The Secrets of Alchemy

by Lawrence M. Principe

In The Secrets of Alchemy, Lawrence M. Principe, one of the world’s leading authorities on the subject, brings alchemy out of the shadows and restores it to its important place in human history and culture. By surveying what alchemy was and how it began, developed, and overlapped with a range of ideas and pursuits, Principe illuminates the practice. He vividly depicts the place of alchemy during its heyday in early modern Europe, and then explores how alchemy has fit into wider views of the cosmos and humanity, touching on its enduring place in literature, fine art, theater, and religion as well as its recent acceptance as a serious subject of study for historians of science. In addition, he introduces the reader to some of the most fascinating alchemists, such as Zosimos and Basil Valentine, whose lives dot alchemy’s long reign from the third century and to the present day. Through his exploration of alchemists and their times, Principe pieces together closely guarded clues from obscure and fragmented texts to reveal alchemy’s secrets, and—most exciting for budding alchemists—uses them to recreate many of the most famous recipes in his lab, including those for the “glass of antimony” and “philosophers’ tree.” This unique approach brings the reader closer to the actual work of alchemy than any other book.

Genres: History, Alchemy, Nonfiction, Science, Occult, History Of Science, Chemistry

288 pages, Paperback

First published November 1, 2012

Reviews

[Atila Iamarino · Rating 4 out of 5]

Lawrence M. Principe realmente entende do que está escrevendo. O livro passa pelo começo da alquimia até o seu fim, ou declínio, com o começo da ciência moderna. E o autor faz um excelente trabalho de explicar não só o que os alquimistas pensavam, como porque eles pensavam o que pensavam. Ao invés de ficar na exposição das ideias, na linha do "olha que ridículo o que achavam", suas explicações vão na linha do "claro que isso fazia sentido quando a referência que tinham desse processo na época era essa".

Além do detalhamento histórico de alguém que realmente entende do assunto, ele ainda testa algumas das receitas, interpreta, explica o que dá certo ou errado e porque. O que torna a busca pela Pedra Filosofal muito mais compreensível, bem como as ideias a seu respeito foram mudando ao longo do tempo. Um livro bem completo para quem busca a ciência por trás da alquimia.

[Sougeitu · Rating 5 out of 5]

本來以為會非常艱澀難讀，結果對我來說意外的很有趣而且想一直讀下去，結果很快就讀完了……
之前說如果一本書寫得很像維基百科會有點難全部啃下來，但本書則囊括了“維基百科式書本”的優點。是一個非常漂亮的橄欖型三段式分佈，開頭先明確定義以及每一個章節要探討的內容，而後塞進翔實的資料考證以及部分現代驗證的實驗過程與圖像。對於歷史上重要的節點以及爭議都有相關描述，同時注釋非常細，還標註了每一個資料的成書年代與後續研究以供讀者進行深度探索。
值得一提的是，作者的寫作顯然是偏向「煉金術有意義」這一觀點的。這也導致對這一話題不感興趣的人可能會覺得這本書很像在給煉金術開脫。但反過來說，如果對此十分有興趣的話，這本書應該能作為知識背景拓展綱要。

[Ryan · Rating 5 out of 5]

Delightful! Exactly what I hoped for.

This book is exactly what I was hoping for: a casually readable but serious investigation of the history of alchemy, explanation of their arcane language, chemical foundations, and especially a telescope onto the mind of proto-scientific mankind. The book is very well written and easily readable, but so delightfully informative. The author’s own experiments with centuries-old alchemical recipes was the icing on the cake—to understand the old methods with 21st century science and cinch a complete understanding of what they claimed to be doing vs. what was actually occurring. This is one of the most satisfying books I’ve read on any topic in years. Thank you!

[AnduSanel · Rating 5 out of 5]

Great introduction to alchemy as a movement. This book covers the basics of it all, starting with the Egyptians and Byzantines all the way into the Scientific Revolution. Insightful, yet easy to read/listen to.

[David · Rating 5 out of 5]

This was an extremely insightful book that provided a context rich history of alchemy. Principe does a great job of providing objective information to clarify what the original purpose of alchemy was and how it contributed to modern chemistry. I read this book because I was not satisfied with the first book on Alchemy I read, "Real Alchemy" by Robert Allen Bartlett. Bartlett's book seemed like it had more of a new age slant on it. I was very put off by his very non-scientific statements about how a certain recipe would yield more potent results if it were done under the right astrological circumstances (IE, the moon is in this phase, this planet is in this house etc etc). This was not what I wanted. I wanted to know what "alchemy" as we know it today meant when it was first started. I wanted to know what was legitimate about the practice and what was BS. Principe's book met all of my expectations.

Principe reviews several of the key periods of alchemy to help the reader understand it's progression through time and how it took on different meaning in different cultures. I like how he uses historical texts and references to show what alchemists were doing and why they were doing it. He does a good job addressing ambiguities and other points that author's take immediately as fact in order to help build intrigue. For instance, Bartlett explains the origins of the word alchemy by tracing it back to the Egyption word "khemet" and smooshing it together with the Arabic article "Al". I like how Principe addresses this and then explains why that might not be the real explanation for how the term alchemy came about. He doesn't gloss over this commonly accepted tidbit, he digs in and challenges it.

I especially appreciated Principe's explanation of how Alchemy took on astrological/new age elements. He pinpoints the exact time and the book that was primarily responsible for landing the topic of Alchemy on the new age section rather than with science or reference books. So many other events and historical figures helped to chip away at the reputation and veracity of alchemy, Principe explains this well and maintains the focus on what alchemy was truly about. His focus again is on what it meant to the people who practiced it, rather than focusing on how it was perceived or interpreted by political or religious leaders.

What puts this book over the top for me is how Principe attempts to reproduce alchemical recipes in his laboratory. What impressed me most is that he did not stop when he was not able to get result described in the recipe. Rather, he examined the recipe closely to determine what he was doing differently that may have contributed to him getting a different result than the original author. Impressively, in at least 3 examples he's able to figure out the variance, account for it, and then get the same result the author of the recipe describes. Very impressive, gives credibility to what alchemists were doing hundreds of years ago without the aid of modern tools like controlled burners or thermometers.

If you have any interest at all in the history and science behind Alchemy, read this book.

[Nancy · Rating 4 out of 5]

Like most modern people, I've thought of alchemy as something more magic than science, but Principe manages to walk us back to a time when science, philosophy, religion (and some slight of hand) were intertwined. Using the term "chymistry" to over-ride our our internal definitions of chemistry and alchemy, he presents an interesting history of the history of alchemy and the infancy of chemistry.

[Josie Boyce · Rating 4 out of 5]

Solid real talk

About Alchemy, one if the most misunderstood concepts and or scientific processes in history. Principe takes great pains to contextualize the history of this maligned noble art. If you want a real history, this is it.

[Josh · Rating 5 out of 5]

If you’ve got the itch about western alchemy as a topic and want to know exactly what our current academic understanding of it is (e.g., what people were actually doing and expecting), without the exaggeration of fiction or any new age stink, this is basically perfect.

I’m not sure if this book will instill what’s intriguing about alchemy, and the way it gets right down to business chugging through our earliest sources might risk being dry if you’re coming in skeptical. (But you probably wouldn’t have ended up here if that were the case.) For me, John Crowley’s Ægypt series was what did me in (and his blurb on the back was an important endorsement for me reading this). I was also confused about the many references to alchemy as “actually” about self-transformation (always presented as a correction to a common misconception), and felt like I had some misunderstanding that needed clearing up.

(Principe clears this up latter question unequivocally, and with open frustration: people during the spiritualism movement just started saying stuff. And everyone confidently ran with it for over a century, and still repeat it now. Why alchemy got this treatment ends up being a fascinating study on inexplicable popular historical revisionism. Why do people need two thousand years of effort to have been about the soul and the occult and not just the effort to understand physical matter?)

One of the strangest aspects of historical alchemy is why all the writings are like that. Even in our oldest alchemical texts (from Zosimos), which are relatively mundane on the theory side, the author is still referring to substances as “the hermaphrodite” and describing necessary processes via dream-visions for the wizened to know what he’s actually talking about.

More than anything, the obtuseness of alchemical writing reminds me of tightly moderated internet communities where people are trying to coyly talk about piracy or something against TOS, filled with cryptic “oh, you know”s and “it’s around”s—to the young and uninitiated, phrases filled with wonder at the secret underbelly out of your reach but apparently known to everyone else. (Also, of course, that some of those coy hints are just people messing with the desperate, too.)

It’s funny to imagine alchemy as a two-thousand-year-long extrapolation of this—no one actually clinching that final step, but convinced their peers and teachers were, under strategic silence. Principe waits a very long time in the book confront this directly (to the point I was worrying it’d never come), but he’s able to present a well-supported portrait of what the practicing alchemist was achieving. One of the selling points of this book is Principe recreating alchemical preparations himself. I admit I didn’t think much of this, accepting it as one of those shticks pop history books do sometimes. Mea culpa—it leads to actual surprising results confirming the lofty descriptions (that would’ve been maddening to get to without modern chemical equipment), and easy to get why it could’ve had kept centuries of people convinced they were close to breakthrough.

I admire Principe for being able to present such a followable overview, considering what absolute hell the scholarship for this field is. He drops some examples of publication history, with unbelievable sequences of people picking shared/legendary pseudonyms for clout, other people believing it was the original, translating back and forth, rebinding multiple texts together under one name... Add on the intentional cryptic aspects of the writing itself, and the field seems designed to torment future historians.

I have one non-minor structural complaint with the book, however. Principe breaks from a normal chronological order to cover the spiritualism fad’s redefinition of alchemy (and this mischaracterization’s use by people like Jung and A.E. White), before jumping back to the heyday to finish the book. He gives his reasons, but in practice, I wasn’t convinced. I feel like the decision was made so he could lead into a fitting book-conclusion about what alchemy achieved, and not have to close out on its long unglamorous fizzle. But, that’s the order things happened, and I would’ve preferred it in proper order without having to mentally rewire the chronology.

- Ironically, one of the biggest revelations this book gave me wasn’t about alchemy, but this passage regarding the ominous metaphorical imagery so popular in the past:

The popularity of emblematics partly depended on the early modern delight in “learned play,” that is, piecing together and puzzling out meanings cleverly hidden beneath allusion and metaphor. Even popular periodicals of the seventeenth century, such as the Parisian monthly Mercure galant, contained “enigmas” in the form of both allegorical verses and pictorial emblems. The journal’s editors encouraged readers to send in their interpretations, and published the best expositions in the following issue. Our closest modern equivalents are perhaps word jumbles, crosswords, sudoku puzzles, and other “brainteasers.”

My god! All the evocative mystery, and it’s just puzzles based off a shared mythology and religious education! Of course it is. (Past-culture-reshaping revelations like this make me appreciate Ægypt thematically even more.)

- Another unexpectedly satisfying aspect to reading this is how often alchemical terms and processes (and other ancient modes of thought like Humorism) survive, culturally and linguistically. More good support for Principe’s depiction of alchemy as not some embarrassing incorrect path people wasted time on before Science struck the Earth, but simply the same path that led us here.

[Cat PBatista · Rating 4 out of 5]

An okey book book, with tons of information but I wished it included history until the present day~

[Brady · Rating 4 out of 5]

Principe's summary and evaluation of hermetic alchemy as understood by occult practitioners of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries is at best myopic. He conveniently overlooks in this section natural poetical metonymy of language (though he appears to love the term Decknamen), the overt mythological and theological references in dozens of pre-nineteenth-century alchemical plates, paintings, and treatises, and Blake's, Scot's and others' treatments of alchemy years before the occult revival and the popularization of mesmerism. However, Principe mentions throughout the book that Christ is used to symbolize the Stone - but nothing more - and the alchemical process is often analogized to or allegorized as Christ's passion. Perhaps Principe should take another look through the Theatrum Chemicum to see just how closely tied many thought (and still think) alchemy and Christianity were...

On page 182 Principe is quick to suggest that Chaucer "takes a position in his Canterbury Tales" on alchemy after quoting a few lines from a modern translation of "The Canon's Yeoman's Tale." Principe shows here his inability to understand the complexity of literature, and especially the personalities of Chaucer's various characters in the Tales: The Yeoman's position on alchemy is not Chaucer's position at all. (And in the original Tales, Chaucer's Yeoman attributes much of what Principe quotes to Hermes, though I can't speak for Principe's edition.)

And not to mention Carl Jung's life's work refuted in a mere 20 pages! Well done, Lawrence.

Many of the pieces necessary to understand the esoteric side of alchemy are here: Mesmer's animal magnetism/Jung's libido, Christian and Greek mythology, layers of meaning, interconnectedness of all things within and without, above and below (spirit and matter), Chaucer, Jonson, Donne, Shakespeare, Rowling - he even includes Fludd's image of the Great Chain of Being that echoes the Tree of Life on page 197 and Valentine's Azoth on page 120! - but, unfortunately, he doesn't quite come away with the "secrets" of alchemy in the end, and neither do we.

In short, this book contains many of the necessary shells, but Principe does not crack them open - look behind or within them - to discover the common meat. Because of this, at times I felt he was misleading, but I rated The Secrets of Alchemy four stars because of the depth of understanding he has of what some call contemporarily exoteric alchemy. Principe would do well to study the layers of language and symbol that to me appear to be lacking in his consciousness yet which he mentions occasionally in his book. The grammatos kills, Principe, but the pneuma gives life.

[Skejven · Rating 4.5 out of 5]

Kinda hard to rate this kind of scientific book in correlation to books, fiction or non-fiction (nearly) purely written for enjoyment. Nonetheless I can easily say that it's a fantastic read. Highly enjoyable and filled to brim with great knowledge about history of alchemy and it's true image as opposed to modern, more stereotypical way of viewing this subject.

It's not only a book providing an insight into minds of alchemists but also into their empirical work. Author of the book tries to follow few recipes from, very often ambiguous (to someone not familiar with alchemy) and obscure alchemical manuscripts, including first steps in preparing the Philosopher Stone.
These parts were fantastically fascinating to read.

The book is also written in fairly straightforward language. As a non native English speaker, and someone who, generally speaking, was never interested much in chemistry at school, I havent had any bigger problems in understanding everything written within!

9/10

[Heather Jones · Rating 4 out of 5]

I’ve been whining about “where were all these books on alchemy last year when I was doing the primary research for The Mystic Marriage? In this case, the answer is “not published yet”. There does seem to be a nebulous “interest in alchemy” front passing through, which I can only hope will be positive for the reception of my novel. This is exactly the sort of readable but solidly historical general history of the field that I was searching for. (The best I could find last year was a bit too invested in the mystical aspects for true objectivity.) This goes on my “actually read it through” list.

[B. Rule · Rating 4 out of 5]

Principe does a solid job establishing the continuity between alchemy and science, while preserving the discrete identity of the former. Principe's historical account and his own laboratory reconstructions show that alchemists were far better experimentalists than often credited. Principe emphasizes that alchemy was a matter of both head and hand: theory and practice were both essential. Charges that alchemists were either armchair dreamers or grubby naïfs proceeding by trial-and-error both miss the mark for the field as a whole (although individual practitioners may be guilty as charged). The field evolved over time, incorporating new advances in understanding. While there is a certain amount of fetishizing the wisdom of earlier writers, alchemists were not just regurgitating older ideas or lost in a semiotic maze of obscurantist references. Not only, anyway. As Principe's account makes clear, all the baroque allegorical stuff was intended both to communicate and to gatekeep. Those in the know could and did derive practical instruction from such texts (even where the keys to understanding were sometimes intentionally scattered), and outsiders were screened from too-easy access to valuable knowledge. Guild protectionism at work, same as it ever was!

While Principe only highlights a handful of figures in the long history of the craft, he selects judiciously to give some shape to the historical stages. He focuses on Zosimus as emblematic of the early Greco-Egyptian period, Jabir for the Islamicate, and a smattering of figures for the medieval, including John of Rupescissa, Giles of Rome, and Roger Bacon. Jarringly, he doesn't stick to a chronological account but jumps forward to the modern period then back, I guess to give more space to the early modern/Enlightenment period that he clearly favors as the height of alchemical sophistication. It really interrupts the flow of the book and wasn't at all necessary.

One feature I liked is Principe's treatment of the epistemology of early modernity. He describes the Great Chain of Being, macrocosmic/microcosmic harmonics ("as above, so below"), and the "Two Books" (nature and scripture) theory to explain early modern conceptions of legitimate sources of knowledge. This stuff really contextualizes how alchemists thought and why they granted authority to evidence that we might quickly dismiss. Principe wants us to understand that alchemy fitted neatly into a larger cultural worldview, and to rehabilitate alchemists' reputation for credulity.

Principe's own practical experience as a chemist brings a fresh perspective to things, and I really enjoyed his detective work in piecing together a plausible series of chemical reactions to match some of his reference texts. He's also very good at describing the Mercury/Sulfur theories of matter and detailing why these weren't crazy inferences to draw from the available evidence at the time. He also pretty convincingly shows that Jung's psychologizing approach arises specifically out of late 19th/early 20th century intellectual trends, and is not true to the self-perception of earlier practitioners (whatever value one may assign such an interpretation now).

Overall, I liked this book, which was scholarly without being academic (footnotes are a bit scanty for that), and sympathetic without going full woo. It would be comfortably slotted with the works of Wouter Hanegraaff as taking seriously the history of esotericism while still preserving some critical distance.

[Travis · Rating 3 out of 5]

I learned about this book when I heard a recent interview of the author on Science Friday (podcast/radio show), where he talked about his experiments that replicated the results of alchemical recipes by accounting for the context of the experiments, such as impurities in the base materials. I think alchemy is interesting for exactly the way that it sort of bridges modern and pre-modern ways of understanding the world, using observation and experiment to learn new things about the world and laying the groundwork for a scientific world view, while also being grounded in a theoretical framework that is utterly fantastical. Unfortunately it seems that most of the material on alchemy out there really leans into the spiritual/mystical interpretations of the endeavor in ways that strike me as false. This book is grounded in the practical reality of the work of alchemists and the influence it had on the development of chemistry, and it also explains how spurious popular notions of the spiritual nature of alchemy developed.

The writing is a bit dry and quite scholarly in its structure, but engaging. I enjoyed the depth of history and context it provided for alchemy. But I think the real value added part of the book is the author's own experiments, and I found those to be unfortunately rather limited in scope. There are only about three or four of these experiments and while they do a wonderful job of illustrating how numerous people were led astray by the tantalizing possibility of transmutation-- there are some truly fantastical and unexpected reactions that can occur under the right conditions-- I really wish there was more. In particular, there is the matter of The Twelve Keys of Basil Valentine, a twelve step process for transmuting base metal to gold. The author demonstrates that the first three steps are possible and create remarkable effects. And he argues (successfully in my opinion) that the final two steps were probably never attempted, but rather just a plain description of how the end result should turn out, assuming the theory continued to match the reality of the intervening steps. But it is those seven steps in between that are irksome. The author argues that they too were merely speculative but I feel this undermines his overall argument that alchemists were achieving sufficient results to maintain the tantalizing possibility of achieving the impossible. Not all of those steps could have been mere theory, it feels like there must have been something going on, though I can accept that the cryptic language and ambiguity of exact conditions may make it hard to impossible to replicate.

[Dan · Rating 4 out of 5]

Alkemi i Skyrim handlar om att smaka saker för att se vad de gör för att sedan blanda dem för att se vad som blir. Oavsett om man vill tro det eller ej har vissa idag den synen (att detta faktiskt var vad folk sysslade med förr).

Andra kan ha bilden att alkemi bara är allegori för ”inre” psykologiska processer, och att förädla metaller egentligen handlade om att förädla sig själv.

Men nu är det så att de faktiskt försökte göra guld (bland annat). Men ändå gick de efter dåvarande modeller och baserade sin forskning på tidigare erfarenhet. Egentligen inte så annorlunda från idag om man tänker efter. Men sedan finns ju hemlighetsmakeriet, kodnamn för olika substanser och massa symboler som endast de initierade eller de ”värdiga” kunde förstå, vilket skiljer sig enormt från dagens vetenskapskommunikation där man faktiskt vill förstå varandra. Men det är ju klart att någon som lyckats med guldmakeriet, dels vill ha det för sig själv, men även förstår farorna som inflation, eller att någon mäktig adelsman fångar dig och tvingar dig att göra guld, vilket faktiskt hände (bortsett från göra guldet alltså)

Att transmutation troddes vara möjligt är, trots att vi vill skratta åt det idag, fullt rimligt. Dels verkar processen ske naturligt i naturen, tex att man ofta hittar spår av guld i silvermalm. Varför skulle det inte gå att göra samma process artificiellt och snabbare? Det är ju mer intuitivt att tro detta (att guld långsamt mognar fram ur mindre ädla metaller) än att det är två neutronstjärnor som krockar med varandra i rymden eller något. Sedan ser man tex att endast en droppe vinäger i en tunna vin kan göra allt till vinäger, eller lite löpe kan transmutera mjölk till ost. Och tänk alla legeringar av olika metaller. Så det fanns inga vetenskapliga invändningar att detta inte skulle gå förrän 1800-talet när man förstod att det fanns grundämnen. Så det är klart att man försökte. Till och med August Strindberg försökte ju. Men det var efter man visste att det inte gick kemiskt.

Riktigt intressant bok, och Lawrence Principe är ju något av ett unikt fall, då han både är historiker OCH kemist, vilket nästan verkar vara kriteriet för att kunna studera alkemi ordentligt. Gamla alkemiska recept som många andra forskare viftat bort som nonsens har Principe lyckats återskapa och dessutom (med modern kemi) förklarat vad som händer. Men att det är så svårt att återskapa många av experimenten, till och med i moderna laboratorier visar hur orimligt duktiga vissa forna alkemister var i rent hantverk.

4,5 ⚗️

[K.A. Ashcomb · Rating 5 out of 5]

I picked up this book as research for my upcoming novel where my antagonist is an alchemist. This was just perfect for it. The book goes over the history of alchemy, the major alchemist (their thoughts and life and work), and the principles of alchemy, and of course, it discusses the quest for Philosopher's Stone. This book gives you a good general picture of alchemy. Its emphasis is on that alchemy was a genuine scientific discipline, and it advanced our understanding of metals, minerals, and chemical processes. But it is true that the "noble art" was cloaked with mystery as the alchemist used verbose language, symbolism, and allegories to hide their recipes. This is maybe the reason why alchemy has gained an esoteric and spiritual reputation. More so after chemistry took over and the likely hood of finding the recipe for Philosopher's Stone diminished.

The book was interesting to read. At times, it was a chore as there were so many facts, names, and minerals fitted into a small paragraph, and I wanted to remember and note them all, but it is understandable if you need to cram all know history in 281 pages (excluded Asia as according to the writer that differs a lot from western alchemy.) When I read this book, I was amazed at how rich the symbolism of alchemy was. How it has influenced art and poetry, and the other way around. How mercury and sulfur were portrayed as woman and man and their union hid behind alchemist recipes. Also, I found it amazing that the writer himself had tried out the Philosopher's Stones recipes and wrote what went wrong and what worked with them and why. Amazingly the key to getting the ancient recipes working was impurity and iron tools. The writer's passion and knowledge for the subject jumped out of the pages and made it easier to trust his writing.

I think this is a perfect summary of western alchemy and perfect for those who want to know more what the true art was all about.

[Fellipy Silva · Rating 4 out of 5]

Esse livro foi um grande desafio para mim. Não pelo fato de ser uma leitura técnica, mas sim porque era um tema que eu tinha bastante interesse em entender, até mesmo para compreender o pensamento de alguns cientistas da nossa história. Consequentemente, este livro poderia enriquecer bastante minhas aulas de física e ciências. 

Levei cerca de seis meses para completar esta leitura, que exige um nível de inglês mais avançado. Entretanto, ao ler as últimas páginas do epílogo, senti que cumpri uma excelente meta.

Como recompensa, o autor me ofereceu um excelente livro sobre a história da química e da alquimia -- tanto do ponto de vista histórico quanto filosofico. É uma leitura que exige conhecimento basico em história da ciência. Se você é iniciante, recomendo que você discuta e fale sobre os capítulos desse livro com estudantes ou professores de química, pois é um livro que necessita de uma conversa pós-leitura para compreender os pontos e ideias apresentados pelo autor.

Um detalhe deste livro que me surpreendeu positivamente é que o autor procurou reproduzir em laboratório alguns dos experimentos alquímicos do passado. Este tipo de detalhe enriquece demais a leitura, pois ajuda a entender os passos que eram feitos no passado para atingir o tão sonhado processo de transformar metal em ouro. Além disso, o livro é recheado de notas históricas, referências bibliográficas, imagens e citações literárias que ajudam a entender a evolução da alquimia, que naturalmente se transformou na química que conhecemos. 

Por fim, digo que este livro oferece um conhecimento profundo para quem é leigo, além de notas e referências técnicas para quem quer se aprofundar mais no assunto. Foi uma excelente leitura, que me acompanhou ao longo deste ano. :) 

[Susan Ferguson · Rating 5 out of 5]

Informative read on alchemy which covers not just the philosopher's stone, but also the medicines that began to be made about the same time. Also about the rise and fall of belief and trust in alchemy and the secrets supposedly hidden in it. Since there was no standardization of ingredients and what some experimenters called an ingredient was not what others called that one, it sounds rather slapdash, but was indeed carefully researched by the individual. The author himself has had some of the results described in the old alchemy books, by repeated experiment and long effort because there were no thermometers then to record the heat used. This was a problem along with the non-standardization of ingredients. The author does not claim to have made a philosopher's stone, in fact, he has barely poked a toe in that treacherous water, but he does seem to have created the first steps described by one or two of the alchemists. In fact, the results one of them describes were results from the impurity inherent in the materials used. Because of their faulty materials and primitive (by today's standards) tools, they achieved results they could not have done with pure ingredients.
The penalties and pains of this kind of work was a discouragement in itself, and chemistry - in spite of itself - is rather an offshoot of it. Much of the controversy and actors in it is discussed with the different medieval attitudes to life. Also, there are quite a few illustrations that are illuminating.
There is a chapter or two that looks at the early modern attitude to 'alchymy' where it is equated with religion - and there was a whole group that grew up that held the writing on alchemy was only intended to reveal religious secrets and had nothing to do with it's supposed purpose.

[Who Watches · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is a BRILLIANT introduction to the topic of alchemy, which, barring pop-culture corruption, is a very niche and evasive topic, rife with misinformation and (in my experience) is absurdly difficult to get a comprehensive source about. I recommend all readers who have more than a passive interest in the topic start here.

It's written by the Drew Professor of the Humanities at John Hopkins university, and with the few alchemical experiments he manages to carry out and describe near the end of the book, I would say he's certainly one of the most qualified (if not simply THE most qualified) people to be writing this book. It's comprehensive, it's engaging, and while it doesn't talk down to the reader at all, it assures that the reader know what the hell is being talked about with ample explanation and examples. It's easy to get lost in such a foreign topic from such a bygone era, and Principe doesn't let his knowledge of chemistry crowd a book meant for the uninitiated.

It also has many names, lingo, and time markers that make recording the information easy. Most important figures in the art of alchemy are brought into the text, often with detailed descriptions of their contributions -- but not so much to where they overwhelm the text. Readers are left with VERY detailed footnotes for the possibility of reading more on the sub-topic of alchemist of their choice. This is truly a great tool for creatives interested in the art, it has all the knowledge you could ask for.

[Jasmin · Rating 5 out of 5]

But Principe also talks about his own experiments and how they don't work by our modern understanding of elements and minerals. Still, by the alchemists' time allotted tools and understanding, they would think that it was the original item and not the continents. So sometimes recreating something with perfect, modern appliances and ingredients create something wholly different. There are even a few photos of such experiments in the book.
I found the book enlightening, and an exciting way to look at the science and logic behind something that is often associated with fraudsters. I also found the steps to be more believable than "they were all quacks." There is usually a logic to their thoughts, even if the logic starts at a remote area that no longer exists in our time.
The presentation of the information was easy to follow. Even as someone who does not have much of a background in chemistry, I was never confused. But everything is presented fairly and with descriptions as to the why of the matter.
If you are interested in some of the more science and anthropological view of alchemy in history, I would suggest reading it. I found it informative and easy to follow.

[Rafael Seabra · Rating 4 out of 5]

Excelente livro, muito claro e surpreendentemente profundo considerando seu comprimento. Duas citações do último capítulo que causaram uma impressão em mim:

"[...] a keen difference between modern and early modern understandings of metaphors and analogies. The modern world considers such metaphors and analogies to be creations of the human mind. For Khunrath and many of his contemporaries, they are neither arbitrary nor products of human imagination—they exist independently as real connections in the fabric of the world itself. They lie there hidden, waiting to be uncovered."

"Contemporaneous artistic productions—paintings, literary works, and music—based themselves on a love of layered meaning and allegory, meanings not found on the surface but teased out by the viewer. Educated early moderns expected multiple levels of meaning in their art, literature, and theatre, and they delighted in seeking and finding them."

[Cameron · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book was exactly what I was seeking: a history of alchemy that is comprehensive without being overwhelming or exhaustive. Principe traces alchemy from its origins in Hellenistic Alexandria in the third century AD through its many transformations in the Islamic world and medieval Europe. He shows how the discipline, especially the infamous pursuit of transmutation, was deeply intertwined with early forms of chemistry, religion, and philosophy, which he brings together under the term "chymistry."

What impressed me most is that Principe doesn’t just summarize ideas or catalog thinkers. He actually reconstructs early alchemical recipes and performs them in a lab. In doing so, he drives home his central argument: alchemy was an early form of experimental laboratory science, not simply symbolic or mystical philosophy that later Romantics and Enlightenment thinkers imagined. Great read.

[Wibisono Yamin · Rating 3 out of 5]

Good enough to simply give an idea of ​​its subject: alchemy. Not so special.
"In a world filled with meaning, where human beings, God, and nature are profoundly intertwined on multiple levels, the alchemists’ laboratory investigations and findings had wider scope and ramifications than do the analogous activities of today’s chemists. Within this wider scope, theological and natural truths could reflect and expound on one another, and the study of nature was the study of God at one remove. Hence, alchemy possessed a multivalency that operated across multiple branches of knowledge and culture."

[Acco Spoot · Rating 4 out of 5]

This was a really fascinating book. I primarily wanted to read it for more cursory knowledge of the 17th and 18th centuries (knowing that Alchemy was in the midst of a golden age at that point) but found so much more.
With a background in chemistry the author (Lawrence Princip) is able to approach the highly overly mysticised subject of Alchemy, not falling into the trap of flippant dismissal or over-exhuberant delusions, instead approaching in rational terms and revealing the true craft and intellect of the Alchemist.

[Jude King · Rating 4 out of 5]

A great summary of some key alchemical thinkers as well as a general trajectory of the alchemical anthology from Egypt to Arabia to Europe and the key ideas and how they changed.

His chemical knowledge and recreation of some of the alchemical experiments complements his writing perfectly with its emphasis on demystifying alchemy and seeing the underlying scientific theories and practice undergirding it.

In that vein he does seem to somewhat underestimate the spiritual dimension that alchemy acquired due to its hermetic and Christian influences.

[Jeff Lewonczyk · Rating 4 out of 5]

A brief but rich history of the historical, philosophical and scientific development of alchemy and how it eventually branched off into both chemistry and mysticism. Principe does a great job of bringing out representative texts regarding the discipline from Greek times to the 19th Century and even reproduces a number of alchemical "recipes" in his laboratory in order to determine where science ends and speculation begins. A great introduction.

[Rubí · Rating 4 out of 5]

So effective at summarizing a rich history and explaining the changing significance and internal understanding of the practice/discipline/field of alchemy/chymisty/chemistry. Read this because the title caught my eye in list of ebooks provided by library and ended up loving the way a deep study of the history of alchemy carried so much context of societal stigma and evolving worldviews/cosmic terrains.

[Jules · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is a mystical and magical exploration of alchemy from its Greco-Egyptian origins and, later, the early modern period. With a holistic approach to understanding its subject matter, the text is both beautifully rendered and rooted in a natural, spiritual and religious understanding that reaches beyond science. There were many surprising nuggets of information, and, there is a hushed, arcane tone that compels the reader into sacred space.

[J · Rating 1 out of 5]

This is a well written but fundamentally absurd book which is relentlessly devoted to a misportrayal of its subject matter by selective use of evidence in the pursuit of a certain narrative. Although quite well written, it will only appeal to those who desperately seek confirmation for their own reductionist worldview. The ironic part is that this highly unscientific approach to the data will masquerade as science. Sadly, the truth of the Art remains as hidden after reading as it was before.

[Luc · Rating 5 out of 5]

Absolutely phantasmagorical in the best way possible!
This is one of the most comprehensive non-fiction books I have ever read. It is thoroughly written, with no sentence too little or too much. While elaborating on a huge and complex subject—describing the "magical" (that is: pre-disenchanted) worldview of the pre-modern sciences—it follows Occam's Razor perfectly. Especially the end gave me hope. I love books. I love reading. I love writing.