Chapter VII: Part 7

This Disparity is also highly eminent in the separated sulphurs or Chymical Oyles of things. For they contain so much of the scent, and tast, and vertues, of the Bodies whence they were drawn, that they seem to be but the Material _Crasis_ (if I may so speak) of their Concretes. Thus the Oyles of Cinnamon, Cloves, Nutmegs and other spices, seem to be but the United Aromatick parts that did ennoble those Bodies. And 'tis a known thing, that Oyl of Cinnamon, and oyle of Cloves, (which I have likewise observ'd in the Oyles of several Woods) will sink to the Bottom of Water: whereas those of Nutmegs and divers other Vegetables will swim upon it. The Oyle (abusively call'd spirit) of Roses swims at the Top of the Water in the forme of a white butter, which I remember not to have observ'd in any other Oyle drawn in any Limbeck; yet there is a way (not here to be declar'd) by which I have seen it come over in the forme of other Aromatick Oyles, to the Delight and Wonder of those that beheld it. In Oyle of Anniseeds, which I drew both with, and without Fermentation, I observ'd the whole Body of the Oyle in a coole place to thicken into the Consistence and Appearance of white Butter, which with the least heat resum'd its Former Liquidness. In the Oyl of Olive drawn over in a Retort, I have likewise more then once seen a spontaneous Coagulation in the Receiver: And I have of it by me thus Congeal'd; which is of such a strangely Penetrating scent, as if 'twould Perforate the Noses that approach it. The like pungent Odour I also observ'd in the Distill'd Liquor of common sope, which forc'd over from _Minium_, lately afforded an oyle of a most admirable Penetrancy; And he must be a great stranger, both to the Writings and preparations of Chymists, that sees not in the Oyles they distill from Vegetables and Animals, a considerable and obvious Difference. Nay I shall venture to add, _Eleutherius_, (what perhaps you will think of kin to a Paradox) that divers times out of the same Animal or Vegetable, there may be extracted Oyles of Natures obviously differing. To which purpose I shall not insist on the swimming and sinking Oyles, which I have sometimes observ'd to float on, and subside under the spirit of _Guajacum_, and that of divers other Vegetables Distill'd with a strong and lasting Fire; Nor shall I insist on the observation elsewhere mention'd, of the divers and unminglable oyles afforded us by Humane Blood long fermented and Digested with spirit of Wine, because these kind of oyles may seem chiefly to differ in Consistence and Weight, being all of them high colour'd and adust. But the Experiment which I devis'd to make out this Difference of the oyles of the same Vegetable, _ad Oculum_, (as they speak) was this that followes. I took a pound of Annisseeds, and having grosly beaten them, caused them to be put into a very large glass Retort almost filled with fair Water; and placing this Retort in a sand Furnace, I caus'd a very Gentle heat to be administer'd during the first day, and a great part of the second, till the Water was for the most part drawn off, and had brought over with it at least most of the Volatile and Aromatick Oyle of the seeds. And then encreasing the Fire, and changing the Receiver, I obtain'd besides an Empyreumatical Spirit, a quantity of adust oyle; whereof a little floated upon the Spirit, and the rest was more heavy, and not easily separable from it. And whereas these oyles were very dark, and smell'd (as Chymists speak) so strongly of the Fire, that their Odour did not betray from what Vegetables they had been forc'd; the other _Aromatick_ Oyle was enrich'd with the genuine smell and tast of the Concrete; and spontaneously coagulating it self into white butter did manifest self [Errata: it self] to be the true Oyle of Annisseeds; which Concrete I therefore chose to employ about this Experiment, that the Difference of these Oyles might be more conspicuous then it would have been, had I instead of it destill'd another Vegetable.

I had almost forgot to take notice, that there is another sort of Bodies, which though not obtain'd from Concretes by Distillation, many Chymists are wont to call their Sulphur; not only because such substances are, for the most part, high colour'd (whence they are also, and that more properly, called Tinctures) as dissolv'd Sulphurs are wont to be; but especially because they are, for the most part, abstracted and separated from the rest of the Masse by Spirit of Wine: which Liquor those men supposing to be Sulphureous, they conclude, that what it works upon, and abstracts, must be a Sulphur also. And upon this account they presume, that they can sequester the sulphur even of Minerals and Metalls; from which 'tis known that they cannot by Fire alone separate it. To all This I shall answer; That if these sequestred substances where indeed the sulphurs of the Bodies whence they are drawn, there would as well be a great Disparity betwixt Chymical Sulphurs obtain'd by Spirit of Wine, as I have already shewn there is betwixt those obtain'd by Distillation in the forme of Oyles: which will be evident from hence, that not to urge that themselves ascribe distinct vertues to Mineral Tinctures, extolling the Tincture of Gold against such and such Diseases; the Tincture of Antimony, or of its Glass, against others; and the Tincture of Emerauld against others; 'tis plain, that in Tinctures drawn from Vegetables, if the superfluous spirit of Wine be distill'd off, it leaves at the bottom that thicker substance which Chymists use to call the Extract of the Vegetable. And that these Extracts are endow'd with very differing Qualities according to the Nature of the Particular Bodies that afforded them (though I fear seldom with so much of the specifick vertues as is wont to be imagin'd) is freely confess'd both by Physitians and Chymists. But, _Eleutherius_, (sayes _Carneades_) we may here take Notice that the Chymists do as well in this case, as in many others, allow themselves a License to abuse Words: For not again to argue from the differing properties of Tinctures, that they are not exactly pure and Elementary Sulphurs; they would easily appear not to be so much as Sulphur's, although we should allow Chymical Oyles to deserve that Name. For however in some Mineral Tinctures the Natural fixtness of the extracted Body does not alwayes suffer it to be easily further resoluble into differing substances; Yet in very many extracts drawn from Vegetables, it may very easily be manifested that the spirit of Wine has not sequestred the sulphureous Ingredient from the saline and Mercurial ones; but has dissolv'd (for I take it to be a Solution) the finer Parts of the Concrete (without making any nice distinction of their being perfectly Sulphureous or not) and united it self with them into a kind of Magistery; which consequently must contain Ingredients or Parts of several sorts. For we see that the stones that are rich in vitriol, being often drench'd with rain-Water, the Liquor will then extract a fine and transparent substance coagulable into Vitriol; and yet though this Vitriol be readily dissoluble in Water, it is not a true Elementary Salt, but, as You know, a body resoluble into very differing Parts, whereof one (as I shall have occasion to tell You anon) is yet of a Metalline, and consequently not of an Elementary Nature. You may consider also, that common Sulphur is readily dissoluble in Oyle of Turpentine, though notwithstanding its Name it abounds as well, if not as much, in Salt as in true Sulphur; witness the great quantity of saline Liquor it affords being set to flame away under a glasse Bell. Nay I have, which perhaps You will think strange, with the same Oyle of Turpentine alone easily enough dissolv'd crude Antimony finely powder'd into a Blood-red Balsam, wherewith perhaps considerable things may be perform'd in Surgery. And if it were now Requisite, I could tell You of some other Bodies (such as Perhaps You would not suspect) that I have been able to work upon with certain Chymical Oyles. But instead of digressing further I shall make this use of the Example I have nam'd. That 'tis not unlikely, but that Spirit of Wine which by its pungent tast, and by some other Qualities that argue it better (especially its Reduciblenesse, according to _Helmont_, into _Alcali_, and Water,) seems to be as well of a Saline as of a Sulphureous Nature, may well be suppos'd Capable of Dissolving Substances That are not meerly Elementary sulphurs, though perhaps they may abound with Parts that are of kin thereunto. For I find that Spirit of Wine will dissolve _Gumm Lacca_, _Benzoine_, and the _Resinous_ Parts of _Jallap_, and even of _Guaiacum_; whence we may well suspect that it may from Spices, Herbs, and other lesse compacted Vegetables, extract substances that are not perfect Sulphurs but mixt Bodies. And to put it past Dispute, there is many a Vulgar Extract drawn with Spirit of Wine, which committed to Distillation will afford such differing substances as will Loudly proclaim it to have been a very compounded Body. So that we may justly suspect, that even in Mineral Tinctures it will not alwaies follow, that because a red substance is drawn from the Concrete by spirit of Wine, that Substance is its true and Elementary Sulphur. And though some of these Extracts may perhaps be inflamable; Yet besides that others are not, and besides that their being reduc'd to such Minuteness of Parts may much facilitate their taking Fire; besides this, I say, We see that common Sulphur, common Oyle, Gumm Lac, and many Unctuous and Resinous Bodies, will flame well enough, though they be of very compounded natures: Nay Travellers of Unsuspected Credit assure Us, as a known thing, that in some Northern Countries where Firr trees and Pines abound, the poorer sort of Inhabitants use Long splinters of those Resinous Woods to burne instead of Candles. And as for the rednesse wont to be met with in such solutions, I could easily shew, that 'tis not necessary it should proceed from the Sulphur of the Concrete, Dissolv'd by the Spirit of Wine; if I had leasure to manifest how much Chymists are wont to delude themselves and others by the Ignorance of those other causes upon whose account spirit of Wine and other _Menstruums_ may acquire a red or some other high colour. But to returne to our Chymical Oyles, supposing that they were exactly pure; Yet I hope they would be, as the best spirit of Wine is, but the more inflamable and deflagrable. And therefore since an Oyle can be by the Fire alone immediately turn'd into flame, which is something of a very differing Nature from it: I shall Demand how this Oyle can be a Primogeneal and Incorruptible Body, as most Chymists would have their Principles; Since it is further resoluble into flame, which whether or no it be a portion of the Element of Fire, as an _Aristotelian_ would conclude, is certainly something of a very differing Nature from a Chymical Oyle, since it burnes, and shines, and mounts swiftly upwards; none of which a Chymical Oyle does, whilst it continues such. And if it should be Objected, that the Dissipated Parts of this flaming Oyle may be caught and collected again into Oyl or Sulphur; I shall demand, what Chymist appears to have ever done it; and without Examining whether it may not hence be as well said that sulphur is but compacted Fire, as that Fire is but diffus'd Sulphur, I shall leave you to consider whether it may not hence be argu'd, that neither Fire nor Sulphur are primitive and indestructible Bodies; and I shall further observe that, at least it will hence appear that a portion of matter may without being Compounded with new Ingredients, by having the Texture and Motion of its small parts chang'd, be easily, by the means of the Fire, endow'd with new Qualities, more differing from them it had before, then are those which suffice to discriminate the Chymists Principles from one another.

We are next to Consider, whether in the Anatomy of mixt Bodies, that which Chymists call the Mercurial part of them be un-compounded, or no. But to tell You True, though Chymists do Unanimously affirm that their Resolutions discover a Principle, which they call Mercury, yet I find them to give of it Descriptions so Differing, and so AEnigmaticall, that I, who am not asham'd to confess that I cannot understand what is not sence, must acknowledge to you that I know not what to make of them. _Paracelsus_ himself, and therefore, as you will easily believe, many of his Followers, does somewhere call that Mercury which ascends upon the burning of Wood, as the Peripateticks are wont to take the same smoke for Air; and so seems to define Mercury by Volatility, or (if I may coyne such a Word) Effumability. But since, in this Example, both Volatile Salt and Sulphur make part of the smoke, which does indeed consist also both of Phlegmatick and Terrene Corpuscles, this Notion is not to be admitted; And I find that the more sober Chymists themselves disavow it. Yet to shew you how little of clearness we are to expect in the accounts even of latter _Spagyrists_, be pleas'd to take notice, that _Beguinus_, even in his _Tyrocinium Chymicum_,[20] written for the Instruction of Novices, when he comes to tell us what are meant by the _Tria Prima_, which for their being Principles ought to be defin'd the more accurately and plainly, gives us this Description of Mercury; _Mercurius_ (sayes he) _est liquor ille acidus, permeabilis, penetrabilis, aethereus, ac purissimus, a quo omnis Nutricatio, Sensus, Motus, Vires, Colores, Senectutisque Praeproperae retardatio._ Which words are not so much a Definition of it, as an _Encomium_: and yet _Quercetanus_ in his Description of the same Principle adds to these, divers other _Epithets_. But both of them, to skip very many other faults that may be found with their Metaphoricall Descriptions, speak incongruously to the Chymists own Principles. For if Mercury be an Acid Liquor, either Hermetical Philosophy must err in ascribing all Tasts to Salt, or else Mercury must not be a Principle, but Compounded of a Saline Ingredient and somewhat else. _Libavius_, though he find great fault with the obscurity of what the Chymists write concerning their Mercurial Principle, does yet but give us such a Negative Description of it, as _Sennertus_, how favourable soever to the _Tria Prima_, is not satisfi'd with. And this _Sennertus_ Himself, though the Learnedst Champion for the Hypostatical Principles, does almost as frequently as justly complain of the unsatisfactoriness of what the Chymists teach concerning their Mercury; and yet he himself (but with his wonted modesty) Substitutes instead of the Description of _Libavius_, another, which many Readers, especially if they be not Peripateticks, will not know what to make of. For scarce telling us any more, then that in all bodies that which is found besides Salt and Sulphur, and the Elements, or, as they call them, Phlegm and Dead Earth, is that Spirit which in _Aristotles_ Language may be call'd [Greek: ousian analogon [Errata: ousia analogos] to ton astron stoichaio [Errata: astron stoicheio]]. He sayes that which I confess is not at all satisfactory to me, who do not love to seem to acquiesce in any mans Mystical Doctrines, that I may be thought to understand them.

[Footnote 20: _Chm. Tyrocin. lib. 1. Cap. 2._]

If (sayes _Eleutherius_) I durst presume that the same thing would be thought clear by me, and those that are fond of such cloudy Expressions as You justly Tax the Chymists for, I should venture to offer to Consideration, whether or no, since the Mercurial Principle that arises from Distillation is unanimously asserted to be distinct from the salt and Sulphur of the same Concrete, that may not be call'd the Mercury of a Body, which though it ascend in Distillation, as do the Phlegme and Sulphur, is neither insipid like the former, nor inflamable like the latter. And therefore I would substitute to the too much abused Name of Mercury, the more clear and Familiar Appellation of Spirit, which is also now very much made use of even by the Chymists themselves, of our times, though they have not given us so Distinct an Explication, as were fit, of what may be call'd the Spirit of a mixt Body.

I should not perhaps (sayes _Carneades_) much quarrel with your Notion of Mercury. But as for the Chymists, what they can mean, with congruity to their own Principles, by the Mercury of Animals and Vegetables, 'twill not be so easie to find out; for they ascribe Tasts only to the Saline Principle, and consequently would be much put to it to shew what Liquor it is, in the Resolution of Bodies, that not being insipid, for that they call Phlegme, neither is inflamable as Oyle or Sulphur, nor has any Tast; which according to them must proceed from a Mixture, at least, of Salt. And if we should take Spirit in the sence of the Word receiv'd among Modern Chymists and Physitians, for any Distill'd Liquor that is neither Phlegme nor oyle, the Appellation would yet appear Ambiguous enough. For, plainly, that which first ascends in the Distillation of Wine and Fermented Liquors, is generally as well by Chymists as others reputed a Spirit. And yet pure Spirit of Wine being wholly inflamable ought according to them to be reckon'd to the Sulphureous, not the Mercurial Principle. And among the other Liquors that go under the name of Spirits, there are divers which seem to belong to the family of Salts, such as are the Spirits of Nitre, Vitriol, Sea-Salt and others, and even the Spirit of Harts-horn, being, as I have try'd, in great part, if not totally reducible into Salt and Phlegme, may be suspected to be but a Volatile Salt disguis'd by the Phlegme mingl'd with it into the forme of a Liquor. However if this be a Spirit, it manifestly differs very much from that of Vinager, the Tast of the one being Acid, and the other Salt, and their Mixture in case they be very pure, sometimes occasioning an Effervescence like that of those Liquors the Chymists count most contrary to one another. And even among those Liquors that seem to have a better title then those hitherto mention'd, to the name of Spirits, there appears a sensible Diversity; For spirit of Oak, for instance, differs from that of Tartar, and this from that of Box, or of _Guaiacum_. And in short, even these spirits as well as other Distill'd Liquors manifest a great Disparity betwixt themselves, either in their Actions on our senses, or in their other operations.

And (continues _Carneades_) besides this Disparity that is to be met with among those Liquors that the Modernes call spirits, & take for similar bodies, what I have formerly told you concerning the Spirit of Box-wood may let you see that some of those Liquors not only have qualities very differing from others, but may be further resolved into substances differing from one another.

And since many moderne Chymists and other Naturalists are pleased to take the Mercurial spirit of Bodies for the same Principle, under differing names, I must invite you to observe, with me, the great difference that is conspicuous betwixt all the Vegetable and Animal spirits I have mention'd and running Mercury. I speak not of that which is commonly sold in shops that many of themselves will confesse to be a mixt Body; but of that which is separated from Metals, which by some Chymists that seem more Philosophers then the rest, and especially by the above mentioned _Claveus_, is (for distinction sake) called _Mercurius Corporum_. Now this Metalline Liquor being one of those three Principles of which Mineral Bodies are by _Spagyrists_ affirmed to be compos'd and to be resoluble into them, the many notorious Differences betwixt them and the Mercuries, as They call Them, of Vegetables and Animals will allow me to inferr, either that Minerals and the other two sorts of Mixt Bodies consist not of the same Elements, or that those Principles whereinto Minerals are immediately resolved, which Chymists with great ostentation shew us as the true principles, of them, are but Secundary Principles, or Mixts of a peculiar sort, which must be themselves reduc'd to a very differing forme, to be of the same kind with Vegetable and Animal Liquors.

But this is not all; for although I formerly told You how Little Credit there is to be given to the Chymical Processes commonly to be met with, of Extracting the Mercuries of Metals, Yet I will now add, that supposing that the more Judicious of Them do not untruly affirme that they have really drawn true and running Mercury from several Metals (which I wish they had cleerly taught Us how to do also,) yet it may be still doubted whether such extracted Mercuries do not as well differ from common Quicksilver, and from one another, as from the Mercuries of Vegetables and Animalls. _Claveus_,[21] in his Apology, speaking of some _experiments_ whereby Metalline Mercuries may be fixt into the nobler metals, adds, that he spake of the Mercuries drawn from metals; because common Quicksilver by reason of its excessive coldnesse and moisture is unfit for that particular kind of operation; for which though a few lines before he prescribes in general the Mercuries of Metalline Bodies, yet he chiefly commends that drawn by art from silver. And elsewhere, in the same Book, he tells us, that he himself tryed, that by bare coction the quicksilver of Tin or Pewter (_argentum vivum ex stanno prolicitum_) may by an efficient cause, as he speaks, be turn'd into pure Gold. And the Experienc'd _Alexander van Suchten_, somewhere tells us, that by a way he intimates may be made a Mercury of Copper, not of the Silver colour of other Mercuries, but green; to which I shall add, that an eminent person, whose name his travells and learned writings have made famous, lately assur'd me that he had more then once seen the Mercury of Lead (which whatever Authors promise, you will find it very difficult to make, at least in any considerable quantity) fixt into perfect Gold. And being by me demanded whether or no any other Mercury would not as well have been changed by the same Operations, he assured me of the Negative.

[Footnote 21: _Dixi autem de argento vivo a metallis prolicito, quod vulgare ob nimiam frigiditatem & humiditatem nimium concoctioni est contumax, nec ab auro solum alterato coerceri potest._ Gast. Clave. in Apoll.]

And since I am fallen upon the mention of the Mercuries of metals, you will perhaps expect (_Eleutherius_!) that I should say something of their two other principles; but must freely confess to you, that what Disparity there may be between the salts and sulphurs of Metals and other Menerals [Transcriber's Note: Minerals], I am not my self experienced enough in the separations and examens of them, to venture to determine: (for as for the salts of Metals, I formerly represented it as a thing much to be question'd, whether they have any at all:) And for the processes of separation I find in Authors, if they were (what many of them are not) successfully practicable, as I noted above, yet they are to be performed by the assistance of other bodies, so hardly, if upon any termes at all, separable from them, that it is very difficult to give the separated principles all their due, and no more. But the Sulphur of Antimony which is vehemently vomitive, and the strongly scented Anodyne Sulphur of Vitriol inclines me to think that not only Mineral Sulphurs differ from Vegetable ones, but also from one another, retaining much of the nature of their Concretes. The salts of metals, and of some sort of minerals, You will easily guesse by [Errata: (by] the Doubts I formerly express'd, whether metals have any salt at all [Errata: all)], that I have not been so happy as yet to see, perhaps not for want of curiosity. But if _Paracelsus_ did alwaies write so consentaneously to himself that his opinion were _confidently_ to be collected from every place of his writings where he seems to expresse it, I might safely take upon me to tell you, that he both countenances in general what I have delivered in my Fourth main consideration, and in particular warrants me to suspect that there may be a difference in metalline and mineral Salts, as well as we find it in those of other bodies. For, _Sulphur_ (sayes he)[22] _aliud in auro, aliud in argento, aliud in ferro, aliud in plumbo, stanno, &c. sic aliud in Saphiro, aliud in Smaragdo, aliud in rubino, chrysolito, amethisto, magnete, &c. Item aliud in lapidibus, silice, salibus, fontibus, &c. nec vero tot sulphura tantum, sed & totidem salia; sal aliud in metallis, aliud in gemmis, aliud in lapidibus, aliud in salibus, aliud in vitriolo, aliud in alumine: similis etiam Mercurii est ratio. Alius in Metallis, alius in Gemmis, &c. Ita ut unicuique speciei suus peculiaris Mercurius sit. Et tamen res saltem tres sunt; una essentia est sulphur; una est sal; una est Mercurius. Addo quod & specialius adhuc singula dividantur; aurum enim non unum, sed multiplex, ut et non unum pyrum, pomum, sed idem multiplex; totidem etiam sulphura auri, salia auri, mercurii auri; idem competit etiam metallis & gemmis; ut quot saphyri praestantiores, laevioris, &c. tot etiam saphyrica sulphura, saphyrica salia, saphyrici Mercurii, &c. Idem verum etiam est de turconibus & gemmis aliis universis._ From which passage (_Eleutherius_) I suppose you will think I might without rashness conclude, either that my opinion is favoured by that of _Paracelsus_, or that _Paracelsus_ his opinion was not alwaies the same. But because in divers other places of his writings he seems to talk at a differing rate of the three Principles and the four Elements, I shall content my self to inferr from the alledg'd passage, that if his doctrine be not consistent with that Part of mine which it is brought to countenance, it is very difficult to know what his opinion concerning salt, sulphur and mercury, was; and that consequently we had reason about the beginning of our conferences, to decline taking upon us, either to examine or oppose it.

[Footnote 22: Paracel. de Mineral. Tract. 1. pag. 141.]

I know not whether I should on this occasion add, that those very bodies the Chymists call Phlegme and Earth do yet recede from an Elementary simplicity. That common Earth and Water frequently do so, notwithstanding the received contrary opinion, is not deny'd by the more wary of the moderne Peripateticks themselves: and certainly, most Earths are much lesse simple bodies then is commonly imagined even by Chymists, who do not so consideratly to prescribe and employ Earths Promiscuously in those distillations that require the mixture of some _caput mortuum_, to hinder the flowing together of the matter, and to retain its grosser parts. For I have found some Earths to yield by distillation a Liquor very far from being inodorous or insipid; and 'tis a known observation, that most kinds of fat Earth kept cover'd from the rain, and hindred from spending themselves in the production of vegetables, will in time become impregnated with Salt-Petre.

But I must remember that the Water and Earths I ought here to speak of, are such as are separated from mixt Bodies by the fire; and therefore to restrain my Discourse to such, I shall tell you, That we see the Phlegme of Vitriol (for instance) is a very effectual remedie against burnes; and I know a very Famous and experienc'd _Physitian_, whose unsuspected secret (himself confess'd to me) it is, for the discussing of hard and Obstinate Tumours. The Phlegme of Vinager, though drawn exceeding leasurly in a digesting Furnace, I have purposely made tryall of; and sometimes found it able to draw, though slowly, a saccharine sweetness out of Lead; and as I remember by long Digestion, I dissolv'd Corpals [Errata: Corals] in it. The Phlegme of the sugar of Saturne is said to have very peculiar properties. Divers Eminent Chymists teach, that it will dissolve Pearls, which being precipitated by the spirit of the same concrete are thereby (as they say) rendred volatile; which has been confirmed to me, upon his own observation, by a person of great veracity. The Phlegme of Wine, and indeed divers other Liquors that are indiscriminately condemnd to be cast away as phlegm, are endow'd with qualities that make them differ both from meer water, and from each other; and whereas the Chymists are pleas'd to call the _caput mortuum_ of what they have distill'd (after they have by affusion of water drawn away its salt) _terra damnata_, or Earth, it may be doubted whether or no those earths are all of them perfectly alike: and it is scarce to be doubted, but that there are some of them which remain yet unreduc'd to an Elementary nature. The ashes of wood depriv'd of all the salt, and bone-Ashes, or calcin'd Harts-horn, which Refiners choose to make Tests of, as freest from Salt, seem unlike: and he that shall compare either of these insipid ashes to Lime, and much more to the _calx_ of Talk [Transcriber's Note: Talck] (though by the affusion of water they be exquisitely dulcify'd) will perhaps see cause to think them things of a somewhat differing nature. And it is evident in Colcothar that the exactest calcination, follow'd by an exquisite dulcification, does not alwaies reduce the remaining body into elementary earth; for after the salt or Vitriol (if the Calcination have been too faint) is drawn out of the Colcothar, the residue is not earth, but a mixt body, rich in Medical vertues (as experience has inform'd me) and which _Angelus Sala_ affirmes to be partly reducible into malleable Copper; which I judge very probable: for though when I was making Experiments upon Colcothar, I was destitute of a Furnace capable of giving a heat intense Enough to bring such a Calx to Fusion; yet having conjectur'd that if Colcothar abounded with that Metal, Aqua Fortis would find it out there, I put some dulcifi'd Colcothar into that _Menstruum_, and found the Liquor, according to my Expectation, presently Colour'd as Highly as if it had been an Ordinary Solution of Copper.

THE

SCEPTICAL CHYMIST.

_The Fifth Part._

Here _Carneades_ making a pause, I must not deny (sayes his Friend to him) that I think You have sufficiently prov'd that these distinct Substances which Chymists are wont to obtain from Mixt Bodies, by their Vulgar Destillation, are not pure and simple enough to deserve, in Rigour of speaking, the Name of Elements, or Principles. But I suppose You have heard, that there are some Modern _Spagyrists_, who give out that they can by further and more Skilfull Purifications, so reduce the separated Ingredients of Mixt Bodies to an Elementary simplicity, That the Oyles (for Instance) extracted from all Mixts shall as perfectly resemble one another, as the Drops of Water do.

If you remember (replies _Carneades_) that at the Beginning of our Conference with _Philoponus_, I declar'd to him before the rest of the Company, that I would not _engage_ my self at present to do any more then examine the usual proofs alledg'd by Chymists, for the Vulgar doctrine of their three Hypostatical Principles; You will easily perceive that I am not oblig'd to make answer to what you newly propos'd; and that it rather grants, then disproves what I have been contending for: Since by pretending to make so great a change in the reputed Principles that Destillation affords the common _Spagyrists_, 'tis plainly enough presuppos'd, that before such Artificial Depurations be made, the Substances to be made more simple were not yet simple enough to be look'd upon as Elementary; Wherefore in case the _Artists_ you speak of could perform what they give out they can, yet I should not need to be asham'd of having question'd the Vulgar Opinion touching the _tria Prima_. And as to the thing it self, I shall freely acknowledge to you, that I love not to be forward in determining things to be impossible, till I know and have consider'd the means by which they are propos'd to be effected. And therefore I shall not peremptorily deny either the possibility of what these _Artists_ promise, or my Assent to any just Inference; however destructive to my Conjectures, that may be drawn from their performances. But give me leave to tell you withall, that because such promises are wont (as Experience has more then once inform'd me) to be much more easily made, then made good by Chymists, I must withhold my Beliefe from their assertions, till their Experiments exact it; and must not be so easie as to expect before hand, an unlikely thing upon no stronger Inducements then are yet given me: Besides that I have not yet found by what I have heard of these Artists, that though they pretend to bring the several Substances into which the Fire has divided the Concrete, to an exquisite simplicity, They pretend also to be able by the Fire to divide all Concretes, Minerals, and others, into the same number of Distinct Substances. And in the mean time I must think it improbable, that they can either truly separate as many differing Bodies from Gold (for Instance) or _Osteocolla_, as we can do from Wine, or Vitriol; or that the Mercury (for Example) of Gold or Saturn would be perfectly of the same Nature with that of Harts-horn; and that the sulphur of Antimony would be but Numerically different from the Distill'd butter or oyle of Roses.

But suppose (sayes _Eleutherius_) that you should meet with Chymists, who would allow you to take in Earth and Water into the number of the principles of Mixt Bodies; and being also content to change the Ambiguous Name of Mercury for that more intelligible one of spirit, should consequently make the principles of Compound Bodies to be Five; would you not think it something hard to reject so plausible an Opinion, only because the Five substances into which the Fire divides mixt Bodies are not exactly pure, and Homogeneous? For my part (Continues _Carneades_) I cannot but think it somewhat strange, in case this Opinion be not true, that it should fall out so luckily, that so great a Variety of Bodies should be Analyz'd by the Fire into just five Distinct substances; which so little differing from the Bodies that bear those names, may so Plausibly be call'd Oyle, Spirit, Salt, Water, and Earth.

The Opinion You now propose (answers _Carneades_) being another then that I was engag'd to examine, it is not requisite for me to Debate it at present; nor should I have leisure to do it thorowly. Wherefore I shall only tell you in General, that though I think this Opinion in some respects more defensible then that of the Vulgar Chymists; yet you may easily enough learn from the past Discourse what may be thought of it: Since many of the Objections made against the Vulgar Doctrine of the Chymists seem, without much alteration, employable against this _Hypothesis_ also. For, besides that this Doctrine does as well as the other take it for granted, (what is not easie to be prov'd) that the Fire is the true and Adequate Analyzer of Bodies, and that all the Distinct substances obtainable from a mixt Body by the Fire, were so pre-existent in it, that they were but extricated from each other by the _Analysis_; Besides that this Opinion, too, ascribe [Errata: ascribes] to the Productions of the Fire an Elementary simplicity, which I have shewn not to belong to them; and besides that this Doctrine is lyable to some of the other Difficulties, wherewith That of the _Tria Prima_ is incumber'd; Besides all this, I say, this quinary number of Elements, (if you pardon the Expression) ought at least to have been restrain'd to the Generality of Animal and Vegetable Bodies, since not only among these there are some Bodies (as I formerly argu'd) which, for ought has yet been made to appear, do consist, either of fewer or more similar substances then precisely Five. But in the Mineral Kingdom, there is scarce one Concrete that has been evinc'd to be adequatly divisible into such five Principles or Elements, and neither more nor less, as this Opinion would have every mixt Body to consist of.

And this very thing (continues _Carneades_) may serve to take away or lessen your Wonder, that just so many Bodies as five should be found upon the Resolution of Concretes. For since we find not that the fire can make any such _Analysis_ (into five Elements) of Metals and other Mineral Bodies, whose Texture is more strong and permanent, it remains that the Five Substances under consideration be Obtain'd from Vegetable and Animal Bodies, which (probably by reason of their looser Contexture) are capable of being Distill'd. And as to such Bodies, 'tis natural enough, that, whether we suppose that there are, or are not, precisely five Elements, there should ordinarily occurr in the Dissipated parts a five Fold Diversity of Scheme (if I may so speak.) For if the Parts do not remain all fix'd, as in Gold, Calcin'd Talck, &c. nor all ascend, as in the Sublimation of Brimstone, Camphire, &c. but after their Dissipation do associate themselves into new Schemes of Matter; it is very likely, that they will by the Fire be divided into fix'd and Volatile (I mean, in Reference to that degree of heat by which they are destill'd) and those Volatile parts will, for the most part, ascend either in a dry forme, which Chymists are pleas'd to call, if they be Tastless, Flowers; if Sapid, Volatile Salt; or in a Liquid Forme. And this Liquor must be either inflamable, and so pass for oyl, or not inflamable, and yet subtile and pungent, which may be call'd Spirit; or else strengthless or insipid, which may be nam'd Phlegme, or Water. And as for the fixt part, or _Caput Mortuum_, it will most commonly consist of Corpuscles, partly Soluble in Water, or Sapid, (especially if the Saline parts were not so Volatile, as to fly away before) which make up its fixt salt; and partly insoluble and insipid, which therefore seems to challenge the name of Earth. But although upon this ground one might easily enough have foretold, that the differing substances obtain'd from a perfectly mixt Body by the Fire would for the most part be reducible to the five newly mentioned States of Matter; yet it will not presently follow, that these five Distinct substances were simple and primogeneal bodies, so pre-existent in the Concrete that the fire does but take them asunder. Besides that it does not appear, that all Mixt Bodies, (witness, Gold, Silver, Mercury, &c.) Nay nor perhaps all Vegetables, which may appear by what we said above of _Camphire_, _Benzoin_, &c. are resoluble by Fire into just such differing Schemes of Matter. Nor will the Experiments formerly alledg'd permit us to look upon these separated Substances as Elementary, or uncompounded. Neither will it be a sufficient Argument of their being Bodies that deserve the Names which Chymists are pleas'd to give them, that they have an Analogy in point of Consistence, or either Volatility or Fixtness, or else some other obvious Quality, with the suppos'd Principles, whose names are ascrib'd to them. For, as I told you above, notwithstanding this Resemblance in some one Quality, there may be such a Disparity in others, as may be more fit to give them Differing Appellations, then the Resemblance is to give them one and the same. And indeed it seems but somewhat a gross Way of judging of the Nature of Bodies, to conclude without Scruple, that those must be of the same Nature that agree in some such General Quality, as Fluidity, Dryness, Volatility, and the like: since each of those Qualities, or States of Matter, may Comprehend a great Variety of Bodies, otherwise of a very differing Nature; as we may see in the Calxes of Gold, of Vitriol, and of Venetian Talck, compar'd with common Ashes, which yet are very dry, and fix'd by the vehemence of the Fire, as well as they. And as we may likewise gather from what I have formerly Observ'd, touching the Spirit of Box-Wood, which though a Volatile, Sapid, and not inflamable Liquor, as well as the Spirits of Harts-horn, of Blood and others, (and therefore has been hitherto call'd, the Spirit, and esteem'd for one of the Principles of the Wood that affords it;) may yet, as I told You, be subdivided into two Liquors, differing from one another, and one of them at least, from the Generality of other Chymical Spirits.

But you may your self, if you please, (pursues _Carneades_) accommodate to the _Hypothesis_ you propos'd what other particulars you shall think applicable to it, in the foregoing Discourse. For I think it unseasonable for me to meddle now any further with a Controversie, which since it does not now belong to me, Leaves me at Liberty to Take my Own time to Declare my Self about it.

_Eleutherius_ perceiving that _Carneades_ was somewhat unwilling to spend any more time upon the debate of this Opinion, and having perhaps some thoughts of taking hence a Rise to make him Discourse it more fully another time, thought not fit as then to make any further mention to him of the propos'd opinion, but told him;

I presume I need not mind you, _Carneades_, That both the Patrons of the ternary number of Principles, and those that would have five Elements, endeavour to back their experiments with a specious Reason or two; and especially some of those Embracers of the Opinion last nam'd (whom I have convers'd with, and found them Learned men) assigne this Reason of the necessity of five distinct Elements; that otherwise mixt Bodies could not be so compounded and temper'd as to obtain a due consistence and competent Duration. For Salt (say they) is the _Basis_ of Solidity; and Permanency in Compound Bodies, without which the other four Elements might indeed be variously and loosly blended together, but would remain incompacted; but that Salt might be dissolv'd into minute Parts, and convey'd to the other Substances to be compacted by it, and with it, there is a Necessity of Water. And that the mixture may not be too hard and brittle, a Sulphureous or Oyly Principle must intervene to make the mass more tenacious; to this a Mercurial spirit must be superadded; which by its activity may for a while premeate [Transcriber's Note: permeate], and as it were leaven the whole Mass, and thereby promote the more exquisite mixture and incorporation of the Ingredients. To all which (lastly) a portion of Earth must be added, which by its drinesse and poracity [Errata: porosity] may soak up part of that water wherein the Salt was dissolv'd, and eminently concurr with the other ingredients to give the whole body the requisite consistence.

I perceive (sayes _Carneades_ smiling) that if it be true, as 'twas lately rooted [Errata: noted] from the Proverb, _That good Wits have bad Memories_, You have that Title, as well as a better, to a place among the good Wits. For you have already more then once forgot, that I declar'd to you that I would at this Conference Examine only the Experiments of my Adversaries, not their Speculative Reasons. Yet 'tis not (Subjoynes _Carneades_) for fear of medling with the Argument you have propos'd, that I decline the examining it at present. For if when we are more at leasure, you shall have a mind that we may Solemnly consider of it together; I am confident we shall scarce find it insoluble. And in the mean time we may observe, that such a way of Arguing may, it seems, be speciously accommodated to differing _Hypotheses_. For I find that _Beguinus_, and other Assertors of the _Tria Prima_, pretend to make out by such a way, the requisiteness of their Salt, Sulphur and Mercury, to constitute mixt Bodies, without taking notice of any necessity of an Addition of Water and Earth.

And indeed neither sort of Chymists seem to have duly consider'd how great Variety there is in the Textures and Consistences of Compound Bodie; sand [Errata: Bodies; and] how little the consistence and Duration of many of them seem to accommodate and be explicable by the propos'd Notion. And not to mention those almost incorruptible Substances obtainable by the Fire, which I have prov'd to be somewhat compounded, and which the Chymists will readily grant not to be perfectly mixt Bodies: (Not to mention these, I say) If you will but recall to mind some of those Experiments, whereby I shew'd You that out of common Water only mixt Bodies (and even living ones) of very differing consistences, and resoluble by Fire into as many Principles as other bodies acknowledg'd to be perfectly mixt; if you do this, I say, you will not, I suppose, be averse from beleeving, that Nature by a convenient disposition of the minute parts of a portion of matter may contrive bodies durable enough, and of this, or that, or the other Consistence, without being oblig'd to make use of all, much less of any Determinate quantity of each of the five Elements, or of the three Principles to compound such bodies of. And I have (pursues _Carneades_) something wonder'd, Chymists should not consider, that there is scarce any body in Nature so permanent and indissoluble as Glass; which yet themselves teach us may be made of bare Ashes, brought to fusion by the meer Violence of the Fire; so that, since Ashes are granted to consist but of pure Salt and simple Earth, sequestred from all the other Principles or Elements, they must acknowledge, That even Art it self can of two Elements only, or, if you please, one Principle and one Element, compound a Body more durable then almost any in the World. Which being undeniable, how will they prove that Nature cannot compound Mixt Bodies, and even durable Ones, under all the five Elements or material Principles.

But to insist any longer on this Occasional Disquisition, Touching their Opinion that would Establish five Elements, were to remember as little as You did before, that the Debate of this matter is no part of my first undertaking; and consequently, that I have already spent time enough in what I look back upon but as a digression, or at best an Excursion.

And thus, _Eleutherius_, (sayes _Carneades_) having at length gone through the four Considerations I propos'd to Discourse unto you, I hold it not unfit, for fear my having insisted so long on each of them may have made you forget their _Series_, briefly to repeat them by telling you, that

Since, in the first place, it may justly be doubted whether or no the Fire be, as Chymists suppose it, the genuine and Universal Resolver of mixt Bodies;

Since we may doubt, in the next place, whether or no all the Distinct Substances that may be obtain'd from a mixt body by the Fire were pre-existent there in the formes in which they were separated from it;

Since also, though we should grant the Substances separable from mixt Bodies by the fire to have been their component Ingredients, yet the Number of such substances does not appear the same in all mixt Bodies; some of them being Resoluble into more differing substances than three, and Others not being Resoluble into so many as three.

And Since, Lastly, those very substances that are thus separated are not for the most part pure and Elementary bodies, but new kinds of mixts;

Since, I say, these things are so, I hope you will allow me to inferr, that the Vulgar Experiments (I might perchance have Added, the Arguments too) wont to be Alledg'd by Chymists to prove, that their three Hypostatical Principles do adequately compose all mixt Bodies, are not so demonstrative as to reduce a wary Person to acquiesce in their Doctrine, which, till they Explain and prove it better, will by its perplexing darkness be more apt to puzzle then satisfy considering men, and will to them appear incumbred with no small Difficulties.

And from what has been hitherto deduc'd (continues _Carneades_) we may Learn, what to Judge of the common Practice of those Chymists, who because they have found that Diverse compound Bodies (for it will not hold in All) can be resolv'd into, or rather can be brought to afford two or three differing Substances more then the Soot and Ashes, whereinto the naked fire commonly divides them in our Chymnies, cry up their own Sect for the Invention of a New Philosophy, some of them, as _Helmont, &c._ styling themselves Philosophers by the Fire; and the most part not only ascribing, but as far as in them lies, engrossing to those of their Sect the Title of PHILOSOPHERS.

But alas, how narrow is this Philosophy, that reaches but to some of those compound Bodies, which we find but upon, or in the crust or outside of our terrestrial Globe, which is it self but a point in comparison of the vast extended Universe, of whose other and greater parts the Doctrine of the _Tria Prima_ does not give us an Account! For what does it teach us, either of the Nature of the Sun, which Astronomers affirme to be eight-score and odd times bigger then the whole Earth? or of that of those numerous fixt Starrs, which, for ought we know, would very few, if any of them, appear inferiour in bulke and brightness to the Sun, if they were as neer us as He? What does the knowing that Salt, sulphur and Mercury, are the Principles of Mixt Bodies, informe us of the Nature of that vast, fluid, and AEtherial Substance, that seemes to make up the interstellar, and consequently much the greatest part of the World? for as for the opinion commonly ascrib'd to _Paracelsus_, as if he would have not only the four Peripatetick Elements, but even the Celestial parts of the Universe to consist of his three Principles, since the modern Chymists themselves have not thought so groundless a conceit worth their owning, I shall not think it Worth my confuting.