . .\n57\n(1513), in Biringuccio\u2019s Pirotechnia, and in Agricola\u2019s De re metallica.16 Further\nnascent signs of a distinct and autonomous chemical laboratory with purpose-built\n\u2018chemical\u2019 equipment can be found in the more general context of the Renaissance\nartist\u2019s workshop culture. Here, together with the fine arts such as painting, sculpture, architecture and jewelry making, metal carpentry, and gun casting, we find\noperations that use substance transformation, such as distillation and sublimation.\nThere is evidence that even the most important names in the history of art were\ninvolved in such workshop activities, for instance Michelangelo (1475\u20131564),\nwhose Florentine workshop, as mentioned in his correspondence with his brother,\nwas involved in generic metal carpentry such as the casting and welding of]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=191\nPages: 191\nmore broadly metallic, and thereby elevated himself to a high social and financial\nsituation. Not only was Anthoni capable of designing, carrying out, and improving\npractical productive processes, but he also operated at a higher epistemic level,\nreading the books of at least Paracelsus (1493\u20131541) and Glauber and designing\ntherefrom new experiments and processes propria\u0302 meditatione and propria\u0302\nindustria\u0302. From his initial profession of silver- and goldsmithing and the associated\ncraft of assaying, Grill kept expanding his horizons and expertise to engage in\nsophisticated and sometimes collaborative chymical projects that reached all the\nway to that summum bonum, the preparation of the Philosophers\u2019 Stone, and he\ndesigned and built substantial and costly laboratories for his processes and explorations. The knowledge embodied in these workspaces and their instruments were\nundoubtedly transmitted to his coworkers and laborants, and certainly to Glauber]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=173\nPages: 173\nalchemical laboratory. The small, limping man with a stick looks like Don Antonio:\nhe is holding a luminescent substance probably taken from the furnace, with a\nnipper in his right hand. Next to Antonio we see an elegantly dressed older man,\nprobably the superintendent of the laboratory, who is looking at the substance held\nby Antonio. The open door on the left shows the beginning of a descending\nstaircase, suggesting that the laboratory was on the first floor. The rest of\nNapoletano\u2019s workshop offers the usual picture of an alchemical laboratory, with\nits disorderly arrangement of equipment, its furnace in a poor state, and its dirty\nfloor. Whether authentic or not, Napoletano\u2019s representation strongly suggests that\nby 1619, at the height of Galileo\u2019s success, the activities promoted in the Casino\nwere still an important feature of Medici scientific patronage. However, in comparison to the Francesco dominated era, the chemical arts seem to have lost their]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=11\nPages: 11\ncontinuing laboratory tradition reaching into the eighteenth century.8 According to\nKlein, in contrast to experimental philosophy, work in the laboratory was characterized by continuous experimentation with material substances. The material\nculture supporting this laboratory work remained largely unchanged. The exception\nis the material equipment for transmutational alchemy and the making of the\nPhilosophers\u2019 Stone, which generally disappeared from laboratories together with\ntransmutational alchemy itself in the eighteenth century. Laboratories were places\nin which the study of nature and technical innovation went hand in hand.\nAs already mentioned, the term \u201claboratory\u201d was not only used to refer to the\nworkplace of the alchemist. All workplaces in which \u201cchemical\u201d operations were\nperformed were known as laboratories, and as such, artisanal workshops with\nfurnaces and fire in which \u201cchemical\u201d operations were performed were also]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=184\nPages: 184\n13270\u2013B)\nreports that Grill\u2019s decision to purchase the property on the Looiersgracht arose\nfrom their collaborative project for extracting silver from tin for which Moriaen\u2019s\nown furnace was found to be \u201ctoo narrow and feeble.\u201d Yet Grill\u2019s aspirations went\nmuch further than this one project, for he set up on the property, besides his\nlodgings, six laboratories [laboratoria]\nnot so much indeed for our work as for his own, this same work, I say, which he has\ndiscovered with his own thoughts from reading partly Paracelsus and partly Glauber [. . .].\nHe knows besides how to draw gold or silver out of any talc, just as the talc is disposed and\nendowed by nature. This knowledge indeed spawned such boldness that he did not hesitate\nto spend 25,000 guilders or more in buying the estate and in erecting things necessary for\nthe work, and he is sparing no labor in completing them as quickly as possible, and is\nleaving no stone unturned.14\n14]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=128\nPages: 128,127\nMagliabechiano (Magl.); Archivio di Stato di Firenze (ASF); Guardaroba Medicea (GM);\ninsertion (ins.); Depositeria Generale (DG); Mediceo del Principato (MDP).\nF. Kieffer (*)\nDepartment of Art History, Centre d\u2019E\u0301tudes Supe\u0301rieures de la Renaissance, Tours, France\ne-mail: fannykieffer@hotmail.com\nS. Dupre\u0301 (ed.), Laboratories of Art, Archimedes 37,\n105\nDOI 10.1007/978-3-319-05065-2_5, \u00a9 Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014\n106\nF. Kieffer\nFig. 1 Map of the second floor of the Uffizi with the Fonderia, Piante de\u2019 palazzi, giardini, ville\net altre fabbriche dell\u2019Altezza Reale del Serenissimo Granducato di Toscana, Ferdinando\nRuggieri. 1742 (manuscript) (Courtesy of Biblioteca Nazionale Centrale Firenze, Florence)\nsuccessor, Grand Duke Ferdinando I de\u2019 Medici (1549\u20131609), took up the baton\nand developed the laboratories and workshops further.\nAmong the first laboratories to be installed was a fonderia (foundry) in the west]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=178\nPages: 178\nand financial success. Grill built large laboratories, managed laborants, engaged in\ncollaborations, mined texts for information, and shared results. Several Parisian\ngoldsmiths were likewise tied into this chymical network where they exchanged\nexperimental and theoretical information with such figures as Kenelm Digby,\nSamuel Cottereau Duclos, and Johann Rudolf Glauber. In England, George Starkey\nfound that the expertise of gold- and silversmiths could, alternatively, be inconvenient when trying to sell alchemical metals. The documentation provided here blurs\nthe boundary between artisans and natural philosophers, at least in chymistry.\nAlchemy, or to speak more inclusively and less anachronistically, chymistry was a\nfamiliar topic in early modern Europe. Despite its well-established culture of\nsecrecy, it was not only highly visible and widely-known, but widely-practiced]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=16\nPages: 16\nBeretta, were also early examples of such places of exchange, followed by many\nother European courts. These workplaces facilitated the exchange of materials\nbetween alchemy and the arts, and the attraction of the courts also made artisans\nadopt alchemical language to elevate the status of their craft. However, above all,\nthese court laboratories made possible, well beyond a shared material culture, the\nexchange of people and knowledge between the arts and alchemy. Although there is\na long tradition of experimentation in alchemy and the boundaries between alchemy\nand art technologies were fluid from the very beginnings of alchemy in Antiquity, in\nthe sixteenth and seventeenth centuries artisans became more deeply involved in\nalchemical pursuits, and some crafts relied on chemical expertise offered by\nscholars trained as alchemists.22 Above all, texts and books, products and symbols\nof scholarly culture, played an increasingly important role in laboratories and]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=201\nPages: 201,202\ntechnology and innovation. The principal focus is on the adoption of specific\nM. Wesley (*)\nDepartment of History, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK\ne-mail: thenex@mac.com\nS. Dupre\u0301 (ed.), Laboratories of Art, Archimedes 37,\n181\nDOI 10.1007/978-3-319-05065-2_8, \u00a9 Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014\n182\nM. Wesley\nchymical practices in early modern ceramic innovation that lead to a drastic\nreshaping of the experimental landscape. While many adopted practices flowed\nseamlessly between the two disciplines through shared tools and techniques developed by generations of practitioners working with fire, the specific nature of\nceramics forced adaptations on other practices. Elements borrowed from controversial chymical fire analysis found more specific application in investigating\nthermal qualities of ceramic bodies in laboratory experimentation. Used in ceramic]"]}

{"result":["[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=48\nPages: 48,49\nof Alchemy.\u201d\n4\nHalleux, \u201cAlchimie,\u201d 336\u20137; Newman, \u201cTechnology and Alchemical Debate,\u201d 432\u20133; Pereira,\n\u201cUse of Vernacular Languages,\u201d 336; and Kahn, Alchimie et paracelsisme, 7\u20138.\n5\nHalleux, Savoir de la main, 134.\n2\nTransmission of Alchemical and Artistic Knowledge in German Mediaeval and. . .\n25\nof base or impure matter (often metal or stone) into a noble or perfect one.6 To do\nso, alchemists used to perform chemical processes and manipulations which resembled those practiced by contemporary artists and artisans.\nThus, in both fields particular importance is placed on craft practices. Both\nalchemical and artistic recipe books describe various processes for purifying and\ntransforming materials, either for improving their properties or in order to use them\nfor specific purposes. In this context, from a technological point of view, the term\n\u2018transmutation\u2019 could refer to the colouring of glass, the melting and tinting of]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=65\nPages: 65\nParticular interest in the empirical aspects of the technical procedures is also\nmore perceptible within alchemical instructions, in comparison to artistic recipes.\nThe former pay greater attention to the chemical aspects of the craft process they\ndetail and describe more precisely each stage of the transformation of matter, from\noriginal to final (and more perfect) form. Whereas artists such as painters were\ninterested in the physical appearance of their materials, alchemists were more\ninterested in the fundamental changes that might occur within the matter. This\ncould perhaps be related to Paul of Taranto\u2019s description in the Theorica et practica\nof primary and secondary qualities and the distinct ways artists and alchemists\nworked on substances. He considered artists capable of producing only \u2018extrinsic\u2019\nor external changes as they operate on secondary or \u2018artificial\u2019 qualities such as\ncolors. In contrast, alchemical attempts to manipulate primary qualities transmute]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=47\nPages: 47\nfraught with difficulty. Alchemy can be defined as the \u2018art of transmutation\u2019,\nreferring to the perfection of base or impure matter (often metal or stone) into\nperfect substances. Alchemical procedures thus rely on artisanal/craft practices.\nAny overlap between alchemy and art-technological procedures can be explained\nby the use of identical materials and substances. Both are concerned with the\ndescription of colours\u2014especially in processes of change, the making of pigments,\nthe production of artificial gemstones, the imitation of gold and silver and the\ntransmutation of materials. Both require procedures involving precise and specifically defined actions, prescriptions and ingredients. So both ultimately use identical\nrhetorical formulations that reflect a \u2018step by step\u2019 procedure. Assuming that\nalchemical and artistic texts have the same textual format, raises the question: did\nthey also have the same types of production and dissemination? Using a corpus of]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=51\nPages: 51\nprocedure for executing the transition from one colour to another, through the steps\nof the alchemical process. Another example is provided by the terms \u2018mercury\u2019 and\n\u2018sulfur\u2019. According to the context, these may alternatively designate the common\nsubstances used for making vermilion or the two principles of which all metals were\nthought to be composed in different proportions.19\nThus, both artistic practices and alchemy required procedures involving precise\nand specifically defined actions, prescriptions and ingredients. So both used an\nidentical rhetorical recipe formulation that reflects a \u2018step by step\u2019 procedure.\nAssuming that alchemical and artistic texts have the same format and were\nassembled within the same sort of compilation raises the question: were they\nproduced, diffused and read by the same people? Previous research has demonstrated that investigating questions related to the authorship and the context of]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=83\nPages: 83,84\n26\nThese admonitions against alchemy, presented for the first time by Avicenna, were known\nduring the Middle Ages as sciant artifices, see Avicenna, De congelatione et conglutinatione\nlapidum, 53\u20135; Newman, \u201cTechnology and Alchemical Debate.\u201d; and Halleux, \u201cAlchimiste et\nl\u2019essayeur,\u201d 211.\nArtisanal Processes and Epistemological Debate in the Works of Leonardo. . .\n61\nLeonardo\u2019s manuscripts are one of the best sources to study the chemical\nequipment of Renaissance. His tireless sketching during his entire career produced\na very large and uncommon collection of manuscripts that allow us to understand\nand visualize many tools, instruments and chemical processes studied, developed\nand used during the Renaissance.\nAn activity that was a sort of flywheel in involving Leonardo in the study of the\nmany aspects of bronze casting was the project of the Equestrian monument for\nFrancesco Sforza. This was a very large bronze statue that was never cast but]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=121\nPages: 121,122\nchemical lore concerning material properties and agency. It is important to note,\n45\n46\nZilsel, \u201cRoots\u201d; Smith, Body of the Artisan; and Long, Artisan/Practitioners.\nNewman, Promethean Ambitions, ch. III, 34\u2013114.\nArtificial Interventions in the Natural Form of Things: Shared. . .\n99\nthat the procedures applied by an alchemist and by a goldsmith are in large parts the\nsame: both required the know how to purify metals, to isolate them from the mixed\nmineral forms they are found in and transform them into massive pure metals. Both\nthe alchemist and the goldsmith share the same theoretical concepts, assuming that\nsulphur and quicksilver are the two original components of all metals. By alloying\nthese metals, by forcing them into forms, both locate their actions within the context\nof natural metallogenesis and both suppose, that they thereby imitate God and his\ncreative processes. But it is hard to prove that the goldsmith followed the same]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=14\nPages: 14\nconcern with the same materials and artisanal processes. The focus on chromatic\ntransformation already found in the Papyri continues in fifteenth-century recipes.\nAlthough related to laboratory practices, Neven emphasizes that these recipe\ncollections are the products of scribal compilation and copying processes. Words\nand works are equally important elements of alchemical practices.15 Next to\nlaboratories, medieval religious institutions were also important sites of alchemical\nand art technological practice. However, as Neven points out, this does not exclude\nthat some scribes, such as the Benedictine monk Wolfgang Seidel (1491\u20131562),\ntried out recipes.\nThe scope of alchemy was from its very beginnings contested, and remained so\nthroughout its long history. Especially its boundaries with art technology were fluid.\nThroughout the Middle Ages and the Renaissance, the distinction between alchemy\nas strictly goldmaking and a more encompassing definition overlapping with art]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=48\nPages: 48,47\n23\n24\nS. Neven\nwritings describe processes for the manufacture, preparation and application of\nvarious types of materials and substances. The majority are anonymous compilations of texts, which may originate from older or undetermined authorities.\nHundreds of such collections of recipes dealing both with alchemical and\nart-technological procedures were produced and disseminated in Northern Europe\nfrom the fourteenth century on, especially in German-speaking countries.\nDrawing on a delimited corpus of about 40 representative German manuscripts\ndated from the fourteenth to the sixteenth century, this paper investigates the\nconnections and similarities between these two fields and examines the various\nways alchemical and artistic instructions were embedded within recipe books.1 It\nargues that textual form and lexical proximities within recipes from these different\ndisciplines may lead to association, contamination and confusion within this textual]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=13\nPages: 13\nusing materials and chemical procedures to make both everyday items and objects\nof the visual and decorative arts, the activity known as alchemy encompassed more\nthan attempts to make gold.14 Transmutational alchemy was about the transmutation of all base metals into more noble ones, but chrysopoeia was only one\naspect of alchemy. Alchemy also touched on medicine and chemical manufacture.\nIt was about the chemical production of things\u2014medicines, porcelain, dyes, and\nother products as well as the precious metals\u2014and about the knowledge of how to\nproduce them. In this sense, \u201cart technologies\u201d\u2014materials and techniques to make\nart and knowledge of these materials and techniques\u2014overlapped with alchemy.\nAlchemy has deep roots in writings on material transformation from Antiquity.\nThe productive knowledge associated with material transformation was written\ndown in recipe books. The Leiden and Stockholm Papyri date to the third century]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=48\nPages: 48\nYet, alchemy could be described as the practical, philosophical and medical search\nfor the perfecting of base material substances and also for the extending of life.3\nThe theoretical and practical aspects of alchemy involve both the study of all\ninanimate or animate things made from the elements and the observation and\nimitation of natural processes within the laboratory.4 In this context, alchemy\ncould be seen as a mechanical art, in the sense that it works on matter but is also\na liberal art, as it attempts to explain matter in its composition and its transformation.5 In the practical sense, one of the main goals of alchemy is the transmutation\n1\nThe main data and characteristics of these manuscripts are given in Appendix.\nBrewer, Fr. Rogeri Bacon, 39\u201340.\n3\nPerception and definition of alchemy is not chronologically constant and has been the subject of\nseveral (re)interpretations since the eighteenth century, see Principe & Newman, \u201cHistoriography\nof Alchemy.\u201d\n4]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=65\nPages: 65\ncolors. In contrast, alchemical attempts to manipulate primary qualities transmute\nsubstances intrinsically and operate fundamental change.58\nAccordingly, alchemical recipes also dedicate a large part of their text to the\ndescription of chemical apparatus, tools and containers. These writings pay particular\nattention to the use of a variety of containers and receptacles and their specific\npurposes. Moreover, in several manuscripts, such as Seidel, Vienna Ms. 5224 or\nCod. Helm. 627 from Wolfenbu\u0308ttel (to cite but a few), the text is punctuated by\nillustrations of these (Fig. 2). This is rare, if not non-existent in artistic instructions.\nThese last distinguishing features of alchemical, as opposed to art-technological\ntexts, go hand in hand with the fact that practical alchemy relies on theoretical\n(or speculative) principles. Quite often, these recipes should be seen and understood\nas experientia which are meant to serve as a rational demonstration of a preceding\ntheorica.59]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=81\nPages: 81\nactivity: heating systems, smelting furnaces, cucurbits, alembics and balanced\nscales (Fig. 1).21 Alchemists used the same technological apparatuses and devices\nas artisans and alchemical research was often carried out along with chemical and\nmetallurgical activities, for instance, at the Fonderia by the Medici family in\nFlorence, or several other places in sixteenth- and seventeenth-century Europe.22\nLeonardo and the \u2018Chemical\u2019 Arts\nVery rarely have historians seen Leonardo from the perspective of his direct\ninvolvement in the chemicals arts. Apart from Ladislao Reti and a few others,\nLeonardo\u2019s observations and studies on matter transformation are usually seen in\nthe context of his natural philosophy, with few references to his practical involvement as a painter and engineer during his entire career, including his vision and\nrelationship with occult science and alchemy.23\nIf we focus our attention on Leonardo\u2019s notes and drawings about substance]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=79\nPages: 79\nthe field of \u2018science and technology of matter\u2019.\nIf we focus our attention on all the artisanal processes of substance transformation known and practiced during the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries it is easy to\nshow that they do not fit perfectly within the domain traced by alchemy. This\nepistemological tension is usually neutralized by saying that alchemical and metallurgical disciplines are intricately interwoven and alchemists were involved in the\ndevelopment of metallurgy.11 If one supposes chemistry did not exist as an independent and autonomous discipline before the end of the seventeenth century then\nspeaking on this topic from a historical perspective in an Italian technical cultural\ncontext, some \u2018superior artisans\u2019 or \u2018artist-engineers\u2019 can be seen as having distanced themselves from alchemy by relocating its technology inside a new epistemological context in which chemical arts were developed and codified separately.12]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=77\nPages: 77\nAgricola talked about a generic art of metal as a separate activity from alchemy:\n\u201cBut concerning the art of alchemy, if it be an art, I will speak further elsewhere. I\nwill now return to the art of mining.\u201d7\nWhen talking about chemistry in the Renaissance we have to consider a variegated tradition of non-mechanical arts where chemical processes developed: pharmacy, metallurgy, glass making, dyeing, spirits distillation, agriculture cultivations\nand the preparation of colours for painting and drawing; each of these professional\nactivities involve chemical processes that are not necessarily involved in alchemical transmutation. The difference between the purpose of chemical arts and\nalchemy was also the cause of cultural and epistemological tension during the\nMiddle Ages and Renaissance. The medieval technological debate during the\nfifteenth and sixteenth centuries went beyond the traditional Quaestio de alchimia]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=64\nPages: 64\nexample is the proportion of mercury and sulphur proposed by mediaeval recipes\nfor the production of vermilion which is invariably incorrect.56 Very rarely are the\ncorrect chemical proportions cited.\nIn parallel, alchemical writings may involve the use of symbols or metaphors to\ndesignate substances and practices. In consequence, the way an alchemical recipe\nwas received would depend on the degree of experience of the reader-practitioner\nreading it. On the one hand, the (sometimes) metaphorical or codified language\nas well as the approximations stressed the arcane nature of these recipes and\ncontributed to their secrecy. On the other hand, the omitted information may have\nbeen complemented by data only known to some readers and not recorded by the\ncopyist who conserves only the essential part of the recipe. If so then this kind of\nrecipe was only meant to be accessible and useable by those practitioners who could\neasily fill in the lacuna that punctuated the text of the recipe.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=62\nPages: 62\n163v), both at the beginning and the end of two distinct treatises.\nAlchemical texts are also sometimes situated alongside an artists\u2019 recipe book,\neither before or after. If this is the case, they will be found next to technical\ninstructions dedicated to procedures similar to those described in an alchemical\ncontext, such as the imitation of gold or silver, the gilding of stones or glass, the\nmanufacture of vermilion, the purification of ultramarine, the melting of stones or\nmetals, or several dyeing procedures. The alchemical content may be delimited\nwithin the title(s), chapter(s) or table of contents or \u2018physically\u2019 circumscribed by a\nfolio or a quire. But, in most cases, there is no obvious delimitation between the two\ndistinct collections of recipes. For example, in Nuremberg Germanisches\n54\nIdentified as \u2018hand\u2019 4 in the catalogue notes, he is responsible for fol. 31v, 38r\u2013120v, 123r\u2013143r,\n153r\u2013157v, 160r\u2013163r.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=65\nPages: 65\nas experientia which are meant to serve as a rational demonstration of a preceding\ntheorica.59\nConclusion\nExamination of the processes of making, compiling and disseminating this corpus\nof mediaeval and premodern recipe books provides us with information concerning\ntheir nature and former function. One the one hand, it has been established that\nthese manuscripts were mostly written in religious centres and that they are largely\nthe result of the copying process undertaken by scribes. Moreover, within these\nbooks, alchemical and artistic recipes were frequently recorded alongside a wide\nrange of various\u2014and a priori unrelated\u2014subjects which may have been written\nby the same person. Both the context of their production and the similarities in\n58\nNewman, \u201cTechnology and Alchemical Debate,\u201d 434, 442\u20135. The author largely relies on Paul\nof Taranto, Theorica et practica, Paris, BN, Lat. 7159, fol. 1r\u201355r for which he delivers a partial\nedition and translation.\n59]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=178\nPages: 178\nand financial success. Grill built large laboratories, managed laborants, engaged in\ncollaborations, mined texts for information, and shared results. Several Parisian\ngoldsmiths were likewise tied into this chymical network where they exchanged\nexperimental and theoretical information with such figures as Kenelm Digby,\nSamuel Cottereau Duclos, and Johann Rudolf Glauber. In England, George Starkey\nfound that the expertise of gold- and silversmiths could, alternatively, be inconvenient when trying to sell alchemical metals. The documentation provided here blurs\nthe boundary between artisans and natural philosophers, at least in chymistry.\nAlchemy, or to speak more inclusively and less anachronistically, chymistry was a\nfamiliar topic in early modern Europe. Despite its well-established culture of\nsecrecy, it was not only highly visible and widely-known, but widely-practiced]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=79\nPages: 79\nThis context applies not only to metallurgical assaying but, more generally, it\ndefines the area of the \u2018perfective arts\u2019, including all arts that use fire to work and\ntransform matter.13 In this trading zone, where Latin was scarcely known and where\ncompetition with alchemists was felt more keenly, a sub-group of artisans, artists\nand engineers kept their distance from alchemy to define a new field of \u2018chemical\ntechnology\u2019.14\nArtisanal processes could be seen as a sort of \u2018melting pot\u2019 of interwoven\npractical and theoretical knowledge coming from the world of crafts, including\nalchemy. It is prevalently in the world of artisans that we find references to\n\u2018chemical activity\u2019 during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. Before there\nwere signs of a laboratory as a separate place\u2014the most ancient plans to build a\nchemical laboratory are in the Astronomiae instauratae mechanica (Wandsbek,]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=200\nPages: 200,199\nApproaches and Divergent Deployments. In Rethinking the Scientific Revolution,\ned. Margaret J. Osler, 201\u2013220. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.\nPrincipe, Lawrence M. 2013a. The Secrets of Alchemy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.\nGoldsmiths and Chymists: The Activity of Artisans Within Alchemical Circles\n179\nPrincipe, Lawrence M. 2013b. Sir Kenelm Digby and His Alchemical Circle in 1650s Paris: Newly\nDiscovered Manuscripts. Ambix 60: 3\u201324.\nPrincipe, Lawrence M., and Lloyd DeWitt. 2002. Transmutations: Alchemy in Art. Philadelphia:\nChemical Heritage Foundation.\nSmith, Pamela H. 2000. Vital Spirits: Redemption, Artisanship, and the New Philosophy in Early\nModern Europe. In Rethinking the Scientific Revolution, ed. Margaret J. Osler, 119\u2013135.\nCambridge: Cambridge University Press.\nSmith, Pamela H. 2004. The Body of the Artisan: Art and Experience in the Scientific Revolution.\nChicago: University of Chicago Press.]"]}

{"result":["[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=48\nPages: 48,49\nof Alchemy.\u201d\n4\nHalleux, \u201cAlchimie,\u201d 336\u20137; Newman, \u201cTechnology and Alchemical Debate,\u201d 432\u20133; Pereira,\n\u201cUse of Vernacular Languages,\u201d 336; and Kahn, Alchimie et paracelsisme, 7\u20138.\n5\nHalleux, Savoir de la main, 134.\n2\nTransmission of Alchemical and Artistic Knowledge in German Mediaeval and. . .\n25\nof base or impure matter (often metal or stone) into a noble or perfect one.6 To do\nso, alchemists used to perform chemical processes and manipulations which resembled those practiced by contemporary artists and artisans.\nThus, in both fields particular importance is placed on craft practices. Both\nalchemical and artistic recipe books describe various processes for purifying and\ntransforming materials, either for improving their properties or in order to use them\nfor specific purposes. In this context, from a technological point of view, the term\n\u2018transmutation\u2019 could refer to the colouring of glass, the melting and tinting of]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=65\nPages: 65\nParticular interest in the empirical aspects of the technical procedures is also\nmore perceptible within alchemical instructions, in comparison to artistic recipes.\nThe former pay greater attention to the chemical aspects of the craft process they\ndetail and describe more precisely each stage of the transformation of matter, from\noriginal to final (and more perfect) form. Whereas artists such as painters were\ninterested in the physical appearance of their materials, alchemists were more\ninterested in the fundamental changes that might occur within the matter. This\ncould perhaps be related to Paul of Taranto\u2019s description in the Theorica et practica\nof primary and secondary qualities and the distinct ways artists and alchemists\nworked on substances. He considered artists capable of producing only \u2018extrinsic\u2019\nor external changes as they operate on secondary or \u2018artificial\u2019 qualities such as\ncolors. In contrast, alchemical attempts to manipulate primary qualities transmute]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=47\nPages: 47\nfraught with difficulty. Alchemy can be defined as the \u2018art of transmutation\u2019,\nreferring to the perfection of base or impure matter (often metal or stone) into\nperfect substances. Alchemical procedures thus rely on artisanal/craft practices.\nAny overlap between alchemy and art-technological procedures can be explained\nby the use of identical materials and substances. Both are concerned with the\ndescription of colours\u2014especially in processes of change, the making of pigments,\nthe production of artificial gemstones, the imitation of gold and silver and the\ntransmutation of materials. Both require procedures involving precise and specifically defined actions, prescriptions and ingredients. So both ultimately use identical\nrhetorical formulations that reflect a \u2018step by step\u2019 procedure. Assuming that\nalchemical and artistic texts have the same textual format, raises the question: did\nthey also have the same types of production and dissemination? Using a corpus of]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=51\nPages: 51\nprocedure for executing the transition from one colour to another, through the steps\nof the alchemical process. Another example is provided by the terms \u2018mercury\u2019 and\n\u2018sulfur\u2019. According to the context, these may alternatively designate the common\nsubstances used for making vermilion or the two principles of which all metals were\nthought to be composed in different proportions.19\nThus, both artistic practices and alchemy required procedures involving precise\nand specifically defined actions, prescriptions and ingredients. So both used an\nidentical rhetorical recipe formulation that reflects a \u2018step by step\u2019 procedure.\nAssuming that alchemical and artistic texts have the same format and were\nassembled within the same sort of compilation raises the question: were they\nproduced, diffused and read by the same people? Previous research has demonstrated that investigating questions related to the authorship and the context of]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=83\nPages: 83,84\n26\nThese admonitions against alchemy, presented for the first time by Avicenna, were known\nduring the Middle Ages as sciant artifices, see Avicenna, De congelatione et conglutinatione\nlapidum, 53\u20135; Newman, \u201cTechnology and Alchemical Debate.\u201d; and Halleux, \u201cAlchimiste et\nl\u2019essayeur,\u201d 211.\nArtisanal Processes and Epistemological Debate in the Works of Leonardo. . .\n61\nLeonardo\u2019s manuscripts are one of the best sources to study the chemical\nequipment of Renaissance. His tireless sketching during his entire career produced\na very large and uncommon collection of manuscripts that allow us to understand\nand visualize many tools, instruments and chemical processes studied, developed\nand used during the Renaissance.\nAn activity that was a sort of flywheel in involving Leonardo in the study of the\nmany aspects of bronze casting was the project of the Equestrian monument for\nFrancesco Sforza. This was a very large bronze statue that was never cast but]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=121\nPages: 121,122\nchemical lore concerning material properties and agency. It is important to note,\n45\n46\nZilsel, \u201cRoots\u201d; Smith, Body of the Artisan; and Long, Artisan/Practitioners.\nNewman, Promethean Ambitions, ch. III, 34\u2013114.\nArtificial Interventions in the Natural Form of Things: Shared. . .\n99\nthat the procedures applied by an alchemist and by a goldsmith are in large parts the\nsame: both required the know how to purify metals, to isolate them from the mixed\nmineral forms they are found in and transform them into massive pure metals. Both\nthe alchemist and the goldsmith share the same theoretical concepts, assuming that\nsulphur and quicksilver are the two original components of all metals. By alloying\nthese metals, by forcing them into forms, both locate their actions within the context\nof natural metallogenesis and both suppose, that they thereby imitate God and his\ncreative processes. But it is hard to prove that the goldsmith followed the same]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=14\nPages: 14\nconcern with the same materials and artisanal processes. The focus on chromatic\ntransformation already found in the Papyri continues in fifteenth-century recipes.\nAlthough related to laboratory practices, Neven emphasizes that these recipe\ncollections are the products of scribal compilation and copying processes. Words\nand works are equally important elements of alchemical practices.15 Next to\nlaboratories, medieval religious institutions were also important sites of alchemical\nand art technological practice. However, as Neven points out, this does not exclude\nthat some scribes, such as the Benedictine monk Wolfgang Seidel (1491\u20131562),\ntried out recipes.\nThe scope of alchemy was from its very beginnings contested, and remained so\nthroughout its long history. Especially its boundaries with art technology were fluid.\nThroughout the Middle Ages and the Renaissance, the distinction between alchemy\nas strictly goldmaking and a more encompassing definition overlapping with art]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=48\nPages: 48,47\n23\n24\nS. Neven\nwritings describe processes for the manufacture, preparation and application of\nvarious types of materials and substances. The majority are anonymous compilations of texts, which may originate from older or undetermined authorities.\nHundreds of such collections of recipes dealing both with alchemical and\nart-technological procedures were produced and disseminated in Northern Europe\nfrom the fourteenth century on, especially in German-speaking countries.\nDrawing on a delimited corpus of about 40 representative German manuscripts\ndated from the fourteenth to the sixteenth century, this paper investigates the\nconnections and similarities between these two fields and examines the various\nways alchemical and artistic instructions were embedded within recipe books.1 It\nargues that textual form and lexical proximities within recipes from these different\ndisciplines may lead to association, contamination and confusion within this textual]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=13\nPages: 13\nusing materials and chemical procedures to make both everyday items and objects\nof the visual and decorative arts, the activity known as alchemy encompassed more\nthan attempts to make gold.14 Transmutational alchemy was about the transmutation of all base metals into more noble ones, but chrysopoeia was only one\naspect of alchemy. Alchemy also touched on medicine and chemical manufacture.\nIt was about the chemical production of things\u2014medicines, porcelain, dyes, and\nother products as well as the precious metals\u2014and about the knowledge of how to\nproduce them. In this sense, \u201cart technologies\u201d\u2014materials and techniques to make\nart and knowledge of these materials and techniques\u2014overlapped with alchemy.\nAlchemy has deep roots in writings on material transformation from Antiquity.\nThe productive knowledge associated with material transformation was written\ndown in recipe books. The Leiden and Stockholm Papyri date to the third century]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=48\nPages: 48\nYet, alchemy could be described as the practical, philosophical and medical search\nfor the perfecting of base material substances and also for the extending of life.3\nThe theoretical and practical aspects of alchemy involve both the study of all\ninanimate or animate things made from the elements and the observation and\nimitation of natural processes within the laboratory.4 In this context, alchemy\ncould be seen as a mechanical art, in the sense that it works on matter but is also\na liberal art, as it attempts to explain matter in its composition and its transformation.5 In the practical sense, one of the main goals of alchemy is the transmutation\n1\nThe main data and characteristics of these manuscripts are given in Appendix.\nBrewer, Fr. Rogeri Bacon, 39\u201340.\n3\nPerception and definition of alchemy is not chronologically constant and has been the subject of\nseveral (re)interpretations since the eighteenth century, see Principe & Newman, \u201cHistoriography\nof Alchemy.\u201d\n4]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=65\nPages: 65\ncolors. In contrast, alchemical attempts to manipulate primary qualities transmute\nsubstances intrinsically and operate fundamental change.58\nAccordingly, alchemical recipes also dedicate a large part of their text to the\ndescription of chemical apparatus, tools and containers. These writings pay particular\nattention to the use of a variety of containers and receptacles and their specific\npurposes. Moreover, in several manuscripts, such as Seidel, Vienna Ms. 5224 or\nCod. Helm. 627 from Wolfenbu\u0308ttel (to cite but a few), the text is punctuated by\nillustrations of these (Fig. 2). This is rare, if not non-existent in artistic instructions.\nThese last distinguishing features of alchemical, as opposed to art-technological\ntexts, go hand in hand with the fact that practical alchemy relies on theoretical\n(or speculative) principles. Quite often, these recipes should be seen and understood\nas experientia which are meant to serve as a rational demonstration of a preceding\ntheorica.59]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=81\nPages: 81\nactivity: heating systems, smelting furnaces, cucurbits, alembics and balanced\nscales (Fig. 1).21 Alchemists used the same technological apparatuses and devices\nas artisans and alchemical research was often carried out along with chemical and\nmetallurgical activities, for instance, at the Fonderia by the Medici family in\nFlorence, or several other places in sixteenth- and seventeenth-century Europe.22\nLeonardo and the \u2018Chemical\u2019 Arts\nVery rarely have historians seen Leonardo from the perspective of his direct\ninvolvement in the chemicals arts. Apart from Ladislao Reti and a few others,\nLeonardo\u2019s observations and studies on matter transformation are usually seen in\nthe context of his natural philosophy, with few references to his practical involvement as a painter and engineer during his entire career, including his vision and\nrelationship with occult science and alchemy.23\nIf we focus our attention on Leonardo\u2019s notes and drawings about substance]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=79\nPages: 79\nthe field of \u2018science and technology of matter\u2019.\nIf we focus our attention on all the artisanal processes of substance transformation known and practiced during the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries it is easy to\nshow that they do not fit perfectly within the domain traced by alchemy. This\nepistemological tension is usually neutralized by saying that alchemical and metallurgical disciplines are intricately interwoven and alchemists were involved in the\ndevelopment of metallurgy.11 If one supposes chemistry did not exist as an independent and autonomous discipline before the end of the seventeenth century then\nspeaking on this topic from a historical perspective in an Italian technical cultural\ncontext, some \u2018superior artisans\u2019 or \u2018artist-engineers\u2019 can be seen as having distanced themselves from alchemy by relocating its technology inside a new epistemological context in which chemical arts were developed and codified separately.12]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=77\nPages: 77\nAgricola talked about a generic art of metal as a separate activity from alchemy:\n\u201cBut concerning the art of alchemy, if it be an art, I will speak further elsewhere. I\nwill now return to the art of mining.\u201d7\nWhen talking about chemistry in the Renaissance we have to consider a variegated tradition of non-mechanical arts where chemical processes developed: pharmacy, metallurgy, glass making, dyeing, spirits distillation, agriculture cultivations\nand the preparation of colours for painting and drawing; each of these professional\nactivities involve chemical processes that are not necessarily involved in alchemical transmutation. The difference between the purpose of chemical arts and\nalchemy was also the cause of cultural and epistemological tension during the\nMiddle Ages and Renaissance. The medieval technological debate during the\nfifteenth and sixteenth centuries went beyond the traditional Quaestio de alchimia]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=64\nPages: 64\nexample is the proportion of mercury and sulphur proposed by mediaeval recipes\nfor the production of vermilion which is invariably incorrect.56 Very rarely are the\ncorrect chemical proportions cited.\nIn parallel, alchemical writings may involve the use of symbols or metaphors to\ndesignate substances and practices. In consequence, the way an alchemical recipe\nwas received would depend on the degree of experience of the reader-practitioner\nreading it. On the one hand, the (sometimes) metaphorical or codified language\nas well as the approximations stressed the arcane nature of these recipes and\ncontributed to their secrecy. On the other hand, the omitted information may have\nbeen complemented by data only known to some readers and not recorded by the\ncopyist who conserves only the essential part of the recipe. If so then this kind of\nrecipe was only meant to be accessible and useable by those practitioners who could\neasily fill in the lacuna that punctuated the text of the recipe.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=62\nPages: 62\n163v), both at the beginning and the end of two distinct treatises.\nAlchemical texts are also sometimes situated alongside an artists\u2019 recipe book,\neither before or after. If this is the case, they will be found next to technical\ninstructions dedicated to procedures similar to those described in an alchemical\ncontext, such as the imitation of gold or silver, the gilding of stones or glass, the\nmanufacture of vermilion, the purification of ultramarine, the melting of stones or\nmetals, or several dyeing procedures. The alchemical content may be delimited\nwithin the title(s), chapter(s) or table of contents or \u2018physically\u2019 circumscribed by a\nfolio or a quire. But, in most cases, there is no obvious delimitation between the two\ndistinct collections of recipes. For example, in Nuremberg Germanisches\n54\nIdentified as \u2018hand\u2019 4 in the catalogue notes, he is responsible for fol. 31v, 38r\u2013120v, 123r\u2013143r,\n153r\u2013157v, 160r\u2013163r.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=65\nPages: 65\nas experientia which are meant to serve as a rational demonstration of a preceding\ntheorica.59\nConclusion\nExamination of the processes of making, compiling and disseminating this corpus\nof mediaeval and premodern recipe books provides us with information concerning\ntheir nature and former function. One the one hand, it has been established that\nthese manuscripts were mostly written in religious centres and that they are largely\nthe result of the copying process undertaken by scribes. Moreover, within these\nbooks, alchemical and artistic recipes were frequently recorded alongside a wide\nrange of various\u2014and a priori unrelated\u2014subjects which may have been written\nby the same person. Both the context of their production and the similarities in\n58\nNewman, \u201cTechnology and Alchemical Debate,\u201d 434, 442\u20135. The author largely relies on Paul\nof Taranto, Theorica et practica, Paris, BN, Lat. 7159, fol. 1r\u201355r for which he delivers a partial\nedition and translation.\n59]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=178\nPages: 178\nand financial success. Grill built large laboratories, managed laborants, engaged in\ncollaborations, mined texts for information, and shared results. Several Parisian\ngoldsmiths were likewise tied into this chymical network where they exchanged\nexperimental and theoretical information with such figures as Kenelm Digby,\nSamuel Cottereau Duclos, and Johann Rudolf Glauber. In England, George Starkey\nfound that the expertise of gold- and silversmiths could, alternatively, be inconvenient when trying to sell alchemical metals. The documentation provided here blurs\nthe boundary between artisans and natural philosophers, at least in chymistry.\nAlchemy, or to speak more inclusively and less anachronistically, chymistry was a\nfamiliar topic in early modern Europe. Despite its well-established culture of\nsecrecy, it was not only highly visible and widely-known, but widely-practiced]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=79\nPages: 79\nThis context applies not only to metallurgical assaying but, more generally, it\ndefines the area of the \u2018perfective arts\u2019, including all arts that use fire to work and\ntransform matter.13 In this trading zone, where Latin was scarcely known and where\ncompetition with alchemists was felt more keenly, a sub-group of artisans, artists\nand engineers kept their distance from alchemy to define a new field of \u2018chemical\ntechnology\u2019.14\nArtisanal processes could be seen as a sort of \u2018melting pot\u2019 of interwoven\npractical and theoretical knowledge coming from the world of crafts, including\nalchemy. It is prevalently in the world of artisans that we find references to\n\u2018chemical activity\u2019 during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. Before there\nwere signs of a laboratory as a separate place\u2014the most ancient plans to build a\nchemical laboratory are in the Astronomiae instauratae mechanica (Wandsbek,]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=200\nPages: 200,199\nApproaches and Divergent Deployments. In Rethinking the Scientific Revolution,\ned. Margaret J. Osler, 201\u2013220. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.\nPrincipe, Lawrence M. 2013a. The Secrets of Alchemy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.\nGoldsmiths and Chymists: The Activity of Artisans Within Alchemical Circles\n179\nPrincipe, Lawrence M. 2013b. Sir Kenelm Digby and His Alchemical Circle in 1650s Paris: Newly\nDiscovered Manuscripts. Ambix 60: 3\u201324.\nPrincipe, Lawrence M., and Lloyd DeWitt. 2002. Transmutations: Alchemy in Art. Philadelphia:\nChemical Heritage Foundation.\nSmith, Pamela H. 2000. Vital Spirits: Redemption, Artisanship, and the New Philosophy in Early\nModern Europe. In Rethinking the Scientific Revolution, ed. Margaret J. Osler, 119\u2013135.\nCambridge: Cambridge University Press.\nSmith, Pamela H. 2004. The Body of the Artisan: Art and Experience in the Scientific Revolution.\nChicago: University of Chicago Press.]"]}

{"result":["[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=120\nPages: 120\nartworks that imitate nature\u2019s processes. This seems to be the basic assumption that\nunderlies all early modern manipulation of and acting with metals: naturally formed\nminerals are presented in the Kunstkammern next to artificialia to exhibit not only\nthe mimicry skills of the artists to imitate the natural forms used as models, but also\nto imitate the natural processes. The discussion of early modern theories on\nmetallogenesis has shown, that the creative process of the human artist and artisan\nwas compared to the natural genesis of the divine artifex. The same primordial\nmatters are available to the goldsmith and the metalworker, to the alchemist and to\n\u2018nature\u2019. All four follow the same working processes, only their ability differentiates the final products. The juxtaposition of form and matter, which is thought of as\na dichotomy of active force-shaping power and passive shape-receiving material, is]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=122\nPages: 122\ncreative processes. But it is hard to prove that the goldsmith followed the same\nideas as the alchemist, because hardly any artisans recorded their approach in\nwritten form: the goldsmith\u2019s knowledge is working, not (alchemical) codified\nknowledge; an object, such as the Handstein might count as product, evidence\nand proof, but will always remain speechless and therefore will never entirely serve\n(in our modern understanding) as an eloquent advocate to support this assumption.\nThird, encapsulated knowledge: A work of art such as the Handstein is not\n\u2018narrative\u2019 in the sense that it develops one argument and discusses it in paratactical\nform. Such an artwork visualizes the variety of knowledge\u2014the theological, the\nmontanistic, the alchemical\u2014in a synoptical way. Rather than developing an\nargument in a logical manner, it emphasizes the interdependencies of different\nareas. But this corresponds with the interconnected nature of these fields, as]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=48\nPages: 48,47\n23\n24\nS. Neven\nwritings describe processes for the manufacture, preparation and application of\nvarious types of materials and substances. The majority are anonymous compilations of texts, which may originate from older or undetermined authorities.\nHundreds of such collections of recipes dealing both with alchemical and\nart-technological procedures were produced and disseminated in Northern Europe\nfrom the fourteenth century on, especially in German-speaking countries.\nDrawing on a delimited corpus of about 40 representative German manuscripts\ndated from the fourteenth to the sixteenth century, this paper investigates the\nconnections and similarities between these two fields and examines the various\nways alchemical and artistic instructions were embedded within recipe books.1 It\nargues that textual form and lexical proximities within recipes from these different\ndisciplines may lead to association, contamination and confusion within this textual]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=83\nPages: 83,84\n26\nThese admonitions against alchemy, presented for the first time by Avicenna, were known\nduring the Middle Ages as sciant artifices, see Avicenna, De congelatione et conglutinatione\nlapidum, 53\u20135; Newman, \u201cTechnology and Alchemical Debate.\u201d; and Halleux, \u201cAlchimiste et\nl\u2019essayeur,\u201d 211.\nArtisanal Processes and Epistemological Debate in the Works of Leonardo. . .\n61\nLeonardo\u2019s manuscripts are one of the best sources to study the chemical\nequipment of Renaissance. His tireless sketching during his entire career produced\na very large and uncommon collection of manuscripts that allow us to understand\nand visualize many tools, instruments and chemical processes studied, developed\nand used during the Renaissance.\nAn activity that was a sort of flywheel in involving Leonardo in the study of the\nmany aspects of bronze casting was the project of the Equestrian monument for\nFrancesco Sforza. This was a very large bronze statue that was never cast but]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=80\nPages: 80,79\n14\nLong, Artisan/Practitioners, 94\u20136. See also, Galison, \u201cTrading Zone.\u201d\n15\nHannaway, \u201cLaboratory Design.\u201d\n12\nArtisanal Processes and Epistemological Debate in the Works of Leonardo. . .\n57\n(1513), in Biringuccio\u2019s Pirotechnia, and in Agricola\u2019s De re metallica.16 Further\nnascent signs of a distinct and autonomous chemical laboratory with purpose-built\n\u2018chemical\u2019 equipment can be found in the more general context of the Renaissance\nartist\u2019s workshop culture. Here, together with the fine arts such as painting, sculpture, architecture and jewelry making, metal carpentry, and gun casting, we find\noperations that use substance transformation, such as distillation and sublimation.\nThere is evidence that even the most important names in the history of art were\ninvolved in such workshop activities, for instance Michelangelo (1475\u20131564),\nwhose Florentine workshop, as mentioned in his correspondence with his brother,\nwas involved in generic metal carpentry such as the casting and welding of]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=51\nPages: 51\nprocedure for executing the transition from one colour to another, through the steps\nof the alchemical process. Another example is provided by the terms \u2018mercury\u2019 and\n\u2018sulfur\u2019. According to the context, these may alternatively designate the common\nsubstances used for making vermilion or the two principles of which all metals were\nthought to be composed in different proportions.19\nThus, both artistic practices and alchemy required procedures involving precise\nand specifically defined actions, prescriptions and ingredients. So both used an\nidentical rhetorical recipe formulation that reflects a \u2018step by step\u2019 procedure.\nAssuming that alchemical and artistic texts have the same format and were\nassembled within the same sort of compilation raises the question: were they\nproduced, diffused and read by the same people? Previous research has demonstrated that investigating questions related to the authorship and the context of]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=122\nPages: 122\nareas. But this corresponds with the interconnected nature of these fields, as\npreviously outlined: early modern concepts of metallogenesis must be understood\nas a mixture of religious connotations, their dependency on antique montanistic\ntheories as well as on alchemical lore adopted through medieval Islamic mediation.\nBeyond that, a work of art communicates in different ways than a text. The object\ntransforms the know how of the artisan as it is performed in the working process and\nblends it with the lore of the scholar into embodied, visual knowledge. This\nknowledge, encapsulated in the work of art can then be exhibited in the surroundings of the ruler, in his Kunstkammer collection as well as in processions and\ncourtly festivities.47 It is\u2014apart from instruments to measure natural phenomena,\nwhich Baird puts in the focus of his analysis \u2014not \u2018useful\u2019 in the sense that it\nembodied knowledge which can be used to gain and widen existent knowledge. But]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=65\nPages: 65\nParticular interest in the empirical aspects of the technical procedures is also\nmore perceptible within alchemical instructions, in comparison to artistic recipes.\nThe former pay greater attention to the chemical aspects of the craft process they\ndetail and describe more precisely each stage of the transformation of matter, from\noriginal to final (and more perfect) form. Whereas artists such as painters were\ninterested in the physical appearance of their materials, alchemists were more\ninterested in the fundamental changes that might occur within the matter. This\ncould perhaps be related to Paul of Taranto\u2019s description in the Theorica et practica\nof primary and secondary qualities and the distinct ways artists and alchemists\nworked on substances. He considered artists capable of producing only \u2018extrinsic\u2019\nor external changes as they operate on secondary or \u2018artificial\u2019 qualities such as\ncolors. In contrast, alchemical attempts to manipulate primary qualities transmute]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=121\nPages: 121\nprocesses are blended together.\nIconographically speaking the vessel represents a model of the dichotomy of\nmale/female, form/matter: Adam and Eve embody this principle and simultaneously their action indicates the beginning of every human productive action.\nAfter the Fall, every human action is per definitionem a repetition of natural\ncreative processes. Embedded in the context of the miners and the general subject\nof minerals and their genesis and extraction, is the idea of God as creator of metals\nand the human propensity to imitate this processes\u2014whether in alchemical or\nartisanal ways.46\nSecond, the Handstein as product of working knowledge: This object has also a\nmaterial significance, because it is the product of applied (al)chemical knowledge.\nEvery piece of art emanating from the goldsmith\u2019s workshop is the embodiment of\nchemical lore concerning material properties and agency. It is important to note,\n45\n46]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=93\nPages: 93,94\nBiringuccio\u2019s original approach to the arts of fire emerges and that distinguishes\nhim, for instance, from Georg Agricola who, at almost the same time, wrote his De\nre metallica in which he outlined the general arts of metals related to mining and\nmetallurgy. Biringuccio expanded his perspective to include all the arts of fire,\nincluding, artillery, making gunpowder, acids preparation, pottery, goldsmithing,\nfireworks, generic distillation arts, as well as alchemy.44 If we accept his conditions,\n43\nSee Biringuccio, De la pirotechnia (1914), 27\u201340; Perifano, \u201cAlchimie\u201d; Smith, Body of the\nArtisan, 143\u20134; and Bernardoni, La conoscenza del fare, 669.\n44\nBiringuccio, De la pirotechnia (1977), fol. 123r\u20134r.\nArtisanal Processes and Epistemological Debate in the Works of Leonardo. . .\n71\nalchemy and pyrotechnics are not in contradiction, rather, in so far as they are used\nin the same philosophical concepts and the same operational practices, alchemy]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=47\nPages: 47\nfraught with difficulty. Alchemy can be defined as the \u2018art of transmutation\u2019,\nreferring to the perfection of base or impure matter (often metal or stone) into\nperfect substances. Alchemical procedures thus rely on artisanal/craft practices.\nAny overlap between alchemy and art-technological procedures can be explained\nby the use of identical materials and substances. Both are concerned with the\ndescription of colours\u2014especially in processes of change, the making of pigments,\nthe production of artificial gemstones, the imitation of gold and silver and the\ntransmutation of materials. Both require procedures involving precise and specifically defined actions, prescriptions and ingredients. So both ultimately use identical\nrhetorical formulations that reflect a \u2018step by step\u2019 procedure. Assuming that\nalchemical and artistic texts have the same textual format, raises the question: did\nthey also have the same types of production and dissemination? Using a corpus of]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=6\nPages: 6\nSylvie Neven\n23\nArtisanal Processes and Epistemological Debate in the Works of\nLeonardo Da Vinci and Vannoccio Biringuccio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\nAndrea Bernardoni\n53\nArtificial Interventions in the Natural Form of Things: Shared\nMetallogenetical Concepts of Goldsmiths and Alchemists . . . . . . . . . . . .\nHenrike Haug\n79\nThe Laboratories of Art and Alchemy at the Uffizi Gallery\nin Renaissance Florence: Some Material Aspects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105\nFanny Kieffer\nMaterial and Temporal Powers at the Casino di San Marco\n(1574\u20131621) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129\nMarco Beretta\nGoldsmiths and Chymists: The Activity of Artisans Within\nAlchemical Circles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 157\nLawrence M. Principe\nIgne refutata: Thermal Analysis in the Laboratory Practices]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=81\nPages: 81,82\nGombrich, \u201cLeonardo and the Magicians\u201d; Vasoli, Leonardo e l\u2019alchimia, 69\u201377; Kiang,\n\u201cLeonardo and Alchemy\u201d; Frosini, \u201cPittura come filosofia\u201d; Kemp, Leonardo da Vinci, 293\u2013\n329; Galluzzi, \u201cVinci\u2019s Concept of \u2018Nature\u2019,\u201d; Beretta, \u201cLeonardo and Lucretius\u201d; Bernardoni,\n\u201cElementi, sostanze naturali\u201d; and Nanni, \u201cLucrezio.\u201d For Leonardo\u2019s involvement in the chemical arts, see Schneider, Chemische Wissen Leonardo, 40\u20133, 87\u201392; Partington, History of Chemistry, vol. II, 1\u20138; Taylor, \u201cVinci et la chimie\u201d; Reti, \u201cArti chimiche di Leonardo\u201d (1952a; 1952b);\nBernardoni, \u201cLeonardo and the \u2018chemical arts\u2019,\u201d and Esplosioni, fusioni e trasmutazioni, 38\u201341.\nArtisanal Processes and Epistemological Debate in the Works of Leonardo. . .\n59\nFig. 1 D. Beccafumi,\nFoundry workshop;\ncourtesy of Accademia\nCarrara, Bergamo\ntension between mechanical arts and alchemy during the Renaissance period. His\nattention was specifically focused on alchemy\u2019s claims to overturn the relationship]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=79\nPages: 79\nThis context applies not only to metallurgical assaying but, more generally, it\ndefines the area of the \u2018perfective arts\u2019, including all arts that use fire to work and\ntransform matter.13 In this trading zone, where Latin was scarcely known and where\ncompetition with alchemists was felt more keenly, a sub-group of artisans, artists\nand engineers kept their distance from alchemy to define a new field of \u2018chemical\ntechnology\u2019.14\nArtisanal processes could be seen as a sort of \u2018melting pot\u2019 of interwoven\npractical and theoretical knowledge coming from the world of crafts, including\nalchemy. It is prevalently in the world of artisans that we find references to\n\u2018chemical activity\u2019 during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. Before there\nwere signs of a laboratory as a separate place\u2014the most ancient plans to build a\nchemical laboratory are in the Astronomiae instauratae mechanica (Wandsbek,]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=120\nPages: 120,121\na dichotomy of active force-shaping power and passive shape-receiving material, is\nof greatest importance with regard to God and his creation, which stands as a model\nboth for the visual artist as well as the alchemist, who tries to recreate natural\nprocesses according to his will.\n44\nZuccari, L\u2019idea [1607], Book I, ch. VII, 14. See also the facsimile reproduction Zuccari, Scritti\nd\u2019Arte (1961), 162.\n98\nH. Haug\nIt is not only difficult; it is almost impossible to compare the content of a written\ntext with the content of an object. But it seems inadequate to narrow early modern\nforms and methods of scientific display down to \u2018codified\u2019 knowledge: since the\n1920s a long line of historians of science have studied how the input of workmen\nchanged the methods of Renaissance natural philosophy towards a more matterbased natural scientific research and \u2018experiment\u2019. The concept of the \u2018superior\ncraftsmen\u2019, introduced by Edgar Zilsel in 1942, who started to interact with]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=80\nPages: 80\nvisited in Milan that discusses the organization of the workshop and the artisans\u2019\nawareness of the technological and epistemological value of their works:\n[. . .] So that whoever entered that shop and saw the activity of so many persons would, I\nthink, believe as I did that he had entered an Inferno, nay, on the contrary, a Paradise, where\nthere was a mirror in which sparkled all the beauty of genius and the power of art.19\nBiringuccio underlined the frenetic and very organized work in the workshop\nstressing the beauty of the mind of the artisans and the power of art. The harmonious cooperation between artisans and the plain consciousness of the processes of\nthe art transformed the hell of hard and dirty metallurgical work into the heaven of\nthe pursuit of the artistic goal. This oxymoron referred to the infernal and paradisiacal condition of art, exalting the extremely difficult process in which raw\nmaterial is transformed into artifact, giving back an important social value to]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=99\nPages: 99,100\nKemp, Martin. 1995. \u2018Wrought by No Artist\u2019s Hand\u2019: The Natural, the Artificial, the Exotic, and\nthe Scientific in Some Artifacts from the Renaissance. In Reframing the Renaissance: Visual\nCulture in Europe and Latin America, 1450\u20131650, ed. Claire Farago, 177\u2013196. New Haven:\nYale University Press.\nKemp, Martin. 2006. Leonardo da Vinci: The Marvellous Works of Nature and Man. Oxford:\nOxford University Press.\nKiang, Dawson. 1997. Leonardo and Alchemy: A Bibliographical Note. Achademia Leonardi\nVinci. Journal of Leonardo Studies & Bibliography of Vinciana 10: 199\u2013201.\nLennep, Jacques van. 1985. Alchimie: contribution a\u0300 l\u2019histoire de l\u2019art alchimique. Brussels:\nCre\u0301dit Communal de Belgique.\nLeonardo da Vinci. 1973\u20131980. Codice Atlantico, ed. Augusto Marinoni, 24 vols. Florence:\nGiunti.\nArtisanal Processes and Epistemological Debate in the Works of Leonardo. . .\n77\nLeonardo da Vinci. 1978\u20131980. Corpus of the Anatomical Studies in the Collection of Her Majesty]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=97\nPages: 97,98\nMechanical Marvels, 11\u201318; and Smith, Body of the Artisan, 142\u20139.\nArtisanal Processes and Epistemological Debate in the Works of Leonardo. . .\n75\nArnaud, E.R. 1655. Introduction a la chymie, ou a la vraye physique, ou\u0300 le lecteur treuvera la\ndefinition de toutes les operations de la chymie, etc. Lyon: Claude Post.\nAvicenna. 1927. De congelatione et conglutinatione lapidum, being sections of the Kitab al-Shifa/\nthe Latin and Arabic texts, eds. and trans. Eric John Holmyard and Desmond Christopher\nMandeville. Paris: Paul Geuthner.\nBeretta, Marco. 2010. Leonardo and Lucretius. In Rinascimento, ed. Leo S. Olschki, Series 2, Vol.\nXLIX, 341\u2013372.\nBernardoni, Andrea. 2007. La quaestio de alchimia nel De la pirotechnia di Vannoccio\nBiringuccio. In Atti del XII convegno nazionale di storia e fondamenti della chimica,\ned. Franco Calascibetta and Luigi Cerruti, 261\u2013276. Rome: Accademia dei LX.\nBernardoni, Andrea. 2009. Leonardo and the Equestrian Monument for Francesco Sforza: The]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=77\nPages: 77\nAgricola talked about a generic art of metal as a separate activity from alchemy:\n\u201cBut concerning the art of alchemy, if it be an art, I will speak further elsewhere. I\nwill now return to the art of mining.\u201d7\nWhen talking about chemistry in the Renaissance we have to consider a variegated tradition of non-mechanical arts where chemical processes developed: pharmacy, metallurgy, glass making, dyeing, spirits distillation, agriculture cultivations\nand the preparation of colours for painting and drawing; each of these professional\nactivities involve chemical processes that are not necessarily involved in alchemical transmutation. The difference between the purpose of chemical arts and\nalchemy was also the cause of cultural and epistemological tension during the\nMiddle Ages and Renaissance. The medieval technological debate during the\nfifteenth and sixteenth centuries went beyond the traditional Quaestio de alchimia]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=48\nPages: 48,49\nof Alchemy.\u201d\n4\nHalleux, \u201cAlchimie,\u201d 336\u20137; Newman, \u201cTechnology and Alchemical Debate,\u201d 432\u20133; Pereira,\n\u201cUse of Vernacular Languages,\u201d 336; and Kahn, Alchimie et paracelsisme, 7\u20138.\n5\nHalleux, Savoir de la main, 134.\n2\nTransmission of Alchemical and Artistic Knowledge in German Mediaeval and. . .\n25\nof base or impure matter (often metal or stone) into a noble or perfect one.6 To do\nso, alchemists used to perform chemical processes and manipulations which resembled those practiced by contemporary artists and artisans.\nThus, in both fields particular importance is placed on craft practices. Both\nalchemical and artistic recipe books describe various processes for purifying and\ntransforming materials, either for improving their properties or in order to use them\nfor specific purposes. In this context, from a technological point of view, the term\n\u2018transmutation\u2019 could refer to the colouring of glass, the melting and tinting of]"]}

{"result":["[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=120\nPages: 120\nartworks that imitate nature\u2019s processes. This seems to be the basic assumption that\nunderlies all early modern manipulation of and acting with metals: naturally formed\nminerals are presented in the Kunstkammern next to artificialia to exhibit not only\nthe mimicry skills of the artists to imitate the natural forms used as models, but also\nto imitate the natural processes. The discussion of early modern theories on\nmetallogenesis has shown, that the creative process of the human artist and artisan\nwas compared to the natural genesis of the divine artifex. The same primordial\nmatters are available to the goldsmith and the metalworker, to the alchemist and to\n\u2018nature\u2019. All four follow the same working processes, only their ability differentiates the final products. The juxtaposition of form and matter, which is thought of as\na dichotomy of active force-shaping power and passive shape-receiving material, is]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=122\nPages: 122\ncreative processes. But it is hard to prove that the goldsmith followed the same\nideas as the alchemist, because hardly any artisans recorded their approach in\nwritten form: the goldsmith\u2019s knowledge is working, not (alchemical) codified\nknowledge; an object, such as the Handstein might count as product, evidence\nand proof, but will always remain speechless and therefore will never entirely serve\n(in our modern understanding) as an eloquent advocate to support this assumption.\nThird, encapsulated knowledge: A work of art such as the Handstein is not\n\u2018narrative\u2019 in the sense that it develops one argument and discusses it in paratactical\nform. Such an artwork visualizes the variety of knowledge\u2014the theological, the\nmontanistic, the alchemical\u2014in a synoptical way. Rather than developing an\nargument in a logical manner, it emphasizes the interdependencies of different\nareas. But this corresponds with the interconnected nature of these fields, as]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=122\nPages: 122\nareas. But this corresponds with the interconnected nature of these fields, as\npreviously outlined: early modern concepts of metallogenesis must be understood\nas a mixture of religious connotations, their dependency on antique montanistic\ntheories as well as on alchemical lore adopted through medieval Islamic mediation.\nBeyond that, a work of art communicates in different ways than a text. The object\ntransforms the know how of the artisan as it is performed in the working process and\nblends it with the lore of the scholar into embodied, visual knowledge. This\nknowledge, encapsulated in the work of art can then be exhibited in the surroundings of the ruler, in his Kunstkammer collection as well as in processions and\ncourtly festivities.47 It is\u2014apart from instruments to measure natural phenomena,\nwhich Baird puts in the focus of his analysis \u2014not \u2018useful\u2019 in the sense that it\nembodied knowledge which can be used to gain and widen existent knowledge. But]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=48\nPages: 48,47\n23\n24\nS. Neven\nwritings describe processes for the manufacture, preparation and application of\nvarious types of materials and substances. The majority are anonymous compilations of texts, which may originate from older or undetermined authorities.\nHundreds of such collections of recipes dealing both with alchemical and\nart-technological procedures were produced and disseminated in Northern Europe\nfrom the fourteenth century on, especially in German-speaking countries.\nDrawing on a delimited corpus of about 40 representative German manuscripts\ndated from the fourteenth to the sixteenth century, this paper investigates the\nconnections and similarities between these two fields and examines the various\nways alchemical and artistic instructions were embedded within recipe books.1 It\nargues that textual form and lexical proximities within recipes from these different\ndisciplines may lead to association, contamination and confusion within this textual]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=65\nPages: 65\nParticular interest in the empirical aspects of the technical procedures is also\nmore perceptible within alchemical instructions, in comparison to artistic recipes.\nThe former pay greater attention to the chemical aspects of the craft process they\ndetail and describe more precisely each stage of the transformation of matter, from\noriginal to final (and more perfect) form. Whereas artists such as painters were\ninterested in the physical appearance of their materials, alchemists were more\ninterested in the fundamental changes that might occur within the matter. This\ncould perhaps be related to Paul of Taranto\u2019s description in the Theorica et practica\nof primary and secondary qualities and the distinct ways artists and alchemists\nworked on substances. He considered artists capable of producing only \u2018extrinsic\u2019\nor external changes as they operate on secondary or \u2018artificial\u2019 qualities such as\ncolors. In contrast, alchemical attempts to manipulate primary qualities transmute]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=83\nPages: 83,84\n26\nThese admonitions against alchemy, presented for the first time by Avicenna, were known\nduring the Middle Ages as sciant artifices, see Avicenna, De congelatione et conglutinatione\nlapidum, 53\u20135; Newman, \u201cTechnology and Alchemical Debate.\u201d; and Halleux, \u201cAlchimiste et\nl\u2019essayeur,\u201d 211.\nArtisanal Processes and Epistemological Debate in the Works of Leonardo. . .\n61\nLeonardo\u2019s manuscripts are one of the best sources to study the chemical\nequipment of Renaissance. His tireless sketching during his entire career produced\na very large and uncommon collection of manuscripts that allow us to understand\nand visualize many tools, instruments and chemical processes studied, developed\nand used during the Renaissance.\nAn activity that was a sort of flywheel in involving Leonardo in the study of the\nmany aspects of bronze casting was the project of the Equestrian monument for\nFrancesco Sforza. This was a very large bronze statue that was never cast but]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=80\nPages: 80,79\n14\nLong, Artisan/Practitioners, 94\u20136. See also, Galison, \u201cTrading Zone.\u201d\n15\nHannaway, \u201cLaboratory Design.\u201d\n12\nArtisanal Processes and Epistemological Debate in the Works of Leonardo. . .\n57\n(1513), in Biringuccio\u2019s Pirotechnia, and in Agricola\u2019s De re metallica.16 Further\nnascent signs of a distinct and autonomous chemical laboratory with purpose-built\n\u2018chemical\u2019 equipment can be found in the more general context of the Renaissance\nartist\u2019s workshop culture. Here, together with the fine arts such as painting, sculpture, architecture and jewelry making, metal carpentry, and gun casting, we find\noperations that use substance transformation, such as distillation and sublimation.\nThere is evidence that even the most important names in the history of art were\ninvolved in such workshop activities, for instance Michelangelo (1475\u20131564),\nwhose Florentine workshop, as mentioned in his correspondence with his brother,\nwas involved in generic metal carpentry such as the casting and welding of]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=93\nPages: 93,94\nBiringuccio\u2019s original approach to the arts of fire emerges and that distinguishes\nhim, for instance, from Georg Agricola who, at almost the same time, wrote his De\nre metallica in which he outlined the general arts of metals related to mining and\nmetallurgy. Biringuccio expanded his perspective to include all the arts of fire,\nincluding, artillery, making gunpowder, acids preparation, pottery, goldsmithing,\nfireworks, generic distillation arts, as well as alchemy.44 If we accept his conditions,\n43\nSee Biringuccio, De la pirotechnia (1914), 27\u201340; Perifano, \u201cAlchimie\u201d; Smith, Body of the\nArtisan, 143\u20134; and Bernardoni, La conoscenza del fare, 669.\n44\nBiringuccio, De la pirotechnia (1977), fol. 123r\u20134r.\nArtisanal Processes and Epistemological Debate in the Works of Leonardo. . .\n71\nalchemy and pyrotechnics are not in contradiction, rather, in so far as they are used\nin the same philosophical concepts and the same operational practices, alchemy]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=77\nPages: 77\nAgricola talked about a generic art of metal as a separate activity from alchemy:\n\u201cBut concerning the art of alchemy, if it be an art, I will speak further elsewhere. I\nwill now return to the art of mining.\u201d7\nWhen talking about chemistry in the Renaissance we have to consider a variegated tradition of non-mechanical arts where chemical processes developed: pharmacy, metallurgy, glass making, dyeing, spirits distillation, agriculture cultivations\nand the preparation of colours for painting and drawing; each of these professional\nactivities involve chemical processes that are not necessarily involved in alchemical transmutation. The difference between the purpose of chemical arts and\nalchemy was also the cause of cultural and epistemological tension during the\nMiddle Ages and Renaissance. The medieval technological debate during the\nfifteenth and sixteenth centuries went beyond the traditional Quaestio de alchimia]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=121\nPages: 121\nprocesses are blended together.\nIconographically speaking the vessel represents a model of the dichotomy of\nmale/female, form/matter: Adam and Eve embody this principle and simultaneously their action indicates the beginning of every human productive action.\nAfter the Fall, every human action is per definitionem a repetition of natural\ncreative processes. Embedded in the context of the miners and the general subject\nof minerals and their genesis and extraction, is the idea of God as creator of metals\nand the human propensity to imitate this processes\u2014whether in alchemical or\nartisanal ways.46\nSecond, the Handstein as product of working knowledge: This object has also a\nmaterial significance, because it is the product of applied (al)chemical knowledge.\nEvery piece of art emanating from the goldsmith\u2019s workshop is the embodiment of\nchemical lore concerning material properties and agency. It is important to note,\n45\n46]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=81\nPages: 81,82\nGombrich, \u201cLeonardo and the Magicians\u201d; Vasoli, Leonardo e l\u2019alchimia, 69\u201377; Kiang,\n\u201cLeonardo and Alchemy\u201d; Frosini, \u201cPittura come filosofia\u201d; Kemp, Leonardo da Vinci, 293\u2013\n329; Galluzzi, \u201cVinci\u2019s Concept of \u2018Nature\u2019,\u201d; Beretta, \u201cLeonardo and Lucretius\u201d; Bernardoni,\n\u201cElementi, sostanze naturali\u201d; and Nanni, \u201cLucrezio.\u201d For Leonardo\u2019s involvement in the chemical arts, see Schneider, Chemische Wissen Leonardo, 40\u20133, 87\u201392; Partington, History of Chemistry, vol. II, 1\u20138; Taylor, \u201cVinci et la chimie\u201d; Reti, \u201cArti chimiche di Leonardo\u201d (1952a; 1952b);\nBernardoni, \u201cLeonardo and the \u2018chemical arts\u2019,\u201d and Esplosioni, fusioni e trasmutazioni, 38\u201341.\nArtisanal Processes and Epistemological Debate in the Works of Leonardo. . .\n59\nFig. 1 D. Beccafumi,\nFoundry workshop;\ncourtesy of Accademia\nCarrara, Bergamo\ntension between mechanical arts and alchemy during the Renaissance period. His\nattention was specifically focused on alchemy\u2019s claims to overturn the relationship]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=79\nPages: 79\nThis context applies not only to metallurgical assaying but, more generally, it\ndefines the area of the \u2018perfective arts\u2019, including all arts that use fire to work and\ntransform matter.13 In this trading zone, where Latin was scarcely known and where\ncompetition with alchemists was felt more keenly, a sub-group of artisans, artists\nand engineers kept their distance from alchemy to define a new field of \u2018chemical\ntechnology\u2019.14\nArtisanal processes could be seen as a sort of \u2018melting pot\u2019 of interwoven\npractical and theoretical knowledge coming from the world of crafts, including\nalchemy. It is prevalently in the world of artisans that we find references to\n\u2018chemical activity\u2019 during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. Before there\nwere signs of a laboratory as a separate place\u2014the most ancient plans to build a\nchemical laboratory are in the Astronomiae instauratae mechanica (Wandsbek,]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=51\nPages: 51\nprocedure for executing the transition from one colour to another, through the steps\nof the alchemical process. Another example is provided by the terms \u2018mercury\u2019 and\n\u2018sulfur\u2019. According to the context, these may alternatively designate the common\nsubstances used for making vermilion or the two principles of which all metals were\nthought to be composed in different proportions.19\nThus, both artistic practices and alchemy required procedures involving precise\nand specifically defined actions, prescriptions and ingredients. So both used an\nidentical rhetorical recipe formulation that reflects a \u2018step by step\u2019 procedure.\nAssuming that alchemical and artistic texts have the same format and were\nassembled within the same sort of compilation raises the question: were they\nproduced, diffused and read by the same people? Previous research has demonstrated that investigating questions related to the authorship and the context of]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=203\nPages: 203,204\nthe decorative arts before the early modern period is worthwhile. Prior to its\ninteraction with chymistry, the relationship between the potter\u2019s craft and fire was\nprincipally of a mechanical, fixative nature. As the heat of the kiln was known to\nremove the water from earthen bodies, its ability to affect permanent transformation\non the materials placed in the kiln was its principal contribution to the success of\nceramic production. Those objects existed first as trade goods rather than artisanal\nobjects and only later became valued as aesthetic products. Vannoccio\nBiringuccio\u2019s (1480\u2013c.1539) introduction to his brief \u201cdiscourse on the art of the\npotter\u201d from his Pirotechnia of 1540, encapsulates both the recent recognition\nreceived by ceramic craft and its inseparability from fire:\n184\nM. Wesley\nHaving started to tell you of working potter\u2019s clay for making crucibles and shells, the wish\ncame to me to tell you of the practice of this art also. Although it may seem at first glance to]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=120\nPages: 120,121\na dichotomy of active force-shaping power and passive shape-receiving material, is\nof greatest importance with regard to God and his creation, which stands as a model\nboth for the visual artist as well as the alchemist, who tries to recreate natural\nprocesses according to his will.\n44\nZuccari, L\u2019idea [1607], Book I, ch. VII, 14. See also the facsimile reproduction Zuccari, Scritti\nd\u2019Arte (1961), 162.\n98\nH. Haug\nIt is not only difficult; it is almost impossible to compare the content of a written\ntext with the content of an object. But it seems inadequate to narrow early modern\nforms and methods of scientific display down to \u2018codified\u2019 knowledge: since the\n1920s a long line of historians of science have studied how the input of workmen\nchanged the methods of Renaissance natural philosophy towards a more matterbased natural scientific research and \u2018experiment\u2019. The concept of the \u2018superior\ncraftsmen\u2019, introduced by Edgar Zilsel in 1942, who started to interact with]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=80\nPages: 80\nvisited in Milan that discusses the organization of the workshop and the artisans\u2019\nawareness of the technological and epistemological value of their works:\n[. . .] So that whoever entered that shop and saw the activity of so many persons would, I\nthink, believe as I did that he had entered an Inferno, nay, on the contrary, a Paradise, where\nthere was a mirror in which sparkled all the beauty of genius and the power of art.19\nBiringuccio underlined the frenetic and very organized work in the workshop\nstressing the beauty of the mind of the artisans and the power of art. The harmonious cooperation between artisans and the plain consciousness of the processes of\nthe art transformed the hell of hard and dirty metallurgical work into the heaven of\nthe pursuit of the artistic goal. This oxymoron referred to the infernal and paradisiacal condition of art, exalting the extremely difficult process in which raw\nmaterial is transformed into artifact, giving back an important social value to]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=47\nPages: 47\nfraught with difficulty. Alchemy can be defined as the \u2018art of transmutation\u2019,\nreferring to the perfection of base or impure matter (often metal or stone) into\nperfect substances. Alchemical procedures thus rely on artisanal/craft practices.\nAny overlap between alchemy and art-technological procedures can be explained\nby the use of identical materials and substances. Both are concerned with the\ndescription of colours\u2014especially in processes of change, the making of pigments,\nthe production of artificial gemstones, the imitation of gold and silver and the\ntransmutation of materials. Both require procedures involving precise and specifically defined actions, prescriptions and ingredients. So both ultimately use identical\nrhetorical formulations that reflect a \u2018step by step\u2019 procedure. Assuming that\nalchemical and artistic texts have the same textual format, raises the question: did\nthey also have the same types of production and dissemination? Using a corpus of]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=6\nPages: 6\nSylvie Neven\n23\nArtisanal Processes and Epistemological Debate in the Works of\nLeonardo Da Vinci and Vannoccio Biringuccio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\nAndrea Bernardoni\n53\nArtificial Interventions in the Natural Form of Things: Shared\nMetallogenetical Concepts of Goldsmiths and Alchemists . . . . . . . . . . . .\nHenrike Haug\n79\nThe Laboratories of Art and Alchemy at the Uffizi Gallery\nin Renaissance Florence: Some Material Aspects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105\nFanny Kieffer\nMaterial and Temporal Powers at the Casino di San Marco\n(1574\u20131621) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129\nMarco Beretta\nGoldsmiths and Chymists: The Activity of Artisans Within\nAlchemical Circles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 157\nLawrence M. Principe\nIgne refutata: Thermal Analysis in the Laboratory Practices]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=14\nPages: 14\nconcern with the same materials and artisanal processes. The focus on chromatic\ntransformation already found in the Papyri continues in fifteenth-century recipes.\nAlthough related to laboratory practices, Neven emphasizes that these recipe\ncollections are the products of scribal compilation and copying processes. Words\nand works are equally important elements of alchemical practices.15 Next to\nlaboratories, medieval religious institutions were also important sites of alchemical\nand art technological practice. However, as Neven points out, this does not exclude\nthat some scribes, such as the Benedictine monk Wolfgang Seidel (1491\u20131562),\ntried out recipes.\nThe scope of alchemy was from its very beginnings contested, and remained so\nthroughout its long history. Especially its boundaries with art technology were fluid.\nThroughout the Middle Ages and the Renaissance, the distinction between alchemy\nas strictly goldmaking and a more encompassing definition overlapping with art]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=180\nPages: 180\nepistemic exchanges or collaborations on the level of practical or theoretical\nknowledge.\nDocumented examples of extended collaborations or exchanges between artisans and natural philosophers would be both more interesting and more informative\nfor mapping out the domains and dynamics of early modern alchemical practice. A\npromising locus for such study is to be found particularly among gold- and\nsilversmiths. On the one hand, their trade regularly involved chymical processes\nsuch as assaying, refining, and so forth, and they were thus more or less conversant\nwith chymical substances (acids, salts, metals, amalgams, etc.) and chymical\noperations (fusion, quartation, distillation, etc.) and would frequently have\nmaintained workshops equipped with the necessary equipment (furnaces, flues,\nfuel, retorts, crucibles, etc.) needed for chymical work generally. On the other\nhand, the basic materials of their artisanal labors\u2014gold and silver\u2014held a central\n5\nSee Smith, Body of the Artisan.]"]}

{"result":["[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=112\nPages: 112,113\nwerden.\u201d (Calw, Bergb\u20ac\nuchlein, 117\u20138).\n90\nH. Haug\naddition of sulphur into one specific metal.26 Agricola discusses both the Aristotelian theory of steam or vapour and the alchemical sulphur-mercury theory and\nrejects both. He states that the Earth\u2019s crust absorbs water and earthy matter, thus\ncreating a certain nobilis succus as kind of mineral liquid that sediments in the\ncorridors and chasms of the mountains, there forming metallic minerals.\nThe hitherto discussed sources of early modern writers on metallogenetic questions have demonstrated\u2014despite the abundance of variety in the existing concepts\u2014that one basic assumption is nearly always present. Almost all theories offer\na dualistic system that operates on the dichotomy of a primary passive substance\nacted on by a potent cause. The involved antagonists are matter and an active\nformative power, or in other words: a creator and a material in which the creation]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=112\nPages: 112\nfaith of the scholars sulphur and quicksilver. Several believe, that due to the orbit and\ninfluence of the heaven, exhalations and vapour of sulphur and quicksilver\u2014called\nexhalationes minerales\u2014were drawn up and, during their ascent under the influence of\nthe planets, connected in the chasms and gaps and were made into ores.25\nThe whole range of early modern competing ideas of metallogenesis is revealed\nwhen Ru\u0308lein of Calw in the very next sentence introduces a Ghur (also discussed in\nthe \u201cThird Sermon\u201d of Mathesius) as a kind of \u201chumid, cold, mucous, completely\nsulphur-free matter, which is extracted virtually as sweat of the earth\u201d as an equally\nvalid theory, a humid and mucilaginous element able to transmute under the\n24\n\u201cAstrologorum autem sententia est, errantes stellas influxu & viribus, quas exercent in materia,\nad id in terrae visceribus aptata, efficere metella: inerrantes vero gemmas. Quod figmentum]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=108\nPages: 108\nThe second part of Albertus\u2019s system is built by the efficient causes\u2014the agents\nor operators that cause the creation of minerals and metals from a still non-specific\nprimordial matter: Albertus takes the \u2018two exhalationes theory\u2019 of Aristotle and\nadjusts it a little, by equating dry smoke with sulphur and moist vapour with\nmercury. According to Aristotle there are two kinds of aeroform emanations\nwhich ascend from the middle of the earth to the surface. One of these exhalationes\nis a dry fume which transforms into earth and stones, the other a humid steam,\nwhich condenses into metals:\nWe maintain that there are two exhalations, one vaporous the other smoky, and there\ncorrespond two kinds of bodies that originate in the earth, \u2018fossils\u2019 and metals. The heat of\nthe dry exhalation is the cause of all \u2018fossils\u2019. Such stones cannot be melted [. . .]. The\nvaporous exhalation is the cause of all metals, those bodies which are either fusible or]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=111\nPages: 111\nThe early modern efforts to categorize the world and its substances, based on\nlarge collections of minerals and the improved material knowledge of the natural\nscientist, started to challenge these obsolete systems. This is evident in Mathesius\u2019s\n\u201cThird Sermon,\u201d where he names the planets and their connection and influence on\nthe seven main metals. He distinguishes gold, golden silver, silver, copper, iron,\nsteel, lead, tin, bismuth, mercury and spie\u00dfglas and thus clearly enumerates more\nthan seven metals. Mathesius\u2019s text probably refers to the writings of Agricola, who\nemphasises the autonomy of bismuth and who uses the addition of this eighth\nspecies to the main metals as his most powerful argument against the star-forming\ntheories of metals:\nAccording to the opinion of the astrologers, the planet is constantly under the influence of\nforces that work on suitable substances in the womb of the earth and this create the ores.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=194\nPages: 194\nto sunlight and/or moonlight and subterranean conditions continued within the\ngroup\u2014now at the hands of others, often more prominent natural philosophers,\nfor at least a decade after the initial report. Indeed, reports of the first results\nattracted the attention of several better-known members of the Parisian circle\u2014\nDuclos, Digby, and Boucaud at least\u2014who proposed modifications to it based on\ntheir own practical and theoretical knowledge; these suggestions may well have\nbeen transmitted back to the goldsmiths. For example, the initial insistence that\nparticular astrological conditions were necessary seems to have been debunked and\ndiscarded. Duclos, for his part, saw the experiment as a route to the Philosophers\u2019\nStone that he was seeking: \u201cI believe that this gold thus prepared, being dissolved in\nthe eau hyliale (hyleal water) extracted from antimony and mercury sublimate, one\npart upon six, and cooked according to art and the doctrine of the Cosmopolite,]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=112\nPages: 112\nor a materia prima, that is a more or less solid primordial matter, secondly one that\nproposes a kind of metal juice, called Ghur or nobilis succus and thirdly the\nAristotelian exhalationes, rising moist vapours from the centre of the earth. One\nor more forming causes affect these primordial matters that all have the potentiality\nto be transformed, so that at one point this matter mutates into one of the known\nspecific metals, and consequently the different ore-deposits were formed. For\nexample, in his Bergb\u20ac\nuchlein Ru\u0308lein of Calw mentions mineral vapours, remotely\nreminiscent of Aristotle and Albertus, that rise as evaporation from the inner earth\nand condense to form ore deposits in the corridors and chasms of the mountains. He\nthen changes direction and ties these exhalationes back to alchemical concepts:\nThe subordinated thing, the common matter of all metals is according to the opinion and\nfaith of the scholars sulphur and quicksilver. Several believe, that due to the orbit and]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=109\nPages: 109\nmetals.\nThe structure of the book and the line of his argumentation shows that Albertus\nat one point had to face the question of transmutation: if metals are formed from\nprimordial matter consisting of a mixture of the four elements, i.e. from a mixture of\nsulphur and mercury as substances in between the basic elements and the finished\nmetals, and if metals are constantly emerging as defined species, then this logically\nleads to a discussion of whether one metal can be transformed into another as the\nalchemists claim. Albertus does not totally dismiss the possibility of transmutation,\nbut\u2014as a follower of Aristotle\u2014accepts the theoretical possibility, without showing particular interest in this question, when he states:\nWe do not intend here to show how any one of these may be transmuted into another, or\nhow, by the remedy of that medicine the alchemists call the elixir, their diseases may be\ncured, or their occult properties made manifest, or conversely their manifest properties be]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=15\nPages: 15\nworked with the great alchemy like those masters who are engaged with precious and\nvaluable things, with silver and gold, and with similar metals. These masters can separate\nsilver and gold from other precious jewelry, and from other valuable colors which they can\nproduce. Now this master Berthold wanted to induce a golden coloration. For this he used\nsalpetre, sulphur, lead and oil. Then he put these ingredients in a container made of copper,\nwhich he sealed completely, exactly as it should be done, but when he put it on fire and the\ncontainer became hot, it burst into many pieces.19\nThe Feuerwerckbuch witnesses material production based on practical chemistry in\nterms borrowed from alchemical transmutation, or more precisely, the making of\ngold. The analogy was not always with chrysopoeia as such. Vasari\u2019s already\nmentioned fashioning of Van Eyck as an alchemist shows that the image of alchemy\nas a field of expert inquiry on materials and material transformation was considered]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=121\nPages: 121,122\nchemical lore concerning material properties and agency. It is important to note,\n45\n46\nZilsel, \u201cRoots\u201d; Smith, Body of the Artisan; and Long, Artisan/Practitioners.\nNewman, Promethean Ambitions, ch. III, 34\u2013114.\nArtificial Interventions in the Natural Form of Things: Shared. . .\n99\nthat the procedures applied by an alchemist and by a goldsmith are in large parts the\nsame: both required the know how to purify metals, to isolate them from the mixed\nmineral forms they are found in and transform them into massive pure metals. Both\nthe alchemist and the goldsmith share the same theoretical concepts, assuming that\nsulphur and quicksilver are the two original components of all metals. By alloying\nthese metals, by forcing them into forms, both locate their actions within the context\nof natural metallogenesis and both suppose, that they thereby imitate God and his\ncreative processes. But it is hard to prove that the goldsmith followed the same]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=106\nPages: 106,107\nin Mathesius, Sarepta, fol. XXXIIIv).\n84\nH. Haug\nempirical knowledge within the limits of a regular and harmonic world, where\neverything points back to its origin, i.e. God.\nMathesius and other mineralogists of the sixteenth century could only rely on a\nfew preliminary works when they made their speculations on the Metallogenese, as\nAgricola regrets in the introduction to his De ortu et causis subterraneorum from\n1546:\nThe Greeks and Latins, however, who we see working for more than a thousand years to\nincrease scientific knowledge, all of them only interpreted the writings of Plato and\nAristotle and followed their views; they neither made inquiries about unsolved questions\nnor did they treat them scientifically. When our Albertus started to make observations about\nthe genesis of excavated materials, he blended the teachings of philosophers, astrologers\nand chymists into one.12\nTwo important preliminary writings, Aristotle\u2019s reflections on meteorology and]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=109\nPages: 109\nwey\u00df und rotg\u20ac\nuldig ertz [silver ores] and gla\u00df ertz [silver sulfid] wear off in the fire because\nof all the sulphur and the quicksilver and the other impurities that are still in it.17\nThe same with gold: \u201cI have seen gold in an iron-stone, as well as gold in the\nStyria [Steiermark], which changes its golden colour in the fire, when the quicksilver exhales from it, comparable to the goldsmith gilding silver dishes.\u201d18 Both\nquotations show how deeply Mathesius\u2019s understanding is based on the two basic\n16\nAlbertus, Book of Minerals, 10.\n\u201cGedigen oder derb silber heyst, das rein und schier fein ist und das sich schneyden und pregen\nlesset ehe es ins fewer kompt. Doch gehet allem gediegen und sonderlich wey\u00df unnd rotgu\u0308ldig ertz\nso wol als dem gla\u00df ertz im fewer was abe umb des Schwebels, quecksilbers und ander wildigkeyt\nwillen, so noch drinne ist.\u201d (\u201cDie Dritte Predigt. Von Ursprung zu und abnemen der Metallen unnd]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=64\nPages: 64\nexample is the proportion of mercury and sulphur proposed by mediaeval recipes\nfor the production of vermilion which is invariably incorrect.56 Very rarely are the\ncorrect chemical proportions cited.\nIn parallel, alchemical writings may involve the use of symbols or metaphors to\ndesignate substances and practices. In consequence, the way an alchemical recipe\nwas received would depend on the degree of experience of the reader-practitioner\nreading it. On the one hand, the (sometimes) metaphorical or codified language\nas well as the approximations stressed the arcane nature of these recipes and\ncontributed to their secrecy. On the other hand, the omitted information may have\nbeen complemented by data only known to some readers and not recorded by the\ncopyist who conserves only the essential part of the recipe. If so then this kind of\nrecipe was only meant to be accessible and useable by those practitioners who could\neasily fill in the lacuna that punctuated the text of the recipe.]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=33\nPages: 33\nby the Lexicon Suda (\u03c7 280) and supported by the Byzantine sources that have been\nbriefly analyzed in the first paragraph. The inclusion of this definition in such an\nancient text is noteworthy, since it proves that some of the earliest authors already\nfocused their treatises only on metallurgical practices.\nConsequently, the last part of Isis\u2019s work lists five metallurgical recipes describing: (a) how to make mercury solid and mix it with lead; (b) how to prepare a white\ndyeing drug by which, according to the third recipe (c), an iron-copper alloy was\ntreated and dyed white (the same alloy is dyed yellow in the second part of the\nrecipe); (d) how to mix the substances prepared according to the first three recipes;\n(e) how to process a metallic body before dyeing it white.24 This section is\nconcluded by a more general statement according to which all the \u03bf\u03b9$ \u03ba\u03bf\u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03af\u03b1\u03b9\n(treatments), the \u03b4\u03af\u03c0\u03bb\u03c9\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2 (techniques for doubling the weight of gold or silver]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=181\nPages: 181\ninformation for those wishing to know more about the properties and potentialities\nof the precious metals. Accordingly, gold- and silversmiths figure prominently in\nmany examples of the genre of \u201ctransmutation histories\u201d\u2014detailed published\naccounts of successful transmutations\u2014where such artisans are routinely called\nin to assay a sample of the gold or silver produced, and thus act as expert witnesses\nto its authenticity.7\nFortunately for such a study, there existed a mid seventeenth-century network of\nalchemical practitioners where such interactions can be well documented. From the\n1640s through the 1660s, a network of correspondents and collaborators that included\nseveral gold- and silversmiths linked three major urban centers\u2014Amsterdam, Paris,\nand London\u2014and freely crossed political, linguistic, social, and confessional boundaries. Its numerous participants shared ideas, experiences, and aspirations relating to]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=111\nPages: 111\nartificers of fraud and who are not on the same level as \u2018real\u2019 metallurgists.22\nThirdly Agricola takes on the astrologers, referring to the authors who claim that\nthe seven planets as formative powers influence some kind of primordial metallic\narch-matter to create the seven known metals. The theory that celestial bodies\ninfluence and shape earthly substances is treated at the beginning of Ru\u0308lein of\nCalw\u2019s Bergb\u20ac\nuchlein:\nFor the formation and growth of ores an effector is required and a subordinated material or\nmatter, which is adapted to receive the effect. The common effector of the ores and of all\nthings that are born is heaven with his orbits, his light and his influence, as the masters of\nnature teach. [. . .] Every ore receives a special influence from the planet he is named after,\nso that the planet and the ore concur in their warmth, coldness, humidity and aridity.23\nThe early modern efforts to categorize the world and its substances, based on]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=185\nPages: 185,186\nsaved many thou[sand]s,\u201d see HP 28/2/17B.\n18\nMoriaen to Worsley, 26 May 1651, HP 9/16/6A\u20136B.\n19\nNewman & Principe, Alchemy Tried in the Fire, 236\u201356.\nGoldsmiths and Chymists: The Activity of Artisans Within Alchemical Circles\n165\ncould consistently prepare two and one-half pounds (five Marks) of silver from\n100 pounds of tin, a quantity augmentable by repeating the process on the\nuntransmuted tin recovered. It is possible that they were separating silver present\nas an impurity in the tin and/or the lead used in the process, although Moriaen\u2019s\nclaim to have eventually turned 27 % of the weight of the tin into silver is\nimplausible. In the end, the project for obtaining silver from tin seems not to\nhave fulfilled initial expectations given Moriaen\u2019s and Grill\u2019s subsequent financial\ndifficulties, even though (or perhaps because) Grill, according to one report, spent\n\u00a31,200 on it.20\nNevertheless, some initial success may stand behind the contract that Grill]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=85\nPages: 85\ndirection, rising to the far reaches of the sky; the longer the distance, the quicker it\nrises. So towards the vertical ducts of these experimental furnaces, the particles of\nfire would have to increase their impact speed on the mass of metal inside the fusion\nchamber. The short sentence below the drawing of the furnace, along with many\nother observations of the physical status of the four elements and other natural\nsubstances, enables us to reconstruct Leonardo\u2019s theory of matter as a sort of a\n\u2018Aristotelian corpuscolarism\u2019 and a kinetic theory of heat/fire in which the melting\nof metal or the dissolution of a substance by fire depends on the percussion of a flow\nof particles.30 This interpretation finds confirmation in several reverberatory furnace drawings made with bent surfaces to drive the flow of fire into the middle of\nthe fusion chamber (Codex Atlanticus, fol. 1103r, 548r, 580v, 82v) (Fig. 4).\n29]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=187\nPages: 187\nmuch-engaged in the art\u201d obtained some spirit of salt \u201cnot prepared by the common\nmethod\u201d from Helvetius\u2019s friend Johann Caspar Kno\u0308ttner, a cloth dyer (and apparently, another type of artisan employed in chymical work). Consistent with\nBorrichius\u2019s private diary\u2019s account of the event, Helvetius tells how Grill poured\nthis spirit of salt over some lead in a glazed vessel (\u201csuch as is used for preserves\nand confections\u201d) and after two weeks was delighted to see a silvery \u201cstar\u201d floating\nin the liquid\u2014perhaps some sort of crystalline concretion. Grill told Helvetius of\nthis phenomenon, which the silversmith believed to be the \u201csignate star of the\nphilosophers that he had read about in Basilius [Valentinus].\u201d Helvetius and \u201cmany\nother honest men\u201d went to see the experiment and marveled at it. After the\nsummer\u2019s heat had evaporated the liquid, Helvetius continues, Grill took some of\nthe now spongy and ashen-colored lead, with a piece of the star-like formation, and]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=38\nPages: 38\nthe revealed books. In the same way as the demons (or maybe under their influence)\nsome people tried to hide the books, to summarize them, and disperse their content\nby focusing only on specific topics.\nIn this respect, the last part of the Syriac passage is particularly relevant, since\nZosimus explains that some alchemists narrowed their inquiry to the methods for\ngilding silver. Whereas, the art called che\u0304meia, at least in its original form, included\na wider set of dyeing techniques that were applied to all kinds of metals in order to\ndye them different colours. This explanation is consistent with Zosimus\u2019s other\n39\nFestugie\u0300re, Re\u0301ve\u0301lation d\u2019Herme\u0300s, 365, ll. 15\u201320 (\u00bc CAAG II 242,10\u20136). The name of Isidoros\nappears also in the list of alchemists handed down by the Marcianus gr. 299 (fol. 7v); see CAAG I\n110.\n40\nWe cannot exclude the possibility that other treatises circulating under the name of Hermes]","[url_for_citation: https://myaidrive.com/wztmG7jcHihx4NbqDVhzk4/Laboratories.pdf?pdfPage=189\nPages: 189,190\n29\nBorrichius, Itinerarium, vol. III, 105\u20137, 6 October 1663.\nOn Helmontian theory, see Newman & Principe, Alchemy Tried in the Fire, 56\u201391. Interestingly, this idea of using the \u201cfermentative odor\u201d of copper scoria to effect transmutation was a\n30\nGoldsmiths and Chymists: The Activity of Artisans Within Alchemical Circles\n169\nthis operation as fermentative, and left the mixture in a hotter fire longer, he could\nhave increased his daily profit to 300 crowns, and suggested that Grill should build a\nbigger furnace outside of some city to effect it. The Frenchman also compared his\nown experiments with litharge and their results to those carried out by Grill.31 That\nBorrichius and a learned French chymist heard about and discussed this matter\nseriously in Paris indicates that Grill and his chymical work in Sweden had attained\na substantial level of international notoriety.\nBy 1664, Grill had risen to become Riksguardien vid Kronans Myntverk (Master]"]}