Greek Alchemical Manuscripts in Libraries

Marcellin Berthelot,

La Revue Scientifique

February 7, 1885


The oldest alchemical manuscripts are written in Greek: they form a characteristic group in the National Library of Paris. The oldest of those we have are linked to the arms of Henry II. They were brought to France in the time of François 1er , at the time when this king was making large purchases of books in Greece and the East. Others come from private libraries, such as that of Chancellor Séguier, later brought together at the National Library. The first of all, No. 2325, is written on cotton paper with particular care. It seems to have been copied at the end of the 13th century or at the beginning of the 14th century .

Similar copies exist in most of the great libraries of Europe, in Florence, in Milan (Ambroisienne), in Rome (Vatican), in Vienna, in Venice (Saint-Marc), etc.
I will especially point out the manuscript of Saint-Marc, the most beautiful and the oldest that we possess. The Italian government was good enough to lend me this capital manuscript, which I have studied and compared with those of the National Library of Paris and of which the learned M. Ruelle has the kindness to take a regular copy at this time. According to the printed table which precedes it, it dates back to the 11th century . The comparison of his writing with the facsimiles of palaeography confirms this attribution and would even tend to push it back a little further. Indeed, the writing is quite similar to that of a text published in the Anleitung zur Grieschischen Palæeographie von Wattenbach (1877), as a type of the 10th century . century. We can also compare it, although the resemblance is less, to a type of the 11th century . The manuscript of Saint-Marc contains, moreover, the same works as ours.

Leo Allatius, librarian of the Vatican, announced in the 17th century that he intended to publish these manuscripts regularly. But he did not keep his promise, and it has not since been fulfilled by anyone as a whole, though substantial portions have been printed and translated into Latin at various times. The obscurity of the subject and the equivocal character of alchemy probably repelled editors and commentators. However, the methodical study of these manuscripts and the publication of some of them would not be without interest, from the point of view of the history of chemistry, the technology of the Middle Ages and even the history of ideas reigning in Egypt around the 3rd and 4th centuries of our era . I hope to be able to fill this gap soon with the assistance of the Minister of Public Instruction.

One finds, indeed, in these works, the doctrines of the last neo-Platonists and the Gnostics, as well as certain information on the old Greek schools: information all the more invaluable, that the authors of some of these writings, Olympiodorus, for example, seem to have had between the hands of the works today lost, taken from the library of Alexandria, or rather fragments which still remained some time before the destruction of this library: contemporary destruction of that of Serape um by Theophilus, Patriarch of Alexandria, at the end of the fourth century AD .
The date of the various works contained in the manuscripts varies; it can be researched and often assigned according to their content and according to quotations from Byzantine polygraphs.

Several writings are pagan and due to contemporaries of Iamblichus and Porphyry. Such are the opuscules attributed to Hermes, to Agathodemon, to Africanus, to Iamblichus himself. The letter of Isis to her son Horus and an oath made in the name of the divinities of Tartarus bear the same character. A quotation from the precept of the Emperor Julian, a character so rarely invoked later, also relates to this order of tradition.

Perhaps even some of the alchemical works that we possess date back to the beginnings of the Christian era. It would certainly be so, if we admitted the identity of the pseudo-Democritus named in our manuscripts and in the papyri, with Bolus of Mendes, a character cited by Pliny and by Columella as having composed certain treatises later attributed to Democritus. I recently developed this opinion, with the texts of ancient authors in support, in the Journal des savants. Physica and mystica of our manuscripts may have been part, for example, of the magical works of the pseudo-Democritus quoted by Pliny, who, I repeat, seems to be none other than Bolus of Mendes, or someone of his time. The treatises relating to colored vitrifications and artificial emeralds which we possess also seem to derive from the analogous treatises quoted by Pliny and Seneca.

Certain anonymous recipes for alloys and artificial precious stones could be even older, because the copyist declares having copied them from the stelae and from the papyri of the sanctuaries.

However most alchemical authors are Christians.

Zosimus, for example, wrote in Egypt around the second century, in the time of Clement of Alexandria and Tertullian, that is to say in the time of the Gnostics, whose beliefs and imaginations he shares; what also do the Leide papyri, which date back to the same period.

Synesius, who appears identical with the bishop of Ptolemais, and Olympiodorus, an important historical and political figure in the time of Theodore II, belong to the end of the fourth and the beginning of the fifth century.

The Christian philosopher seems intermediate between them and Stephaus, according to the content of his writings: while the Anonymous would be about the same time as the last author. Certain parts, moreover, such as the writings of the Anonymous and the Chapters from Zosimos to Theodore, are not complete and original works: they offer the character of those extracts and summaries which the Byzantine polygraphers were in the habit of making in the time of Photius and Constantine Porphyrogenete, and which have preserved for us so many remains of ancient historians, orators and poets.

Stephanus himself is a famous historical figure, from the time of Heraclius, in the 7th century ; he left us works of medicine and astrology, at the same time as alchemy. Now he quotes Olympiodorus, Synesius verbatim, and he comments on the pseudo-Democritus. These authors therefore preceded him. Olympiodorus himself reproduces Synetius verbatim, and Synesius comments on the false Democritus.
Thus there is an uninterrupted filiation from the fifth century of the Christian era between the various works which appear in our manuscripts. This filiation has been accepted as indisputable by all the scholars who have had knowledge of these manuscripts since the 17th century and it is confirmed, as regards the oldest writings, by the discovery of the Leide papyri.

Almost all of these authors predate the Arabs. Several of them are quoted verbatim by Georges Syncelle, in the 8th century , by Photius, in the 9th century , and by the Byzantine polygraphers of the 10th and 11th centuries , Suidas for example.
The Khitab-al-Fihrist , an Arabic work written before the year 850, also names our writers. They are therefore prior to Geber, the great master of the Arabs in the ninth century : the latter, moreover, represents in his authentic writings a more methodical, more advanced science, and consequently posterior to that of the Greek alchemists.

After these authors, called the ecumenical philosophers, thealchemy was exhibited by Byzantine monks, such as Cosmas, Psellus and Nicephorus Blemmydas, of later times.

We can specify up to a certain point the time when these writings were brought together in an encyclopaedic body, by noting that this body is prior to a mythical tradition strongly accredited to the Middle Ages, and of which Jean Malala and Suidas speak to us from the tenth century; I mean the one that identifies the fabulous search for the Golden Fleece with that of an alleged alchemical book, written on skin: yet our collection makes no mention of it,
The most recent work it contains is a technical treatise on glass and artificial precious stones, attributed to the Arab Salmanas (8th century), which contains very old recipes, transmitted perhaps from the ancient Egyptians. This treaty was added to the other books at a more recent time, because it does not exist either in the manuscript 2325, the oldest of those of Paris, nor in the manuscript of Saint-Marc, written around the 11th century .

To sum up, it is by bringing together these works of various dates that the alchemical collection was formed in Constantinople, around the time of Constantine Porphyrogenetes (10th century), by means of the writings of various authors, some pagans, others Christians copied, commented on and sometimes abridged by the Byzantine monks. From there these copies came to Italy, then to the rest of the West.

I am going to present here the general results that I have deduced from the methodical study that I have made of it: interesting results, because they lead to breaking down the alchemical collection into its essential elements, that is to say, to recognizing which are the partial treatises, theoretical or technical, and the groups of recipes whose assembly served to constitute it. I ask some indulgence for this work of analysis, very delicate in its nature, but which seems likely to cast a certain light on the history of science and industry.

Manuscript 2327 is coordinated up to a certain point like a modern work, at least in its first parts: it is a sort of alchemical encyclopedia, in which the copyist has collected all the treatises and similar pieces that he was able to know. The manuscript begins with a dissertation or letter from Michel Psellus , addressed to Xiphilin, patriarch of Constantinople in the middle of the 11th century . It is placed at the head, by way of a preface. After various intercalations, which seem to have been made on originally white flyleaves, we find, as in a contemporary treatise on chemistry:

1° General indications relating to measurements, signs and nomenclature;
2° The set of treaties proper, theoretical and practical, which together form a distinct whole.

Let us develop the detail of this composition.

The general indications first include a Treatise on Weights and Measures attributed to Cleopatra, a classic treatise in antiquity; it exists in the manuscript of Saint Mark and in many others. It is also found in the works of Galen and in various manuscripts dealing with other subjects. It has also been printed several times, notably by Henri Estienne in his Thesaurus græcæ linguæ .
The names of the Egyptian months, compared with those of the Roman months, represent practical information of the same order.

The treatise on measurements is followed, always as in a modern work, by the explanation of the signs of sacred art, which correspond to the symbols of our current elements, with names facing each other. This table of signs also exists in the manuscript of Saint Mark and in manuscript 2325: which proves that it dates back at least to the tenth century. Some of the signs it contains, such as those of gold and silver, already appear in the Leide papyri. That of water is a hieroglyph, etc.

On closer examination of the list of signs in manuscript 2327, we recognize that it results from the juxtaposition of several lists, some chemical, others technical, containing words from metallurgy, pharmacy and materia medica: these lists were added and combined with each other at various times. In fact, the names of the metals and those of the other bodies appear there several times, often with different symbols, the latter of which are simple abbreviations. Mercury, for example, is drawn at the beginning by an inverted crescent, the reverse of the sign of silver; while in the final list it replaced tin for the attribution of the metal to the astronomical sign of the planet Mercury.

The serpent biting its tail (Ouroboros dragon) should be related to the signs of the metals, although it is drawn and described in an entirely different place in the manuscript. I have shown in the Nouvelle Revue the Egyptian and Gnostic origin of this symbol, which also appears in the Leide papyri and on the engraved stones and talismans of the 3rd century, preserved in our collections.

After the list of signs, comes the Lexicon of the words of sacred art, in alphabetical order; always as in certain modern treatises on chemistry. The lexicon - can also be read in the manuscript 2325 and in the manuscript of Saint-Marc. It therefore existed as early as the 10th century .

The lexicon seems to have been preceded by much older nornenclatures of various characters, of which it represents the assembly. Such is the little work on the Philosophical Egg, which follows in manuscript 2327, and which contains a symbolic nomenclature of the parts of the egg, relating to the sacred art; this same nomenclature is also found in the manuscript of Saint Mark, where the characteristic words have been scratched out, probably because they were suspected of magic. Such are also the lists or catalogs of substances attributed to Democritus and transcribed in various places.

This is now the place to quote the List of gold makers, that is to say of the principal alchemists. The manuscript of Saint Mark also contains it, with important variations, and it appears to be the development of a shorter list, given by the philosopher Anonymous.

The main list ends in manuscript 2327 with a statement of the places where the philosopher's stone is prepared, in Egypt, Constantinople, etc. A similar and older designation, because it contains only the names of Egyptian localities, exists a little further on. These lists appeared to be the summary and the alchemical interpretation of a passage from Agatharchides, relating to the metallurgical exploitations of Egypt.

The general indications which have just been mentioned, such as those of weights and measures, signs and nomenclature, are followed in manuscript 2327 by the reproduction of the alchemical treatises themselves. These can be grouped under various categories.

A first set is formed by theoretical and philosophical works. It consists of several distinct collections.

The first constitutes what might be called the DEMIOCRITAN TREATIES: I mean the pseudo-Democritus and his commentators. Pseudo-Democritus is represented by a fundamental treatise, entitled Physica et Mystica , the basis of all commentaries, which is also found in manuscript 2325, in that of St. Mark, etc. We must compare it with the Letter of Democritus to Leucippus; the extracts from a work of Democritus addressed to Philaret, which contains a catalog of mineral matters, the definition of substances, &c. : finally some other quotes from Demoocritus, scattered in the writings of Anonymous and elsewhere.

Pseudo-Democritus is commented on first by Synesius, then by Stephanus, in his nine lessons. These authors are reproduced in the manuscript 2325, in the manuscript of Saint-Marc, etc.

The treatises in this collection were translated into Latin, or rather paraphrased, by Pizzirnenti in 1573. The very text of Synesius was printed by Fabricius, in his Greek Library, and that of Stephanus by Ideler, in his Physici et medici græci minores .

The Democritan collection also includes the work of Olympiodorus, intermediate in date; for he quotes Synesius and does not name Stephanus. He represents a more similar philosophical culture than the last of the Neo-Platonists. But this work does not accompany the precedents in all the manuscripts.

With these authors, we can group the writings attributed to Cleopatra the Learned, and the writings of Mary the Jewess, writings probably composed at a time close to the pseudo-Democritus, and of which we have extensive extracts, quoted among others by Stephanus;

The writings of Ostanes, the alleged master of Democritus, of which Pliny speaks;
Those of Comarius, Cleopatra's tutor, commented on or interpolated by an anonymous Christian.

Those of John the Archpriest in the divine Evagia and the sanctuaries which depend on it; the manuscript of Saint Mark says: John the Archpriest of the Tuthia in Evagia and of the sanctuaries, etc.

Finally the writings of Pelagius.

A second group of treatises, congeners of the Democritan writings, is constituted by the HERMETIC BOOKS, contemporary in the style and ideas of the Poemander and the Asclepias, works known for a long time; such are: the discourse of the Prophetess Isia to her son Horus;

Agathodemon's Commentary on the Oracle of Orpheus;

The Enigma from the Sibylline Books and its Commentary by Hermes and Agathodemon . The chronicler Cedrenus cites this riddle and establishes a certain connection between it and another small writing On the Morals of the Philosophers , which he attributes moreover to Democritus.

The oath of the initiates figures in the discourse of Isis in a pagan form, and it is reproduced with considerable variations, either in an anonymous state, or under the name of Pappus, which gives it a Christian character: it doubtless derives from the same traditions.

It is perhaps the same with the article relating to the Assembly of the philosophers, which seemed, at least by its title, to have served as a point of attachment to the Turba philosophorum , a famous alchemical writing in the Middle Ages.

The interpretations on the lights, which we read next, are probably also from the time of the Gnostics and of Zosimus.

The same is true of the Excellent Coction of Gold, following which appear the processes of Iamblichus, the Processes for Doubling Gold, etc., which seem contemporaneous with those of the papyri of Leide.

The Sign of Hermes and the Instrument of Hermes Trismegistus to predict the outcome of illnesses, as well as Cleopatra's Chrysopèe , formed only of names and magic signs, recall the original union of the alchemy with magic and astrology.
All of this is ultimately related to the hermetic books and bears the imprint of neo-Platonic and Gnostic doctrines.

To the same doctrines relates a third group, comprising THE BOOKS OF ZOSIME LE PANOPOLITAN, the oldest authentic alchemical author that we possess. Zosimus had written, according to Suidas, twenty-eight treatises onalchemy. A large number of these works, some mystical, others technical and relating to descriptions of instruments and real operations, have come down to us, some complete; the others in the state of extracts, made by the philosopher Anonymous and by various monks; others in the state of summaries only.

The authors I have just enumerated, those of the Democritan treatises, those of the hermetic treatises. as well as Zosimus, are said to be ecumenical in the manuscripts. After them come their Christian and anonymous COMMENTATORS, writers of the Byzantine period, who wrote in Egypt and Constantinople, before the time of the Arabs. Such are the Books of the Christian on the good constitution of gold and on divine water, and the pamphlet of the Anonymous Philosopher on divine water.
The explanation of the science of Chrysopeia by the saint. monk Cosmas belongs to the same group. But it was added later. In fact, it does not appear in the manuscript of Saint-Marc nor in the original text of manuscript 2325. In the latter it is found next, transcribed in a completely different handwriting, less neat and almost erased. Could its real author or pseudonym be the monk who traveled in India?

Such is the set of philosophical, theoretical and mystical treatises composing the Corpus of Greek alchemists.

A second set, very interesting for general history, but of no importance for that of chemistry, comprises the alchemical poets, who appear under a common title: Treatises drawn from Mystical Chemistry. It contains the poems of Heliodorus, Theophrastus, Archelaus, Hierotheus. The first of these poems appear to be written by authors of the end of the fourth century, contemporaries of Theodosius; but they underwent successive interpolations in the manuscripts, which sometimes ended up transforming the iambs of the fourth century into so-called political verses of a late period.

Jean de Damas and others later wrote similar pieces, which are only found in a few manuscripts.

A third set is that of treaties and technological recipes. I will try to classify these treatises and recipes, whose origin is very diverse: some seem to go back to Greek Egypt and perhaps earlier, while others are from the Arab period. Most are found only in manuscript 2327.

I will first point out the book of the alchemy metallic, on chrysopeia, argyropea, fixation of mercury, containing evaporations, dyes, treatments by deflagration (?); he also treats green stones, carbuncles, colored glasses, pearls, like the dyeing in red of the clothes of skins intended for the emperor: all that is produced by means of water by the metallurgical art . The end of the book is marked in the margin. A certain number of recipes and isolated articles, transcribed without the author's name, are probably taken from this collection, but it is not easy to reconstitute it in a precise manner.

A treatise, perhaps older, has the title: Good preparation and happy outcome of the thing created and of the work and long duration of life , title which is reproduced in the last line. It relates to operations on metals . It begins with the following sentence: "And the Lord said to Moses: I have chosen in name Beseleel, the priest of the tribe of Judah, to work gold, silver, copper, iron, all objects of stone, wood, and to be the master of all the arts. »

This name is characteristic: it is that of one of the architects of the ark and the tabernacle in Exodus. The present treatise appears to be the same which is referred to elsewhere as the Domestic Chemistry of Moses. Besides, I only encountered it in manuscript 2327. Let us recall that the name of Moses, regarded as the author of astrological and magical treatises, also appears in the papyri of Leide.

This treaty contains strange passages, which seem; the remains of some papyrus, copied one after the other, in an incoherent way, without concern for the general meaning of the titles, nor of the preceding sentences. Thus, under the heading: Matter of Argyropea , one reads, after formulas of minerals and without any transition, nine lines taken from the article on the purple dyeing of Democritus: “These authors are esteemed by our predecessors, etc. » ; then comes the banal finale of the Democritan treatises: "Nature triumphs over nature, and nature dominates nature." This throws a singular light on the mode of composition of the manuscripts we are studying.

In a third treatise entitled: Fusion de l'or very esteemed and very famous , the author exposes processes of gilding and silvering, other processes for making gold letters, for welding gold and silver, for making copper alloys similar to gold. Several of these processes offer, by the detail of the treatments which they describe, a striking resemblance to those of the papyri of Leide. It seems that the latter were taken from some treatise of this kind, just as we find there articles taken from Dioscorides.

Another treatise in the 2327 manuscript might be called the Four Elements Work . It contains various obscure recipes and ends with the denominations of the philosophical egg.

The Technology of the famous Arab Salmanas reports a series of processes on the manufacture of artificial pearls and on the bleaching of natural pearls. This treatise also exists in several other manuscripts. It is a collection which seems to date back to the 8th century and which must have been drawn from an older work.

Following are found in three manuscripts distinct and positive recipes for making silver, tempering bronze, etc., older than the present writing of technurgy. In effect. these processes appear in the manuscript of Saint Mark, which speaks to us neither of SaImanas nor of the pearls. There are first three recipes for making silver with lead, and with tin, quite analogous to those of the Leide papyrus; then come the manufacture of gold, that of cinnabar, the manufacture of mercury.
Then we read the recipes for the coloring of glasses, emeralds, carbuncles, hyacinths, according to the book of the sanctuary , old formulas where we quote the book of Sophe the Egyptian, that is to say of King Cheops (work of Zosimus), and the chemistry of Moses.

A distinct series of metallurgical recipes, which is also found in the manuscript of Saint Mark and in the 2325 manuscript, concerns the tempering of bronze , written in the time of Philip of Macedon, the tempering of Indian iron , etc. These two recipes were printed by Grüner in 1814, and in Schneider's Ecloga Physica . A process for the manufacture of glass was printed at the same time: it speaks of blue glass and various species of green glass, such as jJrasinum and venetum, words already used by Lampride in the third century.

Such is the general composition of Greek alchemical manuscripts.

Mr. BERTHELOT, Member of the Institute.