{"collection":"philosophy-ethics","full_text_available":true,"graph_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/api/page/gutenberg_1271/graph","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/page/gutenberg_1271","id":"gutenberg_1271","license":"Public Domain (US)","rights_basis":"gutenberg_metadata_copyright_false","source":"gutenberg","source_url":"https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/1271","summary":null,"tags":["Alchemy","Category: Essays, Letters & Speeches","Category: History - Other","Category: Philosophy & Ethics","Chemistry","Magic","Superstition"],"text":"Produced by Charles Keller\n\n\n\n\n\nBYGONE BELIEFS BEING A SERIES OF EXCURSIONS IN THE BYWAYS OF THOUGHT\n\nBy H. Stanley Redgrove\n\n\n     _Alle Erfahrung ist Magic, und nur magisch erklarbar_.\n     NOVALIS (Friedrich von Hardenberg).\n\n     Everything possible to be believ'd is an image of truth.\n     WILLIAM BLAKE.\n\n\nTO MY WIFE\n\n\nTranscriber's Note:\n\n <.> = coordinate covalent bond.\n <#s> = subscripted #.\n <#S> = superscripted #.\n {} mark non-ascii characters.\n \"Emphasis\" _italics_ have a * mark.\n @@@ marks a reference to internal page numbers.\n Comments and guessed at characters in {braces} need stripped/fixed.\n Footnotes have not been re-numbered, however, (#) are moved to EOParagraph.\n The footnotes that have duplicate numbers across 2 pages are \"a\" and \"b\".\n \"Protected\" indentations have a space before the [Tab].\n EOL - have been converted to ([Soft Hyphen]).\n Greek letters are encoded in <gr > brackets, and the letters are\n based on Adobe's Symbol font.\n Hebrew letters are encoded in <hb > brackets.\n\n\n\n\nPREFACE\n\nTHESE Excursions in the Byways of Thought were undertaken at different\ntimes and on different occasions; consequently, the reader may be able\nto detect in them inequalities of treatment. He may feel that I have\nlingered too long in some byways and hurried too rapidly through others,\ntaking, as it were, but a general view of the road in the latter case,\nwhilst examining everything that could be seen in the former with,\nperhaps, undue care. As a matter of fact, how ever, all these excursions\nhave been undertaken with one and the same object in view, that, namely,\nof understanding aright and appreciating at their true worth some of the\nmore curious byways along which human thought has travelled. It is easy\nfor the superficial thinker to dismiss much of the thought of the past\n(and, indeed, of the present) as _mere_ superstition, not worth the\ntrouble of investigation: but it is not scientific. There is a reason\nfor every belief, even the most fantastic, and it should be our object\nto discover this reason. How far, if at all, the reason in any case\njustifies us in holding a similar belief is, of course, another\nquestion. Some of the beliefs I have dealt with I have treated at\ngreater length than others, because it seems to me that the truths of\nwhich they are the images--vague and distorted in many cases though they\nbe--are truths which we have either forgotten nowadays, or are in danger\nof forgetting. We moderns may, indeed, learn something from the thought\nof the past, even in its most fantastic aspects. In one excursion at\nleast, namely, the essay on \"The Cambridge Platonists,\" I have ventured\nto deal with a higher phase--perhaps I should say the highest phase--of\nthe thought of a bygone age, to which the modern world may be completely\ndebtor.\n\n\"Some Characteristics of Mediaeval Thought,\" and the two essays on\nAlchemy, have appeared in _The Journal of the Alchemical Society_.\nIn others I have utilised material I have contributed to _The Occult\nReview_, to the editor of which journal my thanks are due for permission\nso to do. I have also to express my gratitude to the Rev. A. H. COLLINS,\nand others to be referred to in due course, for permission here to\nreproduce illustrations of which they are the copyright holders. I have\nfurther to offer my hearty thanks to Mr B. R. ROWBOTTOM and my wife for\nvaluable assistance in reading the proofs. H. S. R.\n\nBLETCHLEY, BUCKS, _December_ 1919.\n\n\n\nCONTENTS PAGE\n\n    PREFACE........................... ix\n    LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS.................... xiii\n  1.  SOME CHARACTERISTICS OF MEDIAEVAL THOUGHT.........  1\n  2.  PYTHAGORAS AND HIS PHILOSOPHY...............  8\n  3.  MEDICINE AND MAGIC..................... 25\n  4.  SUPERSTITIONS CONCERNING BIRDS .............. 34\n  5.  THE POWDER OF SYMPATHY:  A CURIOUS MEDICAL SUPERSTITION.. 47\n  6.  THE BELIEF IN TALISMANS.................. 57\n  7.  CEREMONIAL MAGIC IN THEORY AND PRACTICE.......... 87\n  8.  ARCHITECTURAL SYMBOLISM..................111\n  9.  THE QUEST OF THE PHILOSOPHER'S STONE............121\n  10. THE PHALLIC ELEMENT IN ALCHEMICAL DOCTRINE.........149\n  11. ROGER BACON:  AN APPRECIATION...............183\n  12. THE CAMBRIDGE PLATONISTS..................193\n\n\n{the LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS are incomplete and raw OCR output!}\n\n PAGE 46.  Symbolic Alchemical Design from Mutus Liber (1677).\n PLATE: 25, to face p.176\n 47.  Symbolic Alchemical Design illustrating the Work of Woman,\n      from MAIER's Atalanta Fugiens...,, 26,,, 178\n 48.  Symbolic Alchemica Design, Hermaphrodite,\n      from MAIER's Atalanta Fugiens..,, 27,,, 180\n 49.  ROGER BACON presenting a Book to a King, from a Fifteenth Century\n      Miniature in the Bodleian Library, Oxford...,, 28,,, 184\n 50.  ROGER BACON, from a Portrait in Knole Castle..,, 29,,, 188\n 51.  BENJAMIN WHICHCOTE, from an engraved Portrait\n      by ROBERT WHITE....30...194\n 52.  HENRY MORE, from a Portrait by DAVID LOGGAN, engraved ad vivum, 1679\n     ...,, 31,,, 198\n 53.  RALPH CUDWORTH, from an engraved Portrait by VERTUE, after LOGGAN,\n      forming the Frontispiece to CUDWORTH's Treatise Concerning Morality\n      (1731) ,, 32,,, 3~\n\n\n\n\nBYGONE BELIEFS\n\n\n\n\nI. SOME CHARACTERISTICS OF MEDAEVAL THOUGHT\n\nIN the earliest days of his upward evolution man was satisfied with\na very crude explanation of natural phenomena--that to which the name\n\"animism\" has been given. In this stage of mental development all the\nvarious forces of Nature are personified: the rushing torrent, the\ndevastating fire, the wind rustling the forest leaves--in the mind of\nthe animistic savage all these are personalities, spirits, like himself,\nbut animated by motives more or less antagonistic to him.\n\nI suppose that no possible exception could be taken to the statement\nthat modern science renders animism impossible. But let us inquire\nin exactly what sense this is true. It is not true that science robs\nnatural phenomena of their spiritual significance. The mistake is often\nmade of supposing that science explains, or endeavours to explain,\nphenomena. But that is the business of philosophy. The task science\nattempts is the simpler one of the correlation of natural phenomena, and\nin this effort leaves the ultimate problems of metaphysics untouched. A\nuniverse, however, whose phenomena are not only capable of some degree\nof correlation, but present the extraordinary degree of harmony and\nunity which science makes manifest in Nature, cannot be, as in animism,\nthe product of a vast number of inco-ordinated and antagonistic wills,\nbut must either be the product of one Will, or not the product of will\nat all.\n\nThe latter alternative means that the Cosmos is inexplicable, which not\nonly man's growing experience, but the fact that man and the\nuniverse form essentially a unity, forbid us to believe. The term\n\"anthropomorphic\" is too easily applied to philosophical systems, as if\nit constituted a criticism of their validity. For if it be true, as\nall must admit, that the unknown can only be explained in terms of\nthe known, then the universe must either be explained in terms of\nman--_i.e_. in terms of will or desire--or remain incomprehensible. That\nis to say, a philosophy must either be anthropomorphic, or no philosophy\nat all.\n\nThus a metaphysical scrutiny of the results of modern science leads us\nto a belief in God. But man felt the need of unity, and crude animism,\nthough a step in the right direction, failed to satisfy his thought,\nlong before the days of modern science. The spirits of animism, however,\nwere not discarded, but were modified, co-ordinated, and worked into a\nsystem as servants of the Most High. Polytheism may mark a stage in this\nprocess; or, perhaps, it was a result of mental degeneracy.\n\nWhat I may term systematised as distinguished from crude animism\npersisted throughout the Middle Ages. The work of systematisation had\nalready been accomplished, to a large extent, by the Neo-Platonists\nand whoever were responsible for the Kabala. It is true that these main\nsources of magical or animistic philosophy remained hidden during the\ngreater part of the Middle Ages; but at about their close the youthful\nand enthusiastic CORNELIUS AGRIPPA (1486-1535)(1) slaked his thirst\nthereat and produced his own attempt at the systematisation of magical\nbelief in the famous _Three Books of Occult Philosophy_. But the waters\nof magical philosophy reached the mediaeval mind through various devious\nchannels, traditional on the one hand and literary on the other. And of\nthe latter, the works of pseudo-DIONYSIUS,(2) whose immense influence\nupon mediaeval thought has sometimes been neglected, must certainly be\nnoted.\n\n\n(1) The story of his life has been admirably told by HENRY MORLEY (2\nvols., 1856).\n\n(2) These writings were first heard of in the early part of the sixth\ncentury, and were probably the work of a Syrian monk of that date, who\nfathered them on to DIONYSIUS the Areopagite as a pious fraud. See Dean\nINGE'S _Christian Mysticism_ (1899), pp. 104--122, and VAUGHAN'S _Hours\nwith the Mystics_ (7th ed., 1895), vol. i. pp. 111-124. The books have\nbeen translated into English by the Rev. JOHN PARKER (2 vols.1897-1899),\nwho believes in the genuineness of their alleged authorship.\n\n\nThe most obvious example of a mediaeval animistic belief is that in\n\"elementals\"--the spirits which personify the primordial forces of\nNature, and are symbolised by the four elements, immanent in which they\nwere supposed to exist, and through which they were held to manifest\ntheir powers. And astrology, it must be remembered, is essentially a\nsystematised animism. The stars, to the ancients, were not material\nbodies like the earth, but spiritual beings. PLATO (427-347 B.C.) speaks\nof them as \"gods\". Mediaeval thought did not regard them in quite this\nway. But for those who believed in astrology, and few, I think, did\nnot, the stars were still symbols of spiritual forces operative on man.\nEvidences of the wide extent of astrological belief in those days are\nabundant, many instances of which we shall doubtless encounter in our\nexcursions.\n\nIt has been said that the theological and philosophical atmosphere of\nthe Middle Ages was \"scholastic,\" not mystical. No doubt \"mysticism,\" as\na mode of life aiming at the realisation of the presence of God, is\nas distinct from scholasticism as empiricism is from rationalism,\nor \"tough-minded\" philosophy (to use JAMES' happy phrase) is from\n\"tender-minded\". But no philosophy can be absolutely and purely\ndeductive. It must start from certain empirically determined facts. A\nman might be an extreme empiricist in religion (_i.e_. a mystic),\nand yet might attempt to deduce all other forms of knowledge from the\nresults of his religious experiences, never caring to gather experience\nin any other realm. Hence the breach between mysticism and scholasticism\nis not really so wide as may appear at first sight. Indeed,\nscholasticism officially recognised three branches of theology, of which\nthe MYSTICAL was one. I think that mysticism and scholasticism both had\na profound influence on the mediaeval mind, sometimes acting as opposing\nforces, sometimes operating harmoniously with one another. As Professor\nWINDELBAND puts it: \"We no longer onesidedly characterise the philosophy\nof the middle ages as scholasticism, but rather place mysticism beside\nit as of equal rank, and even as being the more fruitful and promising\nmovement.\"(1)\n\n\n(1) Professor WILHELM WINDELBAND, Ph.D.: \"Present-Day Mysticism,\" _The\nQuest_, vol. iv. (1913), P. 205.\n\n\nAlchemy, with its four Aristotelian or scholastic elements and its\nthree mystical principles--sulphur, mercury, salt,--must be cited as\nthe outstanding product of the combined influence of mysticism and\nscholasticism: of mysticism, which postulated the unity of the Cosmos,\nand hence taught that everything natural is the expressive image and\ntype of some supernatural reality; of scholasticism, which taught men\nto rely upon deduction and to restrict experimentation to the smallest\npossible limits.\n\nThe mind naturally proceeds from the known, or from what is supposed to\nbe known, to the unknown. Indeed, as I have already indicated, it must\nso proceed if truth is to be gained. Now what did the men of the Middle\nAges regard as falling into the category of the known? Why, surely, the\ntruths of revealed religion, whether accepted upon authority or upon\nthe evidence of their own experience. The realm of spiritual and moral\nreality: there, they felt, they were on firm ground. Nature was a realm\nunknown; but they had analogy to guide, or, rather, misguide them.\nNevertheless if, as we know, it misguided, this was not, I think,\nbecause the mystical doctrine of the correspondence between the\nspiritual and the natural is unsound, but because these ancient seekers\ninto Nature's secrets knew so little, and so frequently misapplied what\nthey did know. So alchemical philosophy arose and became systematised,\nwith its wonderful endeavour to perfect the base metals by the\nPhilosopher's Stone--the concentrated Essence of Nature,--as man's soul\nis perfected through the life-giving power of JESUS CHRIST.\n\nI want, in conclusion to these brief introductory remarks, to say a\nfew words concerning phallicism in connection with my topic. For some\n\"tender-minded\"(1) and, to my thought, obscure, reason the subject is\ntabooed. Even the British Museum does not include works on phallicism\nin its catalogue, and special permission has to be obtained to consult\nthem. Yet the subject is of vast importance as concerns the origin\nand development of religion and philosophy, and the extent of phallic\nworship may be gathered from the widespread occurrence of obelisks and\nsimilar objects amongst ancient relics. Our own maypole dances may be\ninstanced as one survival of the ancient worship of the male generative\nprinciple.\n\n\n(1) I here use the term with the extended meaning Mr H. G. WELLS has\ngiven to it. See _The New Machiavelli_.\n\n\nWhat could be more easy to understand than that, when man first\nquestioned as to the creation of the earth, he should suppose it to have\nbeen generated by some process analogous to that which he saw held in\nthe case of man? How else could he account for its origin, if knowledge\nmust proceed from the known to the unknown? No one questions at all\nthat the worship of the human generative organs as symbols of the dual\ngenerative principle of Nature degenerated into orgies of the most\nfrightful character, but the view of Nature which thus degenerated is\nnot, I think, an altogether unsound one, and very interesting remnants\nof it are to be found in mediaeval philosophy.\n\nThese remnants are very marked in alchemy. The metals, as I have\nsuggested, are there regarded as types of man; hence they are\nproduced from seed, through the combination of male and female\nprinciples--mercury and sulphur, which on the spiritual plane are\nintelligence and love. The same is true of that Stone which is perfect\nMan. As BERNARD of TREVISAN (1406-1490) wrote in the fifteenth century:\n\"This Stone then is compounded of a Body and Spirit, or of a volatile\nand fixed Substance, and that is therefore done, because nothing in\nthe World can be generated and brought to light without these two\nSubstances, to wit, a Male and Female: From whence it appeareth, that\nalthough these two Substances are not of one and the same species, yet\none Stone doth thence arise, and although they appear and are said to be\ntwo Substances, yet in truth it is but one, to wit, _Argent-vive_.\"(1)\nNo doubt this sounds fantastic; but with all their seeming intellectual\nfollies these old thinkers were no fools. The fact of sex is the most\nfundamental fact of the universe, and is a spiritual and physical as\nwell as a physiological fact. I shall deal with the subject as concerns\nthe speculations of the alchemists in some detail in a later excursion.\n\n\n(1) BERNARD, Earl of TREVISAN: _A Treatise of the Philosopher's Stone_,\n1683. (See _Collectanea Chymica: A Collection of Ten Several Treatises\nin Chemistry_, 1684, p. 91.)\n\n\n\n\nII. PYTHAGORAS AND HIS PHILOSOPHY\n\nIT is a matter for enduring regret that so little is known to us\nconcerning PYTHAGORAS. What little we do know serves but to enhance\nfor us the interest of the man and his philosophy, to make him, in many\nways, the most attractive of Greek thinkers; and, basing our estimate\non the extent of his influence on the thought of succeeding ages, we\nrecognise in him one of the world's master-minds.\n\nPYTHAGORAS was born about 582 B.C. at Samos, one of the Grecian isles.\nIn his youth he came in contact with THALES--the Father of Geometry,\nas he is well called,--and though he did not become a member of THALES'\nschool, his contact with the latter no doubt helped to turn his mind\ntowards the study of geometry. This interest found the right ground for\nits development in Egypt, which he visited when still young. Egypt is\ngenerally regarded as the birthplace of geometry, the subject having, it\nis supposed, been forced on the minds of the Egyptians by the necessity\nof fixing the boundaries of lands against the annual overflowing of the\nNile. But the Egyptians were what is called an essentially practical\npeople, and their geometrical knowledge did not extend beyond a few\nempirical rules useful for fixing these boundaries and in constructing\ntheir temples. Striking evidence of this fact is supplied by the AHMES\npapyrus, compiled some little time before 1700 B.C. from an older\nwork dating from about 3400 B.C.,(1) a papyrus which almost certainly\nrepresents the highest mathematical knowledge reached by the Egyptians\nof that day. Geometry is treated very superficially and as of subsidiary\ninterest to arithmetic; there is no ordered series of reasoned\ngeometrical propositions given--nothing, indeed, beyond isolated rules,\nand of these some are wanting in accuracy.\n\n\n(1) See AUGUST EISENLOHR: _Ein mathematisches Handbuch der alten\nAegypter_ (1877); J. Gow: _A Short History of Greek Mathematics_ (1884);\nand V. E. JOHNSON: _Egyptian Science from the Monuments and Ancient\nBooks_ (1891).\n\n\nOne geometrical fact known to the Egyptians was that if a triangle be\nconstructed having its sides 3, 4, and 5 units long respectively, then\nthe angle opposite the longest side is exactly a right angle; and the\nEgyptian builders used this rule for constructing walls perpendicular to\neach other, employing a cord graduated in the required manner. The\nGreek mind was not, however, satisfied with the bald statement of mere\nfacts--it cared little for practical applications, but sought above all\nfor the underlying REASON of everything. Nowadays we are beginning to\nrealise that the results achieved by this type of mind, the general laws\nof Nature's behaviour formulated by its endeavours, are frequently\nof immense practical importance--of far more importance than the mere\nrules-of-thumb beyond which so-called practical minds never advance.\nThe classic example of the utility of seemingly useless knowledge is\nafforded by Sir WILLIAM HAMILTON'S discovery, or, rather, invention of\nQuarternions, but no better example of the utilitarian triumph of the\ntheoretical over the so-called practical mind can be adduced than that\nafforded by PYTHAGORAS. Given this rule for constructing a right angle,\nabout whose reason the Egyptian who used it never bothered himself, and\nthe mind of PYTHAGORAS, searching for its full significance, made that\ngigantic geometrical discovery which is to this day known as the Theorem\nof PYTHAGORAS--the law that in every right-angled triangle the square\non the side opposite the right angle is equal in area to the sum of the\nsquares on the other two sides.(1) The importance of this discovery\ncan hardly be overestimated. It is of fundamental importance in most\nbranches of geometry, and the basis of the whole of trigonometry--the\nspecial branch of geometry that deals with the practical mensuration of\ntriangles. EUCLID devoted the whole of the first book of his _Elements\nof Geometry_ to establishing the truth of this theorem; how PYTHAGORAS\ndemonstrated it we unfortunately do not know.\n\n\n(1) Fig. 3 affords an interesting practical demonstration of the truth\nof this theorem. If the reader will copy this figure, cut out the\nsquares on the two shorter sides of the triangle and divide them along\nthe lines AD, BE, EF, he will find that the five pieces so obtained can\nbe made exactly to fit the square on the longest side as shown by the\ndotted lines. The size and shape of the triangle ABC, so long as it\nhas a right angle at C, is immaterial. The lines AD, BE are obtained\nby continuing the sides of the square on the side AB, _i.e_. the side\nopposite the right angle, and EF is drawn at right angles to BE.\n\nAfter absorbing what knowledge was to be gained in Egypt, PYTHAGORAS\njourneyed to Babylon, where he probably came into contact with even\ngreater traditions and more potent influences and sources of knowledge\nthan in Egypt, for there is reason for believing that the ancient\nChaldeans were the builders of the Pyramids and in many ways the\nintellectual superiors of the Egyptians.\n\nAt last, after having travelled still further East, probably as far as\nIndia, PYTHAGORAS returned to his birthplace to teach the men of his\nnative land the knowledge he had gained. But CROESUS was tyrant over\nSamos, and so oppressive was his rule that none had leisure in which to\nlearn. Not a student came to PYTHAGORAS, until, in despair, so the story\nruns, he offered to pay an artisan if he would but learn geometry. The\nman accepted, and later, when PYTHAGORAS pretended inability any longer\nto continue the payments, he offered, so fascinating did he find\nthe subject, to pay his teacher instead if the lessons might only be\ncontinued. PYTHAGORAS no doubt was much gratified at this; and the\nmotto he adopted for his great Brotherhood, of which we shall make the\nacquaintance in a moment, was in all likelihood based on this event. It\nran, \"Honour a figure and a step before a figure and a tribolus\"; or, as\na freer translation renders it:--\n\n\"A figure and a step onward Not a figure and a florin.\"\n\n\n\"At all events,\" as Mr FRANKLAND remarks, \"the motto is a lasting witness\nto a very singular devotion to knowledge for its own sake.\"(1)\n\n\n(1) W. B. FRANKLAND, M.A.: _The Story of Euclid_ (1902), p. 33\n\nBut PYTHAGORAS needed a greater audience than one man, however\nenthusiastic a pupil he might be, and he left Samos for Southern\nItaly, the rich inhabitants of whose cities had both the leisure and\ninclination to study. Delphi, far-famed for its Oracles, was visited _en\nroute_, and PYTHAGORAS, after a sojourn at Tarentum, settled at Croton,\nwhere he gathered about him a great band of pupils, mainly young people\nof the aristocratic class. By consent of the Senate of Croton, he formed\nout of these a great philosophical brotherhood, whose members lived\napart from the ordinary people, forming, as it were, a separate\ncommunity. They were bound to PYTHAGORAS by the closest ties of\nadmiration and reverence, and, for years after his death, discoveries\nmade by Pythagoreans were invariably attributed to the Master, a fact\nwhich makes it very difficult exactly to gauge the extent of PYTHAGORAS'\nown knowledge and achievements. The regime of the Brotherhood, or\nPythagorean Order, was a strict one, entailing \"high thinking and low\nliving\" at all times. A restricted diet, the exact nature of which is\nin dispute, was observed by all members, and long periods of silence, as\nconducive to deep thinking, were imposed on novices. Women were admitted\nto the Order, and PYTHAGORAS' asceticism did not prohibit romance,\nfor we read that one of his fair pupils won her way to his heart, and,\ndeclaring her affection for him, found it reciprocated and became his\nwife.\n\nSCHURE writes: \"By his marriage with Theano, Pythagoras affixed _the\nseal of realization_ to his work. The union and fusion of the two lives\nwas complete. One day when the master's wife was asked what length of\ntime elapsed before a woman could become pure after intercourse with a\nman, she replied: 'If it is with her husband, she is pure all the time;\nif with another man, she is never pure.'\" \"Many women,\" adds the writer,\n\"would smilingly remark that to give such a reply one must be the wife\nof Pythagoras, and love him as Theano did. And they would be in the\nright, for it is not marriage that sanctifies love, it is love which\njustifies marriage.\"(1)\n\n\n(1) EDOUARD SCHURE: _Pythagoras and the Delphic Mysteries_, trans. by F.\nROTHWELL, B.A. (1906), pp. 164 and 165.\n\n\nPYTHAGORAS was not merely a mathematician, he was first and foremost a\nphilosopher, whose philosophy found in number the basis of all things,\nbecause number, for him, alone possessed stability of relationship. As I\nhave remarked on a former occasion, \"The theory that the Cosmos has its\norigin and explanation in Number... is one for which it is not difficult\nto account if we take into consideration the nature of the times in\nwhich it was formulated. The Greek of the period, looking upon Nature,\nbeheld no picture of harmony, uniformity and fundamental unity. The\nouter world appeared to him rather as a discordant chaos, the mere sport\nand plaything of the gods. The theory of the uniformity of Nature--that\nNature is ever like to herself--the very essence of the modern\nscientific spirit, had yet to be born of years of unwearied labour\nand unceasing delving into Nature's innermost secrets. Only in\nMathematics--in the properties of geometrical figures, and of\nnumbers--was the reign of law, the principle of harmony, perceivable.\nEven at this present day when the marvellous has become commonplace,\nthat property of right-angled triangles... already discussed... comes\nto the mind as a remarkable and notable fact: it must have seemed a\nstupendous marvel to its discoverer, to whom, it appears, the regular\nalternation of the odd and even numbers, a fact so obvious to us that\nwe are inclined to attach no importance to it, seemed, itself, to be\nsomething wonderful. Here in Geometry and Arithmetic, here was order and\nharmony unsurpassed and unsurpassable. What wonder then that Pythagoras\nconcluded that the solution of the mighty riddle of the Universe was\ncontained in the mysteries of Geometry? What wonder that he read mystic\nmeanings into the laws of Arithmetic, and believed Number to be the\nexplanation and origin of all that is?\"(1)\n\n\n(1) _A Mathematical Theory of Spirit_ (1912), pp. 64-65.\n\n\nNo doubt the Pythagorean theory suffers from a defect similar to that\nof the Kabalistic doctrine, which, starting from the fact that all words\nare composed of letters, representing the primary sounds of language,\nmaintained that all the things represented by these words were created\nby God by means of the twenty-two letters of the Hebrew alphabet. But at\nthe same time the Pythagorean theory certainly embodies a considerable\nelement of truth. Modern science demonstrates nothing more clearly\nthan the importance of numerical relationships. Indeed, \"the history of\nscience shows us the gradual transformation of crude facts of experience\ninto increasingly exact generalisations by the application to them of\nmathematics. The enormous advances that have been made in recent years\nin physics and chemistry are very largely due to mathematical methods\nof interpreting and co-ordinating facts experimentally revealed, whereby\nfurther experiments have been suggested, the results of which have\nthemselves been mathematically interpreted. Both physics and chemistry,\nespecially the former, are now highly mathematical. In the biological\nsciences and especially in psychology it is true that mathematical\nmethods are, as yet, not so largely employed. But these sciences are far\nless highly developed, far less exact and systematic, that is to say,\nfar less scientific, at present, than is either physics or chemistry.\nHowever, the application of statistical methods promises good results,\nand there are not wanting generalisations already arrived at which\nare expressible mathematically; Weber's Law in psychology, and the law\nconcerning the arrangement of the leaves about the stems of plants in\nbiology, may be instanced as cases in point.\"(1)\n\n\n(1) Quoted from a lecture by the present writer on \"The Law of\nCorrespondences Mathematically Considered,\" delivered before The\nTheological and Philosophical Society on 26th April 1912, and published\nin _Morning Light_, vol. xxxv (1912), p. 434 _et seq_.\n\n\nThe Pythagorean doctrine of the Cosmos, in its most reasonable form,\nhowever, is confronted with one great difficulty which it seems\nincapable of overcoming, namely, that of continuity. Modern science,\nwith its atomic theories of matter and electricity, does, indeed, show\nus that the apparent continuity of material things is spurious, that all\nmaterial things consist of discrete particles, and are hence measurable\nin numerical terms. But modern science is also obliged to postulate an\nether behind these atoms, an ether which is wholly continuous, and hence\ntranscends the domain of number.(1) It is true that, in quite recent\ntimes, a certain school of thought has argued that the ether is\nalso atomic in constitution--that all things, indeed, have a grained\nstructure, even forces being made up of a large number of quantums\nor indivisible units of force. But this view has not gained general\nacceptance, and it seems to necessitate the postulation of an ether\nbeyond the ether, filling the interspaces between its atoms, to obviate\nthe difficulty of conceiving of action at a distance.\n\n\n(1) Cf. chap. iii., \"On Nature as the Embodiment of Number,\" of my _A\nMathematical Theory of Spirit_, to which reference has already been\nmade.\n\n\nAccording to BERGSON, life--the reality that can only be lived, not\nunderstood--is absolutely continuous (_i.e_. not amenable to numerical\ntreatment). It is because life is absolutely continuous that we cannot,\nhe says, understand it; for reason acts discontinuously, grasping only,\nso to speak, a cinematographic view of life, made up of an immense\nnumber of instantaneous glimpses. All that passes between the glimpses\nis lost, and so the true whole, reason can never synthesise from that\nwhich it possesses. On the other hand, one might also argue--extending,\nin a way, the teaching of the physical sciences of the period between\nthe postulation of DALTON'S atomic theory and the discovery of the\nsignificance of the ether of space--that reality is essentially\ndiscontinuous, our idea that it is continuous being a mere illusion\narising from the coarseness of our senses. That might provide a complete\nvindication of the Pythagorean view; but a better vindication, if not\nof that theory, at any rate of PYTHAGORAS' philosophical attitude,\nis forthcoming, I think, in the fact that modern mathematics has\ntranscended the shackles of number, and has enlarged her kingdom, so as\nto include quantities other than numerical. PYTHAGORAS, had he been\nborn in these latter centuries, would surely have rejoiced in this,\nenlargement, whereby the continuous as well as the discontinuous is\nbrought, if not under the rule of number, under the rule of mathematics\nindeed.\n\nPYTHAGORAS' foremost achievement in mathematics I have already\nmentioned. Another notable piece of work in the same department was\nthe discovery of a method of constructing a parallelogram having a side\nequal to a given line, an angle equal to a given angle, and its area\nequal to that of a given triangle. PYTHAGORAS is said to have celebrated\nthis discovery by the sacrifice of a whole ox. The problem appears in\nthe first book of EUCLID'S _Elements of Geometry_ as proposition 44. In\nfact, many of the propositions of EUCLID'S first, second, fourth, and\nsixth books were worked out by PYTHAGORAS and the Pythagoreans; but,\ncuriously enough, they seem greatly to have neglected the geometry of\nthe circle.\n\nThe symmetrical solids were regarded by PYTHAGORAS, and by the Greek\nthinkers after him, as of the greatest importance. To be perfectly\nsymmetrical or regular, a solid must have an equal number of faces\nmeeting at each of its angles, and these faces must be equal regular\npolygons, _i.e_. figures whose sides and angles are all equal.\nPYTHAGORAS, perhaps, may be credited with the great discovery that there\nare only five such solids. These are as follows:--\n\nThe Tetrahedron, having four equilateral triangles as faces.\n\nThe Cube, having six squares as faces.\n\nThe Octahedron, having eight equilateral triangles as faces.\n\nThe Dodecahedron, having twelve regular pentagons (or five-sided\nfigures) as faces.\n\nThe Icosahedron, having twenty equilateral triangles as faces.(1)\n\n\n(1) If the reader will copy figs. 4 to 8 on cardboard or stiff paper,\nbend each along the dotted lines so as to form a solid, fastening\ntogether the free edges with gummed paper, he will be in possession of\nmodels of the five solids in question.\n\n\nNow, the Greeks believed the world to be composed of four\nelements--earth, air, fire, water,--and to the Greek mind the conclusion\nwas inevitable(2a) that the shapes of the particles of the elements\nwere those of the regular solids. Earth-particles were cubical, the cube\nbeing the regular solid possessed of greatest stability; fire-particles\nwere tetrahedral, the tetrahedron being the simplest and, hence,\nlightest solid. Water-particles were icosahedral for exactly the reverse\nreason, whilst air-particles, as intermediate between the two latter,\nwere octahedral. The dodecahedron was, to these ancient mathematicians,\nthe most mysterious of the solids: it was by far the most difficult to\nconstruct, the accurate drawing of the regular pentagon necessitating a\nrather elaborate application of PYTHAGORAS' great theorem.(1) Hence the\nconclusion, as PLATO put it, that \"this (the regular dodecahedron) the\nDeity employed in tracing the plan of the Universe.\"(2b) Hence also\nthe high esteem in which the pentagon was held by the Pythagoreans. By\nproducing each side of this latter figure the five-pointed star (fig.\n9), known as the pentagram, is obtained. This was adopted by the\nPythagoreans as the badge of their Society, and for many ages was held\nas a symbol possessed of magic powers. The mediaeval magicians made use\nof it in their evocations, and as a talisman it was held in the highest\nesteem.\n\n\n(2a) _Cf_. PLATO: The Timaeus, SESE xxviii--xxx.\n\n(1) In reference to this matter FRANKLAND remarks: \"In those early days\nthe innermost secrets of nature lay in the lap of geometry, and the\nextraordinary inference follows that Euclid's _Elements_, which are\ndevoted to the investigation of the regular solids, are therefore in\nreality and at bottom an attempt to 'solve the universe.' Euclid,\nin fact, made this goal of the Pythagoreans the aim of his\n_Elements_.\"--_Op. cit_., p. 35.\n\n(2b) _Op. cit_., SE xxix.\n\n\nMusic played an important part in the curriculum of the Pythagorean\nBrotherhood, and the important discovery that the relations between\nthe notes of musical scales can be expressed by means of numbers is a\nPythagorean one. It must have seemed to its discoverer--as, in a sense,\nit indeed is--a striking confirmation of the numerical theory of the\nCosmos. The Pythagoreans held that the positions of the heavenly bodies\nwere governed by similar numerical relations, and that in consequence\ntheir motion was productive of celestial music. This concept of \"the\nharmony of the spheres\" is among the most celebrated of the Pythagorean\ndoctrines, and has found ready acceptance in many mystically-speculative\nminds. \"Look how the floor of heaven,\" says Lorenzo in SHAKESPEARE'S\n_The Merchant of Venice_--\n\n \"... Look how the floor of heaven\n Is thick inlaid with patines of bright gold:\n There's not the smallest orb which thou behold's\"\n But in his motion like an angel sings,\n Still quiring to the young-eyed cherubins;\n Such harmony is in immortal souls;\n But whilst this muddy vesture of decay\n Doth grossly close it in, we cannot hear it.\"(1)\n\n\n(1) Act v. scene i.\n\nOr, as KINGSLEY writes in one of his letters, \"When I walk the fields I\nam oppressed every now and then with an innate feeling that everything\nI see has a meaning, if I could but understand it. And this feeling\nof being surrounded with truths which I cannot grasp, amounts to an\nindescribable awe sometimes! Everything seems to be full of God's\nreflex, if we could but see it. Oh! how I have prayed to have the\nmystery unfolded, at least hereafter. To see, if but for a moment, the\nwhole harmony of the great system! To hear once the music which the\nwhole universe makes as it performs His bidding!\"(1) In this connection\nmay be mentioned the very significant fact that the Pythagoreans did\nnot consider the earth, in accordance with current opinion, to be a\nstationary body, but believed that it and the other planets revolved\nabout a central point, or fire, as they called it.\n\n\n(1) CHARLES KINGSLEY: _His Letters and Memories of His Life_, edited by\nhis wife (1883), p. 28.\n\n\nAs concerns PYTHAGORAS' ethical teaching, judging from the so-called\n_Golden Verses_ attributed to him, and no doubt written by one of his\ndisciples,(2) this would appear to be in some respects similar to that\nof the Stoics who came later, but free from the materialism of the Stoic\ndoctrines. Due regard for oneself is blended with regard for the gods\nand for other men, the atmosphere of the whole being at once rational\nand austere. One verse--\"Thou shalt likewise know, according to Justice,\nthat the nature of this Universe is in all things alike\"(3)--is of\nparticular interest, as showing PYTHAGORAS' belief in that principle of\nanalogy--that \"What is below is as that which is above, what is above is\nas that which is below\"--which held so dominant a sway over the minds of\nancient and mediaeval philosophers, leading them--in spite, I suggest,\nof its fundamental truth--into so many fantastic errors, as we shall\nsee in future excursions. Metempsychosis was another of the Pythagorean\ntenets, a fact which is interesting in view of the modern revival\nof this doctrine. PYTHAGORAS, no doubt, derived it from the East,\napparently introducing it for the first time to Western thought.\n\n\n(2) It seems probable, though not certain, that PYTHAGORAS wrote nothing\nhimself, but taught always by the oral method.\n\n(3) Cf. the remarks of HIEROCLES on this verse in his _Commentary_.\n\n\nSuch, in brief, were the outstanding doctrines of the Pythagorean\nBrotherhood. Their teachings included, as we have seen, what may justly\nbe called scientific discoveries of the first importance, as well as\ndoctrines which, though we may feel compelled--perhaps rightly--to\nregard them as fantastic now, had an immense influence on the thought of\nsucceeding ages, especially on Greek philosophy as represented by PLATO\nand the Neo-Platonists, and the more speculative minds--the occult\nphilosophers, shall I say?--of the latter mediaeval period and\nsucceeding centuries. The Brotherhood, however, was not destined to\ncontinue its days in peace. As I have indicated, it was a philosophical,\nnot a political, association; but naturally PYTHAGORAS' philosophy\nincluded political doctrines. At any rate, the Brotherhood acquired a\nconsiderable share in the government of Croton, a fact which was greatly\nresented by the members of the democratic party, who feared the loss of\ntheir rights; and, urged thereto, it is said, by a rejected applicant\nfor membership of the Order, the mob made an onslaught on the\nBrotherhood's place of assembly and burnt it to the ground. One account\nhas it that PYTHAGORAS himself died in the conflagration, a sacrifice\nto the mad fury of the mob. According to another account--and we like to\nbelieve that this is the true one--he escaped to Tarentum, from which he\nwas banished, to find an asylum in Metapontum, where he lived his last\nyears in peace.\n\nThe Pythagorean Order was broken up, but the bonds of brotherhood still\nexisted between its members. \"One of them who had fallen upon sickness\nand poverty was kindly taken in by an innkeeper. Before dying he traced\na few mysterious signs (the pentagram, no doubt) on the door of the inn\nand said to the host: 'Do not be uneasy, one of my brothers will pay my\ndebts.' A year afterwards, as a stranger was passing by this inn he saw\nthe signs and said to the host: 'I am a Pythagorean; one of my brothers\ndied here; tell me what I owe you on his account.'\"(1)\n\n\n\n(1) EDOUARD SCHURE: _Op. cit_., p. 174.\n\n\nIn endeavouring to estimate the worth of PYTHAGORAS' discoveries and\nteaching, Mr FRANKLAND writes, with reference to his achievements in\ngeometry: \"Even after making a considerable allowance for his pupils'\nshare, the Master's geometrical work calls for much admiration\"; and,\n\"... it cannot be far wrong to suppose that it was Pythagoras' wont\nto insist upon proofs, and so to secure that rigour which gives to\nmathematics its honourable position amongst the sciences.\" And of his\nwork in arithmetic, music, and astronomy, the same author writes: \"...\neverywhere he appears to have inaugurated genuinely scientific methods,\nand to have laid the foundations of a high and liberal education\";\nadding, \"For nearly a score of centuries, to the very close of the\nMiddle Ages, the four Pythagorean subjects of study--arithmetic,\ngeometry, astronomy, music--were the staple educational course, and were\nbound together into a fourfold way of knowledge--the Quadrivium.\"(1)\nWith these words of due praise, our present excursion may fittingly\nclose.\n\n\n(1) _Op. cit_., pp. 35, 37, and 38.\n\n\n\n\nIII. MEDICINE AND MAGIC\n\nTHERE are few tasks at once so instructive and so fascinating as the\ntracing of the development of the human mind as manifested in the\nevolution of scientific and philosophical theories. And this is,\nperhaps, especially true when, as in the case of medicine, this\nevolution has followed paths so tortuous, intersected by so many\nfantastic byways, that one is not infrequently doubtful as to the true\nroad. The history of medicine is at once the history of human wisdom and\nthe history of human credulity and folly, and the romantic element (to\nuse the expression in its popular acceptation) thus introduced, whilst\nmaking the subject more entertaining, by no means detracts from its\nimportance considered psychologically.\n\nTo whom the honour of having first invented medicines is due is unknown,\nthe origins of pharmacy being lost in the twilight of myth. OSIRIS and\nISIS, BACCHUS, APOLLO father of the famous physician AESCULAPIUS, and\nCHIRON the Centaur, tutor of the latter, are among the many mythological\npersonages who have been accredited with the invention of physic. It\nis certain that the art of compounding medicines is extraordinarily\nancient. There is a papyrus in the British Museum containing medical\nprescriptions which was written about 1200 B.C.; and the famous EBERS\npapyrus, which is devoted to medical matters, is reckoned to date\nfrom about the year 1550 B.C. It is interesting to note that in the\nprescriptions given in this latter papyrus, as seems to have been the\ncase throughout the history of medicine, the principle that the efficacy\nof a medicine is in proportion to its nastiness appears to have been the\nmain idea. Indeed, many old medicines contained ingredients of the\nmost disgusting nature imaginable: a mediaeval remedy known as oil of\npuppies, made by cutting up two newly-born puppies and boiling them with\none pound of live earthworms, may be cited as a comparatively pleasant\nexample of the remedies (?) used in the days when all sorts of excreta\nwere prescribed as medicines.(1)\n\n\n(1) See the late Mr A. C. WOOTTON'S excellent work, _Chronicles of\nPharmacy_ (2 vols, 1910), to which I gladly acknowledge my indebtedness.\n\n\nPresumably the oldest theory concerning the causation of disease is that\nwhich attributes all the ills of mankind to the malignant operations of\nevil spirits, a theory which someone has rather fancifully suggested is\nnot so erroneous after all, if we may be allowed to apply the term \"evil\nspirits\" to the microbes of modern bacteriology. Remnants of this theory\n(which does--shall I say?--conceal a transcendental truth), that is,\nin its original form, still survive to the present day in various\nsuperstitious customs, whose absurdity does not need emphasising: for\nexample, the use of red flannel by old-fashioned folk with which to\ntie up sore throats--red having once been supposed to be a colour very\nangatonistic to evil spirits; so much so that at one time red cloth hung\nin the patient's room was much employed as a cure for smallpox!\n\nMedicine and magic have always been closely associated. Indeed, the\ngreatest name in the history of pharmacy is also what is probably the\ngreatest name in the history of magic--the reference, of course, being\nto PARACELSUS (1493-1541). Until PARACELSUS, partly by his vigorous\ninvective and partly by his remarkable cures of various diseases,\ndemolished the old school of medicine, no one dared contest the\nauthority of GALEN (130-_circa_ 205) and AVICENNA (980--1037). GALEN'S\ntheory of disease was largely based upon that of the four humours\nin man--bile, blood, phlegm, and black bile,--which were regarded as\nrelated to (but not identical with) the four elements--fire, air, water,\nand earth,--being supposed to have characters similar to these. Thus, to\nbile, as to fire, were attributed the properties of hotness and dryness;\nto blood and air those of hotness and moistness; to phlegm and water\nthose of coldness and moistness; and, finally, black bile, like earth,\nwas said to be cold and dry. GALEN supposed that an alteration in the\ndue proportion of these humours gives rise to disease, though he did not\nconsider this to be its only cause; thus, cancer, it was thought, might\nresult from an excess of black bile, and rheumatism from an excess of\nphlegm. Drugs, GALEN argued, are of efficiency in the curing of disease,\naccording as they possess one or more of these so-called fundamental\nproperties, hotness, dryness, coldness, and moistness, whereby it was\nconsidered that an excess of any humour might be counteracted; moreover,\nit was further assumed that four degrees of each property exist, and\nthat only those drugs are of use in curing a disease which contain the\nnecessary property or properties in the degree proportionate to that\nin which the opposite humour or humours are in excess in the patient's\nsystem.\n\nPARACELSUS' views were based upon his theory (undoubtedly true in a\nsense) that man is a microcosm, a world in miniature.(1) Now, all things\nmaterial, taught PARACELSUS, contain the three principles termed in\nalchemistic phraseology salt, sulphur, and mercury. This is true,\ntherefore, of man: the healthy body, he argued, is a sort of chemical\ncompound in which these three principles are harmoniously blended (as\nin the Macrocosm) in due proportion, whilst disease is due to a\npreponderance of one principle, fevers, for example, being the result\nof an excess of sulphur (_i.e_. the fiery principle), _etc_. PARACELSUS,\nalthough his theory was not so different from that of GALEN, whose views\nhe denounced, was thus led to seek for CHEMICAL remedies, containing\nthese principles in varying proportions; he was not content with\nmedicinal herbs and minerals in their crude state, but attempted\nto extract their effective essences; indeed, he maintained that the\npreparation of new and better drugs is the chief business of chemistry.\n\n\n(1) See the \"Note on the Paracelsian Doctrine of the Microcosm\" below.\n\n\nThis theory of disease and of the efficacy of drugs was complicated by\nmany fantastic additions;(1) thus there is the \"Archaeus,\" a sort\nof benevolent demon, supposed by PARACELSUS to look after all the\nunconscious functions of the bodily organism, who has to be taken into\naccount. PARACELSUS also held the Doctrine of Signatures, according to\nwhich the medicinal value of plants and minerals is indicated by their\nexternal form, or by some sign impressed upon them by the operation of\nthe stars. A very old example of this belief is to be found in the use\nof mandrake (whose roots resemble the human form) by the Hebrews and\nGreeks as a cure for sterility; or, to give an instance which is still\naccredited by some, the use of eye-bright (_Euphrasia officinalis_, L.,\na plant with a black pupil-like spot in its corolla) for complaints of\nthe eyes.(2) Allied to this doctrine are such beliefs, once held, as\nthat the lungs of foxes are good for bronchial troubles, or that the\nheart of a lion will endow one with courage; as CORNELIUS AGRIPPA put\nit, \"It is well known amongst physicians that brain helps the brain, and\nlungs the lungs.\"(3)\n\n\n(1) The question of PARACELSUS' pharmacy is further complicated by the\nfact that this eccentric genius coined many new words (without regard to\nthe principles of etymology) as names for his medicines, and often used\nthe same term to stand for quite different bodies. Some of his disciples\nmaintained that he must not always be understood in a literal sense,\nin which probably there is an element of truth. See, for instance, _A\nGolden and Blessed Casket of Nature's Marvels_, by BENEDICTUS FIGULUS\n(trans. by A. E. WAITE, 1893).\n\n(2) See Dr ALFRED C. HADDON'S _Magic and Fetishism_ (1906), p. 15.\n\n(3) HENRY CORNELIUS AGRIPPA: _Occult Philosophy_, bk. i. chap. xv.\n(WHITEHEAD'S edition, Chicago, 1898, P. 72).\n\n\nIn modern times homoeopathy--according to which a drug is a cure,\nif administered in small doses, for that disease whose symptoms it\nproduces, if given in large doses to a healthy person---seems to bear\nsome resemblance to these old medical theories concerning the curing of\nlike by like. That the system of HAHNEMANN (1755--1843), the founder\nof homoeopathy, is free from error could be scarcely maintained, but\ncertain recent discoveries in connection with serum-therapy appear to\nindicate that the last word has not yet been said on the subject, and\nthe formula \"like cures like\" may still have another lease of life to\nrun.\n\nTo return to PARACELSUS, however. It may be thought that his views were\nnot so great an advance on those of GALEN; but whether or not this be\nthe case, his union of chemistry and medicine was of immense benefit\nto each science, and marked a new era in pharmacy. Even if his theories\nwere highly fantastic, it was he who freed medicine from the shackles of\ntraditionalism, and rendered progress in medical science possible.\n\nI must not conclude these brief notes without some reference to the\nmedical theory of the medicinal efficacy of words. The EBERS papyrus\nalready mentioned gives various formulas which must be pronounced when\npreparing and when administering a drug; and there is a draught used by\nthe Eastern Jews as a cure for bronchial complaints prepared by writing\ncertain words on a plate, washing them off with wine, and adding three\ngrains of a citron which has been used at the Tabernacle festival. But\nenough for our present excursion; we must hie us back to the modern\nworld, with its alkaloids, serums, and anti-toxins--another day we will,\nperhaps, wander again down the by-paths of Medicinal Magic.\n\n\nNOTE ON THE PARACELSIAN DOCTRINE OF THE MICROCOSM\n\n\n\"Man's nature,\" writes CORNELIUS AGRIPPA, \"_is the most complete Image\nof the whole Universe_.\"(1) This theory, especially connected with the\nname of PARACELSUS, is worthy of more than passing reference; but as\nthe consideration of it leads us from medicine to metaphysics, I have\nthought it preferable to deal with the subject in a note.\n\n\n(1) H. C. AGRIPPA: _Occult Philosophy_, bk. i. chap. xxxiii.\n(WHITEHEAD'S edition, p. 111).\n\n\nMan, taught the old mystical philosophers, is threefold in nature,\nconsisting of spirit, soul, and body. The Paracelsian mercury, sulphur,\nand salt were the mineral analogues of these. \"As to the Spirit,\" writes\nVALENTINE WEIGEL (1533--1588), a disciple of PARACELSUS, \"we are of God,\nmove in God, and live in God, and are nourished of God. Hence God is in\nus and we are in God; God hath put and placed Himself in us, and we are\nput and placed in God. As to the Soul, we are from the Firmament and\nStars, we live and move therein, and are nourished thereof. Hence the\nFirmament with its astralic virtues and operations is in us, and we in\nit. The Firmament is put and placed in us, and we are put and placed in\nthe Firmament. As to the Body, we are of the elements, we move and live\ntherein, and are nourished of them:--hence the elements are in us, and\nwe in them. The elements, by the slime, are put and placed in us, and we\nare put and placed in them.\"(1) Or, to quote from PARACELSUS himself, in\nhis _Hermetic Astronomy_ he writes: \"God took the body out of which He\nbuilt up man from those things which He created from nothingness into\nsomething... Hence man is now a microcosm, or a little world, because\nhe is an extract from all the stars and planets of the whole firmament,\nfrom the earth and the elements, and so he is their quintessence.... But\nbetween the macrocosm and the microcosm this difference occurs, that the\nform, image, species, and substance of man are diverse therefrom. In man\nthe earth is flesh, the water is blood, fire is the heat thereof, and\nair is the balsam. These properties have not been changed but only the\nsubstance of the body. So man is man, not a world, yet made from the\nworld, made in the likeness, not of the world, but of God. Yet man\ncomprises in himself all the qualities of the world.... His body is from\nthe world, and therefore must be fed and nourished by that world from\nwhich he has sprung.... He has been taken from the earth and from the\nelements, and therefore, must be nourished by these.... Now, man is not\nonly flesh and blood, but there is within the intellect which does not,\nlike the complexion, come from the elements, but from the stars. And\nthe condition of the stars is this, that all the wisdom, intelligence,\nindustry of the animal, and all the arts peculiar to man are contained\nin them. From the stars man has these same things, and that is called\nthe light of Nature; in fact, it is whatever man has found by the light\nof Nature.... Such, then, is the condition of man, that, out of the\ngreat universe he needs both elements and stars, seeing that he himself\nis constituted in that way.\"(1b)\n\n\n(1) VALENTINE WEIGEL: \"_Astrology Theologised\": The Spiritual\nHermeneutics of Astrology and Holy Writ_, ed. by ANNA BONUS KINGSFORD\n(1886), p. 59.\n\n(1b) _The Hermetic and Alchemical Writings of_ PARACELSUS, ed. by A. E.\nWAITE (1894), vol. ii. pp. 289-291.\n\n\n\nIt is not difficult to discern a certain truth in all this, making\nallowances for modes of thought which are not those of the present day.\nThe Swedish philosopher SWEDENBORG (1688-1772) reaffirmed the theory\nin later years; but, as he points out,(2) the reason that man is a\nmicrocosm lies deeper than in the facts that his body is of the elements\nof this earth and is nourished thereby. According to this profound\nthinker, FORM, spiritually understood, is the expression of USE, the\nuses of things being indicated by their forms. Now, the human form is\nthe highest of all forms, because it subserves the highest of all uses.\nHence, both the world of matter and the world of spirit are in the\nhuman form, because there is a correspondence in use between man and\nthe Cosmos. We may, therefore, call man as to his body a microcosm, or\nlittle world; as to his soul a micro-uranos, or little heaven. Or we may\nspeak of the macrocosm, or great world, as the Grand Man, and we may\nsay that the Soul of this Grand Man, the self-existent, substantial, and\nefficient cause of all things, at once immanent within yet transcending\nall things, is God.\n\n(2) See especially his _Divine Love and Wisdom_, SESE 251 and 319.\n\n\n\n\nIV. SUPERSTITIONS CONCERNING BIRDS\n\nAMONGST the most remarkable of natural occurrences must be included\nmany of the phenomena connected with the behaviour of birds. Undoubtedly\nnumerous species of birds are susceptible to atmospheric changes (of\nan electrical and barometric nature) too slight to be observed by man's\nunaided senses; thus only is to be explained the phenomenon of migration\nand also the many other peculiarities in the behaviour of birds whereby\napproaching changes in the weather may be foretold. Probably, also, this\nfact has much to do with the extraordinary homing instinct of pigeons.\nBut, of course, in the days when meteorological science had yet to be\nborn, no such explanation as this could be known. The ancients observed\nthat birds by their migrations or by other peculiarities in their\nbehaviour prognosticated coming changes in the seasons of the year and\nother changes connected with the weather (such as storms, _etc_.); they\nsaw, too, in the homing instincts of pigeons an apparent exhibition of\nintelligence exceeding that of man. What more natural, then, for them\nto attribute foresight to birds, and to suppose that all sorts of coming\nevents (other than those of an atmospheric nature) might be foretold by\ncareful observation of their flight and song?\n\nAugury--that is, the art of divination by observing the behaviour of\nbirds--was extensively cultivated by the Etrurians and Romans.(1) It\nis still used, I believe, by the natives of Samoa. The Romans had an\nofficial college of augurs, the members of which were originally three\npatricians. About 300 B.C. the number of patrician augurs was increased\nby one, and five plebeian augurs were added. Later the number was again\nincreased to fifteen. The object of augury was not so much to foretell\nthe future as to indicate what line of action should be followed, in\nany given circumstances, by the nation. The augurs were consulted on all\nmatters of importance, and the position of augur was thus one of great\nconsequence. In what appears to be the oldest method, the augur, arrayed\nin a special costume, and carrying a staff with which to mark out the\nvisible heavens into houses, proceeded to an elevated piece of ground,\nwhere a sacrifice was made and a prayer repeated. Then, gazing towards\nthe sky, he waited until a bird appeared. The point in the heavens where\nit first made its appearance was carefully noted, also the manner and\ndirection of its flight, and the point where it was lost sight of. From\nthese particulars an augury was derived, but, in order to be of effect,\nit had to be confirmed by a further one.\n\n\n(1) This is not quite an accurate definition, as \"auguries\" were\nalso obtained from other animals and from celestial phenomena (_e.g_.\nlightning), _etc_.\n\nAuguries were also drawn from the notes of birds, birds being divided by\nthe augurs into two classes: (i) _oscines_, \"those which give omens by\ntheir note,\" and (ii) _alites_, \"those which afford presages by their\nflight.\"(1) Another method of augury was performed by the feeding of\nchickens specially kept for this purpose. This was done just before\nsunrise by the _pullarius_ or feeder, strict silence being observed. If\nthe birds manifested no desire for their food, the omen was of a\nmost direful nature. On the other hand, if from the greediness of the\nchickens the grain fell from their beaks and rebounded from the\nground, the augury was most favourable. This latter augury was known as\n_tripudium solistimum_. \"Any fraud practiced by the 'pullarius',\" writes\nthe Rev. EDWARD SMEDLEY, \"reverted to his own head. Of this we have a\nmemorable instance in the great battle between Papirius Cursor and the\nSamnites in the year of Rome 459. So anxious were the troops for battle,\nthat the 'pullarius' dared to announce to the consul a 'tripudium\nsolistimum,' although the chickens refused to eat. Papirius\nunhesitatingly gave the signal for fight, when his son, having\ndiscovered the false augury, hastened to communicate it to his father.\n'Do thy part well,' was his reply, 'and let the deceit of the augur fall\non himself. The \"tripudium\" has been announced to me, and no omen could\nbe better for the Roman army and people!' As the troops advanced, a\njavelin thrown at random struck the 'pullatius' dead. 'The hand of\nheaven is in the battle,' cried Papirius; 'the guilty is punished!' and\nhe advanced and conquered.\"(1b) A coincidence of this sort, if it really\noccurred, would very greatly strengthen the popular belief in auguries.\n\n\n(1) PLINY: _Natural History_, bk. x. chap. xxii. (BOSTOCK and RILEY'S\ntrans., vol. ii., 1855, p. 495).\n\n(1b) Rev. EDWARD SMEDLEY, M.A.: _The Occult Sciences_ (_Encyclopaedia\nMetropolitana_), ed. by ELIHU RICH (1855), p. 144.\n\n\nThe _cock_ has always been reckoned a bird possessed of magic power. At\nits crowing, we are told, all unquiet spirits who roam the earth\ndepart to their dismal abodes, and the orgies of the Witches' Sabbath\nterminate. A cock is the favourite sacrifice offered to evil spirits\nin Ceylon and elsewhere. Alectromancy(2) was an ancient and peculiarly\nsenseless method of divination (so called) in which a cock was employed.\nThe bird had to be young and quite white. Its feet were cut off and\ncrammed down its throat with a piece of parchment on which were written\ncertain Hebrew words. The cock, after the repetition of a prayer by the\noperator, was placed in a circle divided into parts corresponding to the\nletters of the alphabet, in each of which a grain of wheat was placed.\nA certain psalm was recited, and then the letters were noted from which\nthe cock picked up the grains, a fresh grain being put down for each\none picked up. These letters, properly arranged, were said to give the\nanswer to the inquiry for which divination was made. I am not sure what\none was supposed to do if, as seems likely, the cock refused to act in\nthe required manner.\n\n\n(2) Cf. ARTHUR EDWARD WAITE: _The Occult Sciences_ (1891), pp. 124 and\n125.\n\n\nThe _owl_ was reckoned a bird of evil omen with the Romans, who derived\nthis opinion from the Etrurians, along with much else of their so-called\nscience of augury. It was particularly dreaded if seen in a city, or,\nindeed, anywhere by day. PLINY (Caius Plinius Secundus, A.D. 61-before\n115) informs us that on one occasion \"a horned owl entered the very\nsanctuary of the Capitol;... in consequence of which, Rome was purified\non the nones of March in that year.\"(1)\n\n\n(1) PLINY: _Natural History_, bk. x. chap. xvi. (BOSTOCK and RILEY'S\ntrans., vol. ii., 1855, p. 492).\n\n\nThe folk-lore of the British Isles abounds with quaint beliefs and\nstories concerning birds. There is a charming Welsh legend concerning\nthe _robin_, which the Rev. T. F. T. DYER quotes from _Notes and\nQueries_:--\"Far, far away, is a land of woe, darkness, spirits of evil,\nand fire. Day by day does this little bird bear in his bill a drop of\nwater to quench the flame. So near the burning stream does he fly,\nthat his dear little feathers are SCORCHED; and hence he is named\nBrou-rhuddyn (Breast-burnt). To serve little children, the robin\ndares approach the infernal pit. No good child will hurt the devoted\nbenefactor of man. The robin returns from the land of fire, and\ntherefore he feels the cold of winter far more than his brother birds.\nHe shivers in the brumal blast; hungry, he chirps before your door.\"(2)\n\n\n(2) T. F. THISELTON DYER, M.A.: _English Folk-Lore_ (1878), pp. 65 and\n66.\n\n\nAnother legend accounts for the robin's red breast by supposing this\nbird to have tried to pluck a thorn from the crown encircling the brow\nof the crucified CHRIST, in order to alleviate His sufferings. No doubt\nit is on account of these legends that it is considered a crime, which\nwill be punished with great misfortune, to kill a robin. In some places\nthe same prohibition extends to the _wren_, which is popularly believed\nto be the wife of the robin. In other parts, however, the wren is (or\nat least was) cruelly hunted on certain days. In the Isle of Man the\nwren-hunt took place on Christmas Eve and St Stephen's Day, and is\naccounted for by a legend concerning an evil fairy who lured many men to\ndestruction, but had to assume the form of a wren to escape punishment\nat the hands of an ingenious knight-errant.\n\nFor several centuries there was prevalent over the whole of civilised\nEurope a most extraordinary superstition concerning the small Arctic\nbird resembling, but not so large as, the common wild goose, known as\nthe _barnacle_ or _bernicle goose_. MAX MUELLER(1) has suggested that\nthis word was really derived from _Hibernicula_, the name thus referring\nto Ireland, where the birds were caught; but common opinion associated\nthe barnacle goose with the shell-fish known as the barnacle (which\nis found on timber exposed to the sea), supposing that the former was\ngenerated out of the latter. Thus in one old medical writer we find:\n\"There are founde in the north parts of Scotland, and the Ilands\nadjacent, called Orchades (Orkney Islands), certain trees, whereon\ndoe growe certaine shell fishes, of a white colour tending to russet;\nwherein are conteined little liuing creatures: which shells in time of\nmaturitie doe open, and out of them grow those little living things;\nwhich falling into the water, doe become foules, whom we call\nBarnakles... but the other that do fall vpon the land, perish and come\nto nothing: this much by the writings of others, and also from the\nmouths of the people of those parts....\"(1b)\n\n\n(1) See F. MAX MUELLER'S _Lectures on the Science of Language_ (1885),\nwhere a very full account of the tradition concerning the origin of the\nbarnacle goose will be found.\n\n(1b) JOHN GERARDE: _The Herball; or, Generall Historie of Plantes_\n(1597). 1391.\n\n\nThe writer, however, who was a well-known surgeon and botanist of\nhis day, adds that he had personally examined certain shell-fish from\nLancashire, and on opening the shells had observed within birds in\nvarious stages of development. No doubt he was deceived by some purely\nsuperficial resemblances--for example, the feet of the barnacle fish\nresemble somewhat the feathers of a bird. He gives an imaginative\nillustration of the barnacle fowl escaping from its shell, which is\nreproduced in fig. 12.\n\nTurning now from superstitions concerning actual birds to legends of\nthose that are purely mythical, passing reference must be made to the\n_roc_, a bird existing in Arabian legend, which we meet in the _Arabian\nNights_, and which is chiefly remarkable for its size and strength.\n\nThe _phoenix_, perhaps, is of more interest. Of \"that famous bird of\nArabia,\" PLINY writes as follows, prefixing his description of it with\nthe cautious remark, \"I am not quite sure that its existence is not all\na fable.\" \"It is said that there is only one in existence in the whole\nworld, and that that one has not been seen very often. We are told that\nthis bird is of the size of an eagle, and has a brilliant golden plumage\naround the neck, while the rest of the body is of a purple colour;\nexcept the tail, which is azure, with long feathers intermingled of a\nroseate hue; the throat is adorned with a crest, and the head with a\ntuft of feathers. The first Roman who described this bird... was the\nsenator Manilius.... He tells us that no person has ever seen this bird\neat, that in Arabia it is looked upon as sacred to the sun, that it\nlives five hundred and forty years, that when it becomes old it builds a\nnest of cassia and sprigs of incense, which it fills with perfumes, and\nthen lays its body down upon them to die; that from its bones and marrow\nthere springs at first a sort of small worm, which in time changes\ninto a little bird; that the first thing that it does is to perform the\nobsequies of its predecessor, and to carry the nest entire to the city\nof the Sun near Panchaia, and there deposit it upon the altar of that\ndivinity.\n\n\"The same Manilius states also, that the revolution of the great year\nis completed with the life of this bird, and that then a new cycle comes\nround again with the same characteristics as the former one, in the\nseasons and the appearance of the stars. ... This bird was brought to\nRome in the censorship of the Emperor Claudius... and was exposed to\npublic view.... This fact is attested by the public Annals, but there is\nno one that doubts that it was a fictitious phoenix only.\"(1)\n\n\n(1) PLINY: _Natural History_, bk. x. chap. ii. (BOSTOCK and RILEY'S\ntrans., vol. ii., 1855, PP. 479-481).\n\n\nThe description of the plumage, _etc_., of this bird applies fairly\nwell, as CUVIER has pointed out,(2) to the golden pheasant, and a\nspecimen of the latter may have been the \"fictitious phoenix\"\nreferred to above. That this bird should have been credited with the\nextraordinary and wholly fabulous properties related by PLINY and others\nis not, however, easy to understand. The phoenix was frequently used\nto illustrate the doctrine of the immortality of the soul (_e.g_. in\nCLEMENT'S _First Epistle to the Corinthians_), and it is not impossible\nthat originally it was nothing more than a symbol of immortality which\nin time became to be believed in as a really existing bird. The fact,\nhowever, that there was supposed to be only one phoenix, and also that\nthe length of each of its lives coincided with what the ancients\ntermed a \"great year,\" may indicate that the phoenix was a symbol\nof cosmological periodicity. On the other hand, some ancient writers\n(e_.g_. TACITUS, A.D. 55-120) explicitly refer to the phoenix as a\nsymbol of the sun, and in the minds of the ancients the sun was closely\nconnected with the idea of immortality. Certainly the accounts of\nthe gorgeous colours of the plumage of the phoenix might well be\ndescriptions of the rising sun. It appears, moreover, that the Egyptian\nhieroglyphic _benu_, {glyph}, which is a figure of a heron or crane (and\nthus akin to the phoenix), was employed to designate the rising sun.\n\n\n(2) See CUVIER'S _The Animal Kingdom_, GRIFFITH'S trans., vol. viii.\n(1829), p. 23.\n\n\nThere are some curious Jewish legends to account for the supposed\nimmortality of the phoenix. According to one, it was the sole animal\nthat refused to eat of the forbidden tree when tempted by EVE. According\nto another, its immortality was conferred on it by NOAH because of its\nconsiderate behaviour in the Ark, the phoenix not clamouring for food\nlike the other animals.(1)\n\n\n(1) The existence of such fables as these shows how grossly the real\nmeanings of the Sacred Writings have been misunderstood.\n\n\nThere is a celebrated bird in Chinese tradition, the _Fung Hwang_, which\nsome sinologues identify with the phoenix of the West.(2) According to\na commentator on the '_Rh Ya_, this \"felicitous and perfect bird has a\ncock's head, a snake's neck, a swallow's beak, a tortoise's back, is of\nfive different colours and more than six feet high.\"\n\n\n(2) Mr CHAS. GOULD, B.A., to whose book _Mythical Monsters_ (1886) I am\nvery largely indebted for my account of this bird, and from which I have\nculled extracts from the Chinese, is not of this opinion. Certainly the\nfact that we read of Fung Hwangs in the plural, whilst tradition asserts\nthat there is only one phoenix, seems to point to a difference in\norigin.\n\n\nAnother account (that in the _Lun Yu Tseh Shwai Shing_) tells us that\n\"its head resembles heaven, its eye the sun, its back the moon,\nits wings the wind, its foot the ground, and its tail the woof.\"\nFurthermore, \"its mouth contains commands, its heart is conformable to\nregulations, its ear is thoroughly acute in hearing, its tongue utters\nsincerity, its colour is luminous, its comb resembles uprightness, its\nspur is sharp and curved, its voice is sonorous, and its belly is the\ntreasure of literature.\" Like the dragon, tortoise, and unicorn, it was\nconsidered to be a spiritual creature; but, unlike the Western phoenix,\nmore than one Fung Hwang was, as I have pointed out, believed to exist.\nThe birds were not always to be seen, but, according to Chinese records,\nthey made their appearance during the reigns of certain sovereigns. The\nFung Hwang is regarded by the Chinese as an omen of great happiness and\nprosperity, and its likeness is embroidered on the robes of empresses\nto ensure success. Probably, if the bird is not to be regarded as purely\nmythological and symbolic in origin, we have in the stories of it no\nmore than exaggerated accounts of some species of pheasant. Japanese\nliterature contains similar stories.\n\nOf other fabulous bird-forms mention may be made of the _griffin_ and\nthe _harpy_. The former was a creature half eagle, half lion, popularly\nsupposed to be the progeny of the union of these two latter. It is\ndescribed in the so-called _Voiage and Travaile of Sir_ JOHN MAUNDEVILLE\nin the following terms(1): \"Sum men seyn, that thei ben the Body upward,\nas an Egle, and benethe as a Lyoun: and treuly thei seyn sothe, that\nthei ben of that schapp. But o Griffoun hathe the body more gret and\nis more strong thanne 8 Lyouns, of suche Lyouns as ben o this half; and\nmore gret and strongere, than an 100 Egles, suche as we ben amonges us.\nFor o Griffoun there will bere, fleynge to his Nest, a gret Hors, or\n2 Oxen zoked to gidere, as thei gon at the Plowghe. For he hathe his\nTalouns so longe and so large and grete, upon his Feet, as thoughe thei\nweren Hornes of grete Oxen or of Bugles or of Kyzn; so that men maken\nCuppes of hem, to drynken of: and of hire Ribbes and of the Pennes of\nhire Wenges, men maken Bowes fulle strong, to schote with Arwes\nand Quarelle.\" The special characteristic of the griffin was its\nwatchfulness, its chief function being thought to be that of guarding\nsecret treasure. This characteristic, no doubt, accounts for its\nfrequent use in heraldry as a supporter to the arms. It was sacred to\nAPOLLO, the sun-god, whose chariot was, according to early sculptures,\ndrawn by griffins. PLINY, who speaks of it as a bird having long ears\nand a hooked beak, regarded it as fabulous.\n\n\n(1) _The Voiage and Travaile of Sir_ JOHN MAUNDEVILLE, _Kt. Which\ntreateth of the Way to Hierusalem; and of Marvayles of Inde, with other\nIlands and Countryes. Now Publish'd entire from an Original MS. in The\nCotton Library_ (London, 1727), cap. xxvi. pp. 325 and 326.\n\n\"This work is mainly a compilation from the writings of William of\nBoldensele, Friar Odoric of Pordenone, Hetoum of Armenia, Vincent de\nBeauvais, and other geographers. It is probable that the name John de\nMandeville should be regarded as a pseudonym concealing the identity\nof Jean de Bourgogne, a physician at Liege, mentioned under the name of\nJoannes ad Barbam in the vulgate Latin version of the Travels.\" (Note in\nBritish Museum Catalogue). The work, which was first published in French\nduring the latter part of the fourteenth century, achieved an immense\npopularity, the marvels that it relates being readily received by the\ncredulous folk of that and many a succeeding day.\n\n\nThe harpies (_i.e_. snatchers) in Greek mythology are creatures like\nvultures as to their bodies, but with the faces of women, and armed with\nsharp claws.\n\n\"Of Monsters all, most Monstrous this; no greater Wrath God sends\n'mongst Men; it comes from depth of pitchy Hell: And Virgin's Face, but\nWomb like Gulf unsatiate hath, Her Hands are griping Claws, her Colour\npale and fell.\"(1)\n\n\n(1) Quoted from VERGIL by JOHN GUILLIM in his _A Display of Heraldry_\n(sixth edition, 1724), p. 271.\n\n\nWe meet with the harpies in the story of PHINEUS, a son of AGENOR,\nKing of Thrace. At the bidding of his jealous wife, IDAEA, daughter of\nDARDANUS, PHINEUS put out the sight of his children by his former wife,\nCLEOPATRA, daughter of BOREAS. To punish this cruelty, the gods caused\nhim to become blind, and the harpies were sent continually to harass\nand affright him, and to snatch away his food or defile it by their\npresence. They were afterwards driven away by his brothers-in-law,\nZETES and CALAIS. It has been suggested that originally the harpies were\nnothing more than personifications of the swift storm-winds; and few\nof the old naturalists, credulous as they were, regarded them as real\ncreatures, though this cannot be said of all. Some other fabulous\nbird-forms are to be met with in Greek and Arabian mythologies, _etc_.,\nbut they are not of any particular interest. And it is time for us to\nconclude our present excursion, and to seek for other byways.\n\n\n\n\nV. THE POWDER OF SYMPATHY: A CURIOUS MEDICAL SUPERSTITION\n\nOUT of the superstitions of the past the science of the present has\ngradually evolved. In the Middle Ages, what by courtesy we may term\nmedical science was, as we have seen, little better than a heterogeneous\ncollection of superstitions, and although various reforms were\ninstituted with the passing of time, superstition still continued for\nlong to play a prominent part in medical practice.\n\nOne of the most curious of these old medical (or perhaps I should say\nsurgical) superstitions was that relating to the Powder of Sympathy, a\nremedy (?) chiefly remembered in connection with the name of Sir KENELM\nDIGBY (1603-1665), though he was probably not the first to employ it.\nThe Powder itself, which was used as a cure for wounds, was, in fact,\nnothing else than common vitriol,(1) though an improved and more elegant\nform (if one may so describe it) was composed of vitriol desiccated by\nthe sun's rays, mixed with _gum tragacanth_. It was in the application\nof the Powder that the remedy was peculiar. It was not, as one might\nexpect, applied to the wound itself, but any article that might have\nblood from the wound upon it was either sprinkled with the Powder or\nelse placed in a basin of water in which the Powder had been dissolved,\nand maintained at a temperate heat. Meanwhile, the wound was kept clean\nand cool.\n\n\n(1) Green vitriol, ferrous sulphate heptahydrate, a compound of iron,\nsulphur, and oxygen, crystallised with seven molecules of water,\nrepresented by the formula FeSO4<.>7H2O. On exposure to the air it loses\nwater, and is gradually converted into basic ferric sulphate. For long,\ngreen vitriol was confused with blue vitriol, which generally occurs\nas an impurity in crude green vitriol. Blue vitriol is copper sulphate\npentahydrate, CuSO4<.>5H2O.\n\n\nSir KENELM DIGBY appears to have delivered a discourse dealing with the\nfamous Powder before a learned assembly at Montpellier in France; at\nleast a work purporting to be a translation of such a discourse was\npublished in 1658,(1) and further editions appeared in 1660 and 1664.\nKENELM was a son of the Sir EVERARD DIGBY (1578-1606) who was executed\nfor his share in the Gunpowder Plot. In spite of this fact, however,\nJAMES I. appears to have regarded him with favour. He was a man of\nromantic temperament, possessed of charming manners, considerable\nlearning, and even greater credulity. His contemporaries seem to have\ndiffered in their opinions concerning him. EVELYN (1620-1706), the\ndiarist, after inspecting his chemical laboratory, rather harshly speaks\nof him as \"an errant mountebank\". Elsewhere he well refers to him as \"a\nteller of strange things\"--this was on the occasion of DIGBY'S relating\na story of a lady who had such an aversion to roses that one laid on her\ncheek produced a blister!\n\n(1) _A late Discourse... by Sir_ KENELM DIGBY, _Kt.&c. Touching the Cure\nof Wounds by the Powder of Sympathy...rendered... out of French into\nEnglish by_ R. WHITE, Gent. (1658). This is entitled the second edition,\nbut appears to have been the first.\n\n\nTo return to the _Late Discourse_: after some preliminary remarks, Sir\nKENELM records a cure which he claims to have effected by means of\nthe Powder. It appears that JAMES HOWELL (1594-1666, afterwards\nhistoriographer royal to CHARLES II.), had, in the attempt to separate\ntwo friends engaged in a duel, received two serious wounds in the hand.\nTo proceed in the writer's own words:--\"It was my chance to be lodged\nhard by him; and four or five days after, as I was making myself ready,\nhe (Mr Howell) came to my House, and prayed me to view his wounds; for\nI understand, said he, that you have extraordinary remedies upon such\noccasions, and my Surgeons apprehend some fear, that it may grow to a\nGangrene, and so the hand must be cut off....\n\n\"I asked him then for any thing that had the blood upon it, so he\npresently sent for his Garter, wherewith his hand was first bound: and\nhaving called for a Bason of water, as if I would wash my hands; I took\nan handfull of Powder of Vitrol, which I had in my study, and presently\ndissolved it. As soon as the bloody garter was brought me, I put it\nwithin the Bason, observing in the interim what Mr _Howel_ did,\nwho stood talking with a Gentleman in the corner of my Chamber, not\nregarding at all what I was doing: but he started suddenly, as if he had\nfound some strange alteration in himself; I asked him what he ailed? I\nknow not what ailes me, but I find that I feel no more pain, methinks\nthat a pleasing kind of freshnesse, as it were a wet cold Napkin\ndid spread over my hand, which hath taken away the inflammation that\ntormented me before; I replied, since that you feel already so good an\neffect of my medicament, I advise you to cast away all your Plaisters,\nonely keep the wound clean, and in a moderate temper 'twixt heat and\ncold. This was presently reported to the Duke of _Buckingham_, and a\nlittle after to the King (James I.), who were both very curious to know\nthe issue of the businesse, which was, that after dinner I took the\ngarter out of the water, and put it to dry before a great fire; it was\nscarce dry, but Mr _Howels_ servant came running (and told me), that his\nMaster felt as much burning as ever he had done, if not more, for the\nheat was such, as if his hand were betwixt coales of fire: I answered,\nthat although that had happened at present, yet he should find ease in\na short time; for I knew the reason of this new accident, and I\nwould provide accordingly, for his Master should be free from that\ninflammation, it may be, before he could possibly return unto him: but\nin case he found no ease, I wished him to come presently back again, if\nnot he might forbear coming. Thereupon he went, and at the instant I\ndid put again the garter into the water; thereupon he found his Master\nwithout any pain at all. To be brief, there was no sense of pain\nafterward: but within five or six dayes the wounds were cicatrized, and\nentirely healed.\"(1)\n\n\n(1) _Ibid_., pp. 7-11.\n\n\nSir KENELM proceeds, in this discourse, to relate that he obtained the\nsecret of the Powder from a Carmelite who had learnt it in the East.\nSir KENELM says that he told it only to King JAMES and his celebrated\nphysician, Sir THEODORE MAYERNE (1573-1655). The latter disclosed it to\nthe Duke of MAYERNE, whose surgeon sold the secret to various persons,\nuntil ultimately, as Sir KENELM remarks, it became known to every\ncountry barber. However, DIGBY'S real connection with the Powder has\nbeen questioned. In an Appendix to Dr NATHANAEL HIGHMORE'S (1613-1685)\n_The History of Generation_, published in 1651, entitled _A Discourse\nof the Cure of Wounds by Sympathy_, the Powder is referred to as Sir\nGILBERT TALBOT'S Powder; nor does it appear to have been DIGBY who\nbrought the claims of the Sympathetic Powder before the notice of\nthe then recently-formed Royal Society, although he was a by no means\ninactive member of the Society. HIGHMORE, however, in the Appendix\nto the work referred to above, does refer to DIGBY'S reputed cure of\nHOWELL'S wounds already mentioned; and after the publication of DIGBY'S\n_Discourse_ the Powder became generally known as Sir KENELM DIGBY'S\nSympathetic Powder. As such it is referred to in an advertisement\nappended to _Wit and Drollery_ (1661) by the bookseller, NATHANAEL\nBROOK.(1)\n\n\n(1) This advertisement is as follows: \"These are to give notice, that\nSir _Kenelme Digbies_ Sympathetical Powder prepar'd by Promethean fire,\ncuring all green wounds that come within the compass of a Remedy; and\nlikewise the Tooth-ache infallibly in a very short time: Is to be had at\nMr _Nathanael Brook's_ at the Angel in _Cornhil_.\"\n\nThe belief in cure by sympathy, however, is much older than DIGBY'S or\nTALBOT'S Sympathetic Powder. PARACELSUS described an ointment consisting\nessentially of the moss on the skull of a man who had died a violent\ndeath, combined with boar's and bear's fat, burnt worms, dried boar's\nbrain, red sandal-wood and mummy, which was used to cure (?) wounds in a\nsimilar manner, being applied to the weapon with which the hurt had been\ninflicted. With reference to this ointment, readers will probably recall\nthe passage in SCOTT'S _Lay of the Last Minstrel_ (canto 3, stanza 23),\nrespecting the magical cure of WILLIAM of DELORAINE'S wound by \"the\nLadye of Branksome\":--\n\n  \"She drew the splinter from the wound\n  And with a charm she stanch'd the blood;\n  She bade the gash be cleans'd and bound:\n  No longer by his couch she stood;\n  But she had ta'en the broken lance,\n  And washed it from the clotted gore\n  And salved the splinter o'er and o'er.\n  William of Deloraine, in trance,\n  Whene'er she turned it round and round,\n  Twisted as if she gall'd his wound.\n  Then to her maidens she did say\n  That he should be whole man and sound\n  Within the course of a night and day.\n  Full long she toil'd; for she did rue\n  Mishap to friend so stout and true.\"\n\n\nFRANCIS BACON (1561-1626) writes of sympathetic cures as follows:--\"It\nis constantly Received, and Avouched, that the _Anointing_ of the\n_Weapon_, that maketh the _Wound_, wil heale the _Wound_ it selfe. In\nthis _Experiment_, upon the Relation of _Men of Credit_, (though my\nselfe, as yet, am not fully inclined to beleeve it,) you shal note\nthe _Points_ following; First, the _Ointment_... is made of Divers\n_ingredients_; whereof the Strangest and Hardest to come by, are the\nMosse upon the _Skull_ of a _dead Man, Vnburied_; And the _Fats_ of a\n_Boare_, and a _Beare_, killed in the _Act of Generation_. These Two\nlast I could easily suspect to be prescribed as a Starting Hole; That if\nthe _Experiment_ proved not, it mought be pretended, that the _Beasts_\nwere not killed in due Time; For as for the _Mosse_, it is certain\nthere is great Quantity of it in _Ireland_, upon _Slain Bodies_, laid\non _Heaps, Vnburied_. The other _Ingredients_ are, the _Bloud-Stone_\nin _Powder_, and some other _Things_, which seeme to have a _Vertue_ to\n_Stanch Bloud_; As also the _Mosse_ hath.... Secondly, the same _kind_\nof _Ointment_, applied to the Hurt it selfe, worketh not the _Effect_;\nbut onely applied to the _Weapon_..... Fourthly, it may be applied to\nthe _Weapon_, though the Party Hurt be at a great Distance. Fifthly, it\nseemeth the _Imagination_ of the Party, to be _Cured_, is not needfull\nto Concurre; For it may be done without the knowledge of the _Party\nWounded_; And thus much hath been tried, that the _Ointment_ (for\n_Experiments_ sake,) hath been wiped off the _Weapon_, without the\nknowledge of the _Party Hurt_, and presently the _Party Hurt_, hath been\nin great _Rage of Paine_, till the _Weapon_ was _Reannointed_. Sixthly,\nit is affirmed, that if you cannot get the _Weapon_, yet if you put an\n_Instrument_ of _Iron_, or _Wood_, resembling the _Weapon_, into the\n_Wound_, whereby it bleedeth, the _Annointing_ of that _Instrument_ will\nserve, and work the _Effect_. This I doubt should be a Device, to keep\nthis strange _Forme of Cure_, in Request, and Use; Because many times\nyou cannot come by the _Weapon_ it selve. Seventhly, the _Wound_ be at\nfirst _Washed clean_ with _White Wine_ or the _Parties_ own _Water_; And\nthen bound up close in _Fine Linen_ and no more _Dressing_ renewed, till\nit be _whole_.\"(1)\n\n\n(1) FRANCIS BACON: _Sylva Sylvarum: or, A Natural History... Published\nafter the Authors death... The sixt Edition_ \u00f9.. (1651), p. 217.\n\n\nOwing to the demand for making this ointment, quite a considerable trade\nwas done in skulls from Ireland upon which moss had grown owing to\ntheir exposure to the atmosphere, high prices being obtained for fine\nspecimens.\n\nThe idea underlying the belief in the efficacy of sympathetic remedies,\nnamely, that by acting on part of a thing or on a symbol of it, one\nthereby acts magically on the whole or the thing symbolised, is the\nroot-idea of all magic, and is of extreme antiquity. DIGBY and others,\nhowever, tried to give a natural explanation to the supposed efficacy\nof the Powder. They argued that particles of the blood would ascend from\nthe bloody cloth or weapon, only coming to rest when they had reached\ntheir natural home in the wound from which they had originally issued.\nThese particles would carry with them the more volatile part of the\nvitriol, which would effect a cure more readily than when combined with\nthe grosser part of the vitriol. In the days when there was hardly any\nknowledge of chemistry and physics, this theory no doubt bore every\nsemblance of truth. In passing, however, it is interesting to note\nthat DIGBY'S _Discourse_ called forth a reply from J. F. HELVETIUS\n(or SCHWETTZER, 1625-1709), physician to the Prince of Orange, who\nafterwards became celebrated as an alchemist who had achieved the magnum\nopus.(1)\n\n\n(1) See my _Alchemy: Ancient and Modern_ (1911), SESE 63-67.\n\n\nWriting of the Sympathetic Powder, Professor DE MORGAN wittily argues\nthat it must have been quite efficacious. He says: \"The directions were\nto keep the wound clean and cool, and to take care of diet, rubbing the\nsalve on the knife or sword. If we remember the dreadful notions upon\ndrugs which prevailed, both as to quantity and quality, we shall readily\nsee that any way of NOT dressing the wound would have been useful. If\nthe physicians had taken the hint, had been careful of diet, _etc_.,\nand had poured the little barrels of medicine down the throat of a\npracticable doll, THEY would have had their magical cures as well as the\nsurgeons.\"(2) As Dr PETTIGREW has pointed out,(3) Nature exhibits very\nremarkable powers in effecting the healing of wounds by adhesion, when\nher processes are not impeded. In fact, many cases have been recorded in\nwhich noses, ears, and fingers severed from the body have been rejoined\nthereto, merely by washing the parts, placing them in close continuity,\nand allowing the natural powers of the body to effect the healing.\nMoreover, in spite of BACON'S remarks on this point, the effect of\nthe imagination of the patient, who was usually not ignorant that a\nsympathetic cure was to be attempted, must be taken into account; for,\nwithout going to the excesses of \"Christian Science\" in this respect,\nthe fact must be recognised that the state of the mind exercises a\npowerful effect on the natural forces of the body, and a firm faith is\nundoubtedly helpful in effecting the cure of any sort of ill.\n\n\n(2) Professor AUGUSTUS DE MORGAN: _A Budget of Paradoxes_ (1872), p 66.\n\n(3) THOMAS JOSEPH PETTIGREW, F.R.S.: _On Superstitions connected with\nthe History and Practice of Medicine and Surgery_ (1844), pp. 164-167.\n\n\n\n\nVI. THE BELIEF IN TALISMANS\n\nTHE word \"talisman\" is derived from the Arabic \"tilsam,\" \"a magical\nimage,\" through the plural form \"tilsamen.\" This Arabic word is itself\nprobably derived from the Greek telesma in its late meaning of \"a\nreligious mystery\" or \"consecrated object\". The term is often employed\nto designate amulets in general, but, correctly speaking, it has a more\nrestricted and special significance. A talisman may be defined briefly\nas an astrological or other symbol expressive of the influence and power\nof one of the planets, engraved on a sympathetic stone or metal (or\ninscribed on specially prepared parchment) under the auspices of this\nplanet.\n\nBefore proceeding to an account of the preparation of talismans proper,\nit will not be out of place to notice some of the more interesting and\ncurious of other amulets. All sorts of substances have been employed\nas charms, sometimes of a very unpleasant nature, such as dried toads.\nGenerally, however, amulets consist of stones, herbs, or passages from\nSacred Writings written on paper. This latter class are sometimes\ncalled \"characts,\" as an example of which may be mentioned the Jewish\nphylacteries.\n\nEvery precious stone was supposed to exercise its own peculiar virtue;\nfor instance, amber was regarded as a good remedy for throat troubles,\nand agate was thought to preserve from snake-bites. ELIHU RICH(1) gives\na very full list of stones and their supposed virtues. Each sign of the\nzodiac was supposed to have its own particular stone(2) (as shown in the\nannexed table), and hence the superstitious though not inartistic custom\nof wearing one's birth-\n\n                                  Month (com-\n Astrological                     mencing 21st\n Sign of the Zodiac.              of preceding\n                        Symbol.   month).        Stone.\n\n\n  Aries, the Ram     .    {}        April       Sardonyx.\n  Taurus the Bull    .    {}        May         Cornelian.\n  Gemini the Twins .      {}        June        Topaz.\n  Cancer, the Crab .      {}        July        Chalcedony.\n  Leo, the Lion . .       {}        August      Jasper.\n  Virgo, the Virgin .     {}        September   Emerald.\n  Libra, the Balance .    {}        October     Beryl.\n  Scorpio, the Scorpion   {}        November    Amethyst.\n  Sagittarius, the Archer {}        December    Hyacinth (=Sapphire).\n  Capricorn, the Goat .   {}        January     Chrysoprase.\n  Aquarius, the Water-    {}        February    Crystal.\n  bearer\n  Pisces, the Fishes .    {}        March       Sapphire.(=Lapis lazuli).\n\n\nstone for \"luck\". The belief in the occult powers of certain stones\nis by no means non-existent at the present day; for even in these\nenlightened times there are not wanting those who fear the beautiful\nopal, and put their faith in the virtues of New Zealand green-stone.\n\n\n(1) ELIHU RICH: _The Occult Sciences (Encyclopaedia Metropolitana_,\n1855), pp. 348 _et seq_.\n\n(2) With regard to these stones, however, there is much confusion and\ndifference of opinion. The arrangement adopted in the table here\ngiven is that of CORNELIUS AGRIPPA (_Occult Philosophy_, bk. ii.). A\ncomparatively recent work, esteemed by modern occultists, namely, _The\nLight of Egypt, or the Science of the Soul and the Stars_ (1889), gives\nthe following scheme:--\n\n{}=Amethyst. {}=Emerald. {}=Diamond. {}=Onyx (Chalcedony).\n\n{}=Agate. {}=Ruby. {}=Topaz. {}=Sapphire (skyblue).\n\n{}=Beryl. {}=Jasper. {}=Carbuncle. {}=Chrysolite.\n\n\nCommon superstitious opinion regarding birth-stones, as reflected, for\nexample, in the \"lucky birth charms\" exhibited in the windows of the\njewellers' shops, considerably diverges in this matter from the views of\nboth these authorities. The usual scheme is as follows:--\n\n Jan.=Garnet.       May =Emerald.    Sept.=Sapphire,\n Feb.=Amethyst.     June=Agate.      Oct. =Opal.\n Mar.=Bloodstone.   July=Ruby.       Nov. =Topaz.\n Apr.=Diamond.      Aug.=Sardonyx.   Dec. =Turquoise.\n\n\nThe bloodstone is frequently assigned either to Aries or Scorpio, owing\nto its symbolical connection with Mars; and the opal to Cancer, which in\nastrology is the constellation of the moon.\n\nConfusion is rendered still worse by the fact that the ancients whilst\nin some cases using the same names as ourselves, applied them to\ndifferent stones; thus their \"hyacinth\" is our \"sapphire,\" whilst their\n\"sapphire\" is our \"lapis lazuli\".\n\n\nCertain herbs, culled at favourable conjunctions of the planets and worn\nas amulets, were held to be very efficacious against various diseases.\nPrecious stones and metals were also taken internally for the same\npurpose--\"remedies\" which in certain cases must have proved exceedingly\nharmful. One theory put forward for the supposed medical value of\namulets was the Doctrine of Effluvia. This theory supposes the amulets\nto give off vapours or effluvia which penetrate into the body and effect\na cure. It is, of course, true that certain herbs, _etc_., might, under\nthe heat of the body, give off such effluvia, but the theory on the\nwhole is manifestly absurd. The Doctrine of Signatures, which we have\nalready encountered in our excursions,(1) may also be mentioned in this\nconnection as a complementary and equally untenable hypothesis.\n\nAccording to ELIHU RICH,(2) the following were the commonest Egyptian\namulets:--\n\n\n1. Those inscribed with the figure of _Serapis_, used to preserve\nagainst evils inflicted by earth.\n\n2. Figure of _Canopus_, against evil by water.\n\n3. Figure of a _hawk_, against evil from the air.\n\n4. Figure of an _asp_, against evil by fire.\n\n\nPARACELSUS believed there to be much occult virtue in an alloy of\nthe seven chief metals, which he called _Electrum_. Certain definite\nproportions of these metals had to be taken, and each was to be added\nduring a favourable conjunction of the planets. From this electrum he\nsupposed that valuable amulets and magic mirrors could be prepared.\n\n\n(1) See \"Medicine and Magic.\" (2) _Op. Cit_., p. 343\n\n\nA curious and ancient amulet for the cure of various diseases,\nparticularly the ague, was a triangle formed of the letters of the word\n\"Abracadabra.\" The usual form was that shown in fig. 19, and that shown\nin fig. 20 was also known. The origin of this magical word is lost in\nobscurity.\n\nThe belief in the horn as a powerful amulet, especially prevalent in\nItaly, where is it the custom of the common people to make the sign of\nthe _mano cornuto_ to avoid the consequence of the dreaded _jettatore_\nor evil eye, can be traced to the fact that the horn was the symbol\nof the Goddess of the Moon. Probably the belief in the powers of the\nhorse-shoe had a similar origin. Indeed, it seems likely that not only\nthis, but most other amulets, like talismans proper--as will appear\nbelow,--were originally designed as appeals to gods and other powerful\nspiritual beings.\n\n\n     \\ ABRACADABRA          /      \\ ABRACADABRA |\n      \\ ABRACADABR         /        \\ BRACADABRA |\n       \\ ABRACADAB        /          \\ RACADABRA |\n        \\ ABRACADA       /            \\ ACADABRA |\n         \\ ABRACAD      /              \\ CADABRA |\n          \\ ABRACA     /                \\ ADABRA |\n           \\ ABRAC    /                  \\ DABRA |\n            \\ ABRA   /                    \\ ABRA |\n             \\ ABR  /                      \\ BRA |\n              \\ AB /                        \\ RA |\n               \\ A/                          \\ A |\n                \\/                            \\  |\n\n\n(1) See FREDERICK T. ELWORTHY'S _Horns of Honour_ (1900), especially pp.\n56 _et seq_.\n\nTo turn our attention, however, to the art of preparing talismans\nproper: I may remark at the outset that it was necessary for the\ntalisman to be prepared by one's own self--a task by no means easy as\na rule. Indeed, the right mental attitude of the occultist was insisted\nupon as essential to the operation.\n\nAs to the various signs to be engraver on the talismans, various\nauthorities differ, though there are certain points connected with the\nart of talismanic magic on which they all agree. It so happened that the\nancients were acquainted with seven metals and seven planets (including\nthe sun and moon as planets), and the days of the week are also seven.\nIt was concluded, therefore, that there was some occult connection\nbetween the planets, metals, and days of the week. Each of the seven\ndays of the week was supposed to be under the auspices of the spirits of\none of the planets; so also was the generation in the womb of Nature of\neach of the seven chief metals.\n\nIn the following table are shown these particulars in detail:--\n\n\n     Planet.  Symbol.   Day of    Metal.       Colour.\n\n     Sun.    {}        Sunday    Gold         Gold or yellow.\n     Moon.   {}        Monday    Silver       Silver or white.\n     Mars.   {}        Tuesday   Iron         Red.\n     Mercury  {}        Wednesday (1)Mercury   Mixed colours or purple.\n     Jupiter  {}        Thursday  Tin          Violet or blue.\n     Venus    {}        Friday    Copper       Turquoise or green.\n     Saturn.  {}        Saturday  Lead         Black.\n\n(1) Used in the form of a solid amalgam for talismans.\n\nConsequently, the metal of which a talisman was to be made, and also the\ntime of its preparation, had to be chosen with due regard to the planet\nunder which it was to be prepared.(1) The power of such a talisman was\nthought to be due to the genie of this planet--a talisman, was, in fact,\na silent evocation of an astral spirit. Examples of the belief that a\ngenie can be bound up in an amulet in some way are afforded by the story\nof ALADDIN'S lamp and ring and other stories in the _Thousand and\nOne Nights_. Sometimes the talismanic signs were engraved on precious\nstones, sometimes they were inscribed on parchment; in both cases the\nsame principle held good, the nature of the stone chosen, or the colour\nof the ink employed, being that in correspondence with the planet under\nwhose auspices the talisman was prepared.\n\n\n(1) In this connection a rather surprising discovery made by Mr W.\nGORNOLD (see his _A Manual of Occultism_, 1911, pp. 7 and 8) must be\nmentioned. The ancient Chaldeans appear invariably to have enumerated\nthe planets in the following order: Saturn, Jupiter, Mars, Sun, Venus,\nMercury, Moon--which order was adopted by the mediaeval astrologers.\nLet us commence with the Sun in the above sequence, and write down every\nthird planet; we then have--          Sun .   .   .   . Sunday.\n          Moon.   .   .   . Monday.\n          Mars.   .   .   . Tuesday.\n          Mercury. .   .   . Wednesday.\n          Jupiter..   .   . Thursday.\n          Venus.  .   .   . Friday.\n          Saturn. .   .   . Saturday.\n\nThat is to say, we have the planets in the order in which they were\nsupposed to rule over the days of the week. This is perhaps, not so\nsurprising, because it seems probable that, each day being first divided\ninto twenty-four hours, it was assumed that the planets ruled for one\nhour in turn, in the order first mentioned above. Each day was then\nnamed after the planet which ruled during its first hour. It will be\nfound that if we start with the Sun and write down every twenty-fourth\nplanet, the result is exactly the same as if we write down every third.\nBut Mr OLD points out further, doing so by means of a diagram which\nseems to be rather cumbersome that if we start with Saturn in the first\nplace, and write down every fifth planet, and then for each planet\nsubstitute the metal over which it was supposed to rule, we then have\nthese metals arranged in descending order of atomic weights, thus:--\n\n     Saturn   .   .   . Lead (=207).\n     Mercury  .   .   . Mercury (=200).\n     Sun.    .   .   . Gold (=197).\n     Jupiter  .   .   . Tin (=119).\n     Moon.   .   .   . Silver (=108).\n     Venus         .   . Copper (=64).\n     Mars.   .   .   . Iron (=56).\n\n\nSimilarly we can, starting from any one of these orders, pass to the\nother two. The fact is a very surprising one, because the ancients could\nnot possibly have been acquainted with the atomic weights of the metals,\nand, it is important to note, the order of the densities of these\nmetals, which might possibly have been known to them, is by no means the\nsame as the order of their atomic weights. Whether the fact indicates a\nreal relationship between the planets and the metals, or whether there\nis some other explanation, I am not prepared to say. Certainly some\nexplanation is needed: to say that the fact is mere coincidence is\nunsatisfactory, seeing that the odds against, not merely this, but any\nsuch regularity occurring by chance--as calculated by the mathematical\ntheory of probability--are 119 to 1.\n\n\nAll the instruments employed in the art had to be specially prepared and\nconsecrated. Special robes had to be worn, perfumes and incense burnt,\nand invocations, conjurations, _etc_., recited, all of which depended\non the planet ruling the operation. A description of a few typical\ntalismans in detail will not here be out of place.\n\nIn _The Key of Solomon the King_ (translated by S. L. M. MATHERS,\n1889)(1) are described five, six, or seven talismans for each planet.\nEach of these was supposed to have its own peculiar virtues, and many of\nthem are stated to be of use in the evocation of spirits. The majority\nof them consist of a central design encircled by a verse of Hebrew\nScripture. The central designs are of a varied character, generally\ngeometrical figures and Hebrew letters or words, or magical characters.\nFive of these talismans are here portrayed, the first three described\ndiffering from the above. The translations of the Hebrew verses, _etc_.,\ngiven below are due to Mr MATHERS.\n\n\n(1) The _Clavicula Salomonis_, or _Key of Solomon the King_, consists\nmainly of an elaborate ritual for the evocation of the various planetary\nspirits, in which process the use of talismans or pentacles plays a\nprominent part. It is claimed to be a work of white magic, but, inasmuch\nas it, like other old books making the same claim, gives descriptions\nof a pentacle for causing ruin, destruction, and death, and another for\ncausing earthquakes--to give only two examples,--the distinction between\nblack and white magic, which we shall no doubt encounter again in later\nexcursions, appears to be somewhat arbitrary.\n\nRegarding the authorship of the work, Mr MATHERS, translator and editor\nof the first printed copy of the book, says, \"I see no reason to\ndoubt the tradition which assigns the authorship of the 'Key' to King\nSolomon.\" If this view be accepted, however, it is abundantly evident\nthat the _Key_ as it stands at present (in which we find S. JOHN\nquoted, and mention made of SS. PETER and PAUL) must have received some\nconsiderable alterations and additions at the hands of later editors.\nBut even if we are compelled to assign the _Clavicula Salomonis_ in its\npresent form to the fourteenth or fifteenth century, we must, I think,\nallow that it was based upon traditions of the past, and, of course,\nthe possibility remains that it might have been based upon some earlier\nwork. With regard to the antiquity of the planetary sigils, Mr MATHERS\nnotes \"that, among the Gnostic talismans in the British Museum, there is\na ring of copper with the sigils of Venus, which are exactly the same as\nthose given by mediaeval writers on magic.\"\n\nIn spite of the absurdity of its claims, viewed in the light of modern\nknowledge, the _Clavicula Salomonis_ exercised a considerable influence\nin the past, and is to be regarded as one of the chief sources of\nmediaeval ceremonial magic. Historically speaking, therefore, it is a\nbook of no little importance.\n\n\n_The First Pentacle of the Sun_.--\"The Countenance of Shaddai the\nAlmighty, at Whose aspect all creatures obey, and the Angelic Spirits\ndo reverence on bended knees.\" About the face is the name \"El Shaddai\".\nAround is written in Latin: \"Behold His face and form by Whom all things\nwere made, and Whom all creatures obey\" (see fig. 21).\n\n\n_The Fifth Pentacle of Mars_.--\"Write thou this Pentacle upon virgin\nparchment or paper because it is terrible unto the Demons, and at\nits sight and aspect they will obey thee, for they cannot resist its\npresence.\" The design is a Scorpion,(1) around which the word Hvl is\nrepeated. The Hebrew versicle is from _Psalm_ xci. 13: \"Thou shalt go\nupon the lion and adder, the young lion and the dragon shalt thou tread\nunder thy feet\" (see fig. 22).\n\n\n(1) In astrology the zodiacal sign of the scorpion is the \"night house\"\nof the planet Mars.\n\n\n_The Third Pentacle of the Moon_.--\"This being duly borne with thee when\nupon a journey, if it be properly made, serveth against all attacks by\nnight, and against every kind of danger and peril by Water.\" The design\nconsists of a hand and sleeved forearm (this occurs on three other\nmoon talismans), together with the Hebrew names Aub and Vevaphel. The\nversicle is from _Psalm_ xl. 13: \"Be pleased O IHVH to deliver me, O\nIHVH make haste to help me\" (see fig 23)\n\n_The Third Pentacle of Venus_.--\"This, if it be only shown unto any\nperson, serveth to attract love. Its Angel Monachiel should be invoked\nin the day and hour of Venus, at one o'clock or at eight.\" The design\nconsists of two triangles joined at their apices, with the following\nnames--IHVH, Adonai, Ruach, Achides, AEgalmiel, Monachiel, and Degaliel.\nThe versicle is from _Genesis_ i. 28: \"And the Elohim blessed them, and\nthe Elohim said unto them, Be ye fruitful, and multiply, and replenish\nthe earth, and subdue it\" (see fig. 24).\n\n_The Third Pentacle of Mercury_.--\"This serves to invoke the Spirits\nsubject unto Mercury; and especially those who are written in this\nPentacle.\" The design consists of crossed lines and magical characters\nof Mercury. Around are the names of the angels, Kokaviel, Ghedoriah,\nSavaniah, and Chokmahiel (see fig. 25).\n\n\nCORNELIUS AGRIPPA, in his _Three Books of Occult Philosophy_, describes\nanother interesting system of talismans. FRANCIS BARRETT'S _Magus, or\nCelestial Intelligencer_, a well-known occult work published in the\nfirst year of the nineteenth century, I may mention, copies AGRIPPA'S\nsystem of talismans, without acknowledgment, almost word for word. To\neach of the planets is assigned a magic square or table, _i.e_. a square\ncomposed of numbers so arranged that the sum of each row or column is\nalways the same. For example, the table for Mars is as follows:--\n\n     11   24   7    20   3\n     4    12   25   8    16\n     17   5    13   21   9\n     10   18   1    14   22\n     23   6    19   2    15\n\n\nIt will be noticed that every number from 1 up to the highest possible\noccurs once, and that no number occurs twice. It will also be seen that\nthe sum of each row and of each column is always 65. Similar squares\ncan be constructed containing any square number of figures, and it is,\nindeed, by no means surprising that the remarkable properties of such\n\"magic squares,\" before these were explained mathematically, gave rise\nto the belief that they had some occult significance and virtue. From\nthe magic squares can be obtained certain numbers which are said to be\nthe numbers of the planets; their orderliness, we are told, reflects\nthe order of the heavens, and from a consideration of them the magical\nproperties of the planets which they represent can be arrived at. For\nexample, in the above table the number of rows of numbers is 5. The\ntotal number of numbers in the table is the square of this number,\nnamely, 25, which is also the greatest number in the table. The sum of\nany row or column is 65. And, finally, the sum of all the numbers is\nthe product of the number of rows (namely, 5) and the sum of any row\n(namely, 65), _i.e_. 325. These numbers, namely, 5, 25, 65, and 325, are\nthe numbers of Mars. Sets of numbers for the other planets are obtained\nin exactly the same manner.(1)\n\n\n(1) Readers acquainted with mathematics will notice that if _n_ is the\nnumber of rows in such a \"magic square,\" the other numbers derived as\nabove will be n<2S>, 1/2_n_(_n_<2S> + 1), and 1/2_n_<2S>(_n_<2S> + 1).\nThis can readily be proved by the laws of arithmetical progressions.\nRather similar but more complicated and less uniform \"magic squares\" are\nattributed to PARACELSUS.\n\n\nNow to each planet is assigned an Intelligence or good spirit, and an\nEvil Spirit or demon; and the names of these spirits are related to\ncertain of the numbers of the planets. The other numbers are also\nconnected with holy and magical Hebrew names. AGRIPPA, and BARRETT\ncopying him, gives the following table of \"names answering to the\nnumbers of Mars\":--\n\n     5. He, the letter of the holy name.          <hb >\n     25.                                <hb ___>\n     65. Adonai.                             <hb ____>\n     325. Graphiel, the Intelligence of Mars.     <hb _______>\n     325. Barzabel, the Spirit of Mars.      <hb _______>\n\nSimilar tables are given for the other planets. The numbers can be\nderived from the names by regarding the Hebrew letters of which they\nare composed as numbers, in which case <hb > (Aleph) to <hb > (Teth)\nrepresent the units 1 to 9 in order, <hb > (Jod) to <hb > (Tzade) the\ntens 10 to 90 in order, <hb > (Koph) to <hb > (Tau) the hundreds 100 to\n400, whilst the hundreds 500 to 900 are represented by special terminal\nforms of certain of the Hebrew letters.(2) It is evident that no little\nwasted ingenuity must have been employed in working all this out.\n\n\n(2) It may be noticed that this makes <hb _______> equal to 326, one\nunit too much. Possibly an Alelph should be omitted.\n\n\nEach planet has its own seal or signature, as well as the signature of\nits intelligence and the signature of its demon. These signatures were\nsupposed to represent the characters of the planets' intelligences and\ndemons respectively. The signature of Mars is shown in fig. 26, that of\nits intelligence in fig. 27, and that of its demon in fig. 28.\n\nThese various details were inscribed on the talismans each of which was\nsupposed to confer its own peculiar benefits--as follows: On one side\nmust be engraved the proper magic table and the astrological sign of\nthe planet, together with the highest planetary number, the sacred names\ncorresponding to the planet, and the name of the intelligence of\nthe planet, but not the name of its demon. On the other side must be\nengraved the seals of the planet and of its intelligence, and also the\nastrological sign. BARRETT says, regarding the demons:(1) \"It is to be\nunderstood that the intelligences are the presiding good angels that are\nset over the planets; but that the spirits or daemons, with their names,\nseals, or characters, are never inscribed upon any Talisman, except to\nexecute any evil effect, and that they are subject to the intelligences,\nor good spirits; and again, when the spirits and their characters are\nused, it will be more conducive to the effect to add some divine name\nappropriate to that effect which we desire.\" Evil talismans can also be\nprepared, we are informed, by using a metal antagonistic to the signs\nengraved thereon. The complete talisman of Mars is shown in fig. 29.\n\n\n(1) FRANCIS BARRETT: _The Magus, or Celestial Intelligencer_ (1801), bk.\ni. p. 146.\n\n\nALPHONSE LOUIS CONSTANT,(1) a famous French occultist of the nineteenth\ncentury, who wrote under the name of \"ELIPHAS LEVI,\" describes yet\nanother system of talismans. He says: \"The Pentagram must be always\nengraved on one side of the talisman, with a circle for the Sun, a\ncrescent for the Moon, a winged caduceus for Mercury, a sword for Mars,\na G for Venus, a crown for Jupiter, and a scythe for Saturn. The other\nside of the talisman should bear the sign of Solomon, that is, the\nsix-pointed star formed by two interlaced triangles; in the centre there\nshould be placed a human figure for the sun talismans, a cup for those\nof the Moon, a dog's head for those of Jupiter, a lion for those of\nMars, a dove's for those of Venus, a bull's or goat's for those of\nSaturn. The names of the seven angels should be added either in Hebrew,\nArabic, or magic characters similar to those of the alphabets of\nTrimethius. The two triangles of Solomon may be replaced by the double\ncross of Ezekiel's wheels, this being found on a great number of ancient\npentacles. All objects of this nature, whether in metals or in precious\nstones, should be carefully wrapped in silk satchels of a colour\nanalogous to the spirit of the planet, perfumed with the perfumes of the\ncorresponding day, and preserved from all impure looks and touches.\"(2)\n\n(1) For a biographical and critical account of this extraordinary\npersonage and his views, see Mr A. E. WAITE'S _The Mysteries of Magic: a\nDigest of the writings of_ ELIPHAS LEVI (1897).\n\n(2) _Op. cit_., p. 201.\n\n\nELIPHAS LEVI, following PYTHAGORAS and many of the mediaeval magicians,\nregarded the pentagram, or five-pointed star, as an extremely powerful\npentacle. According to him, if with one horn in the ascendant it is the\nsign of the microcosm--Man. With two horns in the ascendant, however,\nit is the sign of the Devil, \"the accursed Goat of Mendes,\" and an\ninstrument of black magic. We can, indeed, trace some faint likeness\nbetween the pentagram and the outline form of a man, or of a goat's\nhead, according to whether it has one or two horns in the ascendant\nrespectively, which resemblances may account for this idea. Fig. 30\nshows the pentagram embellished with other symbols according to ELIPHAS\nLEVI, whilst fig. 31 shows his embellished form of the six-pointed star,\nor Seal of SOLOMON. This, he says, is \"the sign of the Macrocosmos,\nbut is less powerful than the Pentagram, the microcosmic sign,\" thus\ncontradicting PYTHAGORAS, who, as we have seen, regarded the pentagram\nas the sign of the Macrocosm. ELIPHAS LEVI asserts that he attempted the\nevocation of the spirit of APOLLONIUS of Tyana in London on 24th July\n1854, by the aid of a pentagram and other magical apparatus and ritual,\napparently with success, if we may believe his word. But he sensibly\nsuggests that probably the apparition which appeared was due to the\neffect of the ceremonies on his own imagination, and comes to the\nconclusion that such magical experiments are injurious to health.(1)\n\n\n(1) _Op cit_. pp. 446-450.\n\n\nMagical rings were prepared on the same principle as were talismans.\nSays CORNELIUS AGRIPPA: \"The manner of making these kinds of Magical\nRings is this, viz.: When any Star ascends fortunately, with the\nfortunate aspect or conjunction of the Moon, we must take a stone and\nherb that is under that Star, and make a ring of the metal that is\nsuitable to this Star, and in it fasten the stone, putting the herb\nor root under it--not omitting the inscriptions of images, names, and\ncharacters, as also the proper suffumigations....\"(1) SOLOMON'S ring\nwas supposed to have been possessed of remarkable occult virtue. Says\nJOSEPHUS (_c_. A.D. 37-100): \"God also enabled him (SOLOMON) to learn\nthat skill which expels demons, which is a science useful and sanative\nto men. He composed such incantations also by which distempers are\nalleviated. And he left behind him the manner of using exorcisms, by\nwhich they drive away demons, so that they never return; and this method\nof cure is of great force unto this day; for I have seen a certain man\nof my own country, whose name was Eleazar, releasing people that were\ndemoniacal in the presence of Vespasian, and his sons, and his captains,\nand the whole multitude of his soldiers. The manner of the cure was\nthis; he put a ring that had under the seal a root of one of those sorts\nmentioned by Solomon, to the nostrils of the demoniac, after which he\ndrew out the demon through his nostrils: and when the man fell down\nimmediately, he abjured him to return unto him no more, making still\nmention of Solomon, and reciting the incantations which he composed.\"(2)\n\n(1) H. C. AGRIPPA: _Occult Philosophy_, bk. i. chap. xlvii. (WHITEHEAD'S\nedition, pp. 141 and 142).\n\n(2) FLAVIUS JOSEPHUS: _The Antiquities of the Jews_ (trans. by W.\nWHISTON), bk. viii. chap. ii., SE 5 (45) to (47).\n\nEnough has been said already to indicate the general nature of\ntalismanic magic. No one could maintain otherwise than that much of it\nis pure nonsense; but the subject should not, therefore, be dismissed as\nvalueless, or lacking significance. It is past belief that amulets and\ntalismans should have been believed in for so long unless they APPEARED\nto be productive of some of the desired results, though these may have\nbeen due to forces quite other than those which were supposed to be\noperative. Indeed, it may be said that there has been no widely held\nsuperstition which does not embody some truth, like some small specks of\ngold hidden in an uninviting mass of quartz. As the poet BLAKE put it:\n\"Everything possible to be believ'd is an image of truth\";(1) and the\nattempt may here be made to extract the gold of truth from the quartz of\nsuperstition concerning talismanic magic. For this purpose the various\ntheories regarding the supposed efficacy of talismans must be examined.\n\n\n(1) \"Proverbs of Hell\" (_The Marriage of Heaven and Hell_).\n\n\nTwo of these theories have already been noted, but the doctrine of\neffluvia admittedly applied only to a certain class of amulets, and, I\nthink, need not be seriously considered. The \"astral-spirit theory\" (as\nit may be called), in its ancient form at any rate, is equally untenable\nto-day. The discoveries of new planets and new metals seem destructive\nof the belief that there can be any occult connection between planets,\nmetals, and the days of the week, although the curious fact discovered\nby Mr OLD, to which I have referred (footnote, p. 63@@@), assuredly\ndemands an explanation, and a certain validity may, perhaps, be allowed\nto astrological symbolism. As concerns the belief in the existence\nof what may be called (although the term is not a very happy one)\n\"discarnate spirits,\" however, the matter, in view of the modern\ninvestigation of spiritistic and other abnormal psychical phenomena,\nstands in a different position. There can, indeed, be little doubt that\nvery many of the phenomena observed at spiritistic seances come under\nthe category of deliberate fraud, and an even larger number, perhaps,\ncan be explained on the theory of the subconscious self. I think,\nhowever, that the evidence goes to show that there is a residuum of\nphenomena which can only be explained by the operation, in some way,\nof discarnate intelligences.(1) Psychical research may be said to\nhave supplied the modern world with the evidence of the existence of\ndiscarnate personalities, and of their operation on the material plane,\nwhich the ancient world lacked. But so far as our present subject is\nconcerned, all the evidence obtainable goes to show that the phenomena\nin question only take place in the presence of what is called \"a\nmedium\"--a person of peculiar nervous or psychical organisation.\nThat this is the case, moreover, appears to be the general belief of\nspiritists on the subject. In the sense, then, in which \"a talisman\"\nconnotes a material object of such a nature that by its aid the powers\nof discarnate intelligences may become operative on material things, we\nmight apply the term \"talisman\" to the nervous system of a medium:\nbut then that would be the only talisman. Consequently, even if one is\nprepared to admit the whole of modern spiritistic theory, nothing is\nthereby gained towards a belief in talismans, and no light is shed upon\nthe subject.\n\n\n(1) The publications of The Society for Psychical Research, and\nFREDERICK MYERS' monumental work on _Human Personality and its Survival\nof Bodily Death_, should be specially consulted. I have attempted a\nbrief discussion of modern spiritualism and psychical research in my\n_Matter, Spirit, and the Cosmos_ (1910), chap. ii.\n\n\nAnother theory concerning talismans which commended itself to many of\nthe old occult philosophers, PARACELSUS for instance, is what may be\ncalled the \"occult force\" theory. This theory assumes the existence of\nan occult mental force, a force capable of being exerted by the human\nwill, apart from its usual mode of operation by means of the body. It\nwas believed to be possible to concentrate this mental energy and infuse\nit into some suitable medium, with the production of a talisman, which\nwas thus regarded as a sort of accumulator for mental energy. The theory\nseems a fantastic one to modern thought, though, in view of the many\nstartling phenomena brought to light by psychical research, it is not\nadvisable to be too positive regarding the limitations of the powers of\nthe human mind. However, I think we shall find the element of truth in\nthe otherwise absurd belief in talismans by means of what may be called,\nnot altogether fancifully perhaps, a transcendental interpretation of\nthis \"occult force\" theory. I suggest, that is, that when a believer\nmakes a talisman, the transference of the occult energy is ideal, not\nactual; that the power, believed to reside in the talisman itself, is\nthe power due to the reflex action of the believer's mind. The power\nof what transcendentalists call \"the imagination\" cannot be denied; for\nexample, no one can deny that a man with a firm conviction that such a\nsuccess will be achieved by him, or such a danger avoided, will be far\nmore likely to gain his desire, other conditions being equal, than one\nof a pessimistic turn of mind. The mere conviction itself is a factor in\nsuccess, or a factor in failure, according to its nature; and it seems\nlikely that herein will be found a true explanation of the effects\nbelieved to be due to the power of the talisman.\n\nOn the other hand, however, we must beware of the exaggerations into\nwhich certain schools of thought have fallen in their estimates of the\npowers of the imagination. These exaggerations are particularly\nmarked in the views which are held by many nowadays with regard to\n\"faith-healing,\" although the \"Christian Scientists\" get out of the\ndifficulty--at least to their own satisfaction--by ascribing their\nalleged cures to the Power of the Divine Mind, and not to the power of\nthe individual mind.\n\nOf course the real question involved in this \"transcendental theory\nof talismans\" as I may, perhaps, call it, is that of the operation of\nincarnate spirit on the plane of matter. This operation takes place only\nthrough the medium of the nervous system, and it has been suggested,(1)\nto avoid any violation of the law of the conservation of energy, that\nit is effected, not by the transference, as is sometimes supposed, of\nenergy from the spiritual to the material plane, but merely by means\nof directive control over the expenditure of energy derived by the body\nfrom purely physical sources, _e.g_. the latent chemical energy bound up\nin the food eaten and the oxygen breathed.\n\n\n(1) _Cf_ Sir OLIVER LODGE: _Life and Matter_ (1907), especially chap.\nix.; and W. HIBBERT, F.I.C.: _Life and Energy_ (1904).\n\n\nI am not sure that this theory really avoids the difficulty which it is\nintended to obviate;(1) but it is at least an interesting one, and\nat any rate there may be modes in which the body, under the directive\ncontrol of the spirit, may expend energy derived from the material\nplane, of which we know little or nothing. We have the testimony of many\neminent authorities(2) to the phenomenon of the movement of physical\nobjects without contact at spiritistic seances. It seems to me that the\nintroduction of discarnate intelligences to explain this phenomenon is\nsomewhat gratuitous--the psychic phenomena which yield evidence of the\nsurvival of human personality after bodily death are of a different\ncharacter. For if we suppose this particular phenomenon to be due to\ndiscarnate spirits, we must, in view of what has been said concerning\n\"mediums,\" conclude that the movements in question are not produced by\nthese spirits DIRECTLY, but through and by means of the nervous\nsystem of the medium present. Evidently, therefore, the means for the\nproduction of the phenomenon reside in the human nervous system (or, at\nany rate, in the peculiar nervous system of \"mediums\"), and all that\nis lacking is intelligence or initiative to use these means. This\nintelligence or initiative can surely be as well supplied by the\nsub-consciousness as by a discarnate intelligence. Consequently, it does\nnot seem unreasonable to suppose that equally remarkable phenomena may\nhave been produced by the aid of talismans in the days when these\nwere believed in, and may be produced to-day, if one has sufficient\nfaith--that is to say, produced by man when in the peculiar condition of\nmind brought about by the intense belief in the power of a talisman. And\nhere it should be noted that the term \"talisman\" may be applied to\nany object (or doctrine) that is believed to possess peculiar power or\nefficacy. In this fact, I think, is to be found the peculiar danger of\nerroneous doctrines which promise extraordinary benefits, here and now\non the material plane, to such as believe in them. Remarkable results\nmay follow an intense belief in such doctrines, which, whilst having no\nconnection whatever with their accuracy, being proportional only to the\nintensity with which they are held, cannot do otherwise than confirm the\nbeliever in the validity of his beliefs, though these may be in every\nway highly fantastic and erroneous. Both the Roman Catholic, therefore,\nand the Buddhist may admit many of the marvels attributed to the relics\nof each other's saints; though, in denying that these marvels prove the\naccuracy of each other's religious doctrines, each should remember that\nthe same is true of his own.\n\n\n(1) The subject is rather too technical to deal with here. I have\ndiscussed it elsewhere; see \"Thermo-Dynamical Objections to the\nMechanical Theory of Life,\" _The Chemical News_, vol. cxii. pp. 271 _et\nseq_. (3rd December 1915).\n\n(2) For instance, the well-known physicist, Sir W. F. BARRETT, F.R.S.\n(late Professor of Experimental Physics in The Royal College of Science\nfor Ireland). See his _On the Threshold of a New World of Thought_\n(1908), SE 10.\n\n\nIn illustration of the real power of the imagination, I may instance the\nMaori superstition of the Taboo. According to the Maories, anyone who\ntouches a tabooed object will assuredly die, the tabooed object being\na sort of \"anti-talisman\". Professor FRAZER(1) says: \"Cases have\nbeen known of Maories dying of sheer fright on learning that they had\nunwittingly eaten the remains of a chief's dinner or handled something\nthat belonged to him,\" since such objects were, _ipso facto_, tabooed.\nHe gives the following case on good authority: \"A woman, having partaken\nof some fine peaches from a basket, was told that they had come from\na tabooed place. Immediately the basket dropped from her hands and she\ncried out in agony that the atua or godhead of the chief, whose divinity\nhad been thus profaned, would kill her. That happened in the afternoon,\nand next day by twelve o'clock she was dead.\" For us the power of the\ntaboo does not exist; for the Maori, who implicitly believes in it, it\nis a very potent reality, but this power of the taboo resides not in\nexternal objects but in his own mind.\n\n\n(1) Professor J. G. FRAZER, D.C.L.: _Psyche's Task_ (1909), p. 7.\n\n\nDr HADDON(2) quotes a similar but still more remarkable story of a young\nCongo negro which very strikingly shows the power of the imagination.\nThe young negro, \"being on a journey, lodged at a friend's house; the\nlatter got a wild hen for his breakfast, and the young man asked if it\nwere a wild hen. His host answered 'No.' Then he fell on heartily, and\nafterwards proceeded on his journey. After four years these two met\ntogether again, and his old friend asked him 'if he would eat a wild\nhen,' to which he answered that it was tabooed to him. Hereat the host\nbegan immediately to laugh, inquiring of him, 'What made him refuse it\nnow, when he had eaten one at his table about four years ago?' At the\nhearing of this the negro immediately fell a-trembling, and suffered\nhimself to be so far possessed with the effects of imagination that he\ndied in less than twenty-four hours after.\"\n\n\n(2) ALFRED C. HADDON, SC.D., F.R.S.: _Magic and Fetishism_ (1906), p.\n56.\n\n\nThere are, of course, many stories about amulets, _etc_., which cannot\nbe thus explained. For example, ELIHU RICH gives the following:--\n\n\"In 1568, we are told (Transl. of Salverte, p. 196) that the Prince of\nOrange condemned a Spanish prisoner to be shot at Juliers. The soldiers\ntied him to a tree and fired, but he was invulnerable. They then\nstripped him to see what armour he wore, but they found only an amulet\nbearing the figure of a lamb (the _Agnus Dei_, we presume). This was\ntaken from him, and he was then killed by the first shot. De Baros\nrelates that the Portuguese in like manner vainly attempted to destroy\na Malay, so long as he wore a bracelet containing a bone set in gold,\nwhich rendered him proof against their swords. A similar marvel is\nrelated in the travels of the veracious Marco Polo. 'In an attempt of\nKublai Khan to make a conquest of the island of Zipangu, a jealousy\narose between the two commanders of the expedition, which led to an\norder for putting the whole garrison to the sword. In obedience to this\norder, the heads of all were cut off excepting of eight persons, who\nby the efficacy of a diabolical charm, consisting of a jewel or amulet\nintroduced into the right arm, between the skin and the flesh, were\nrendered secure from the effects of iron, either to kill or wound. Upon\nthis discovery being made, they were beaten with a heavy wooden club,\nand presently died.'\"\n\n(1) I think, however, that these, and many similar stories, must be\ntaken _cum grano salis_.\n\nIn conclusion, mention must be made of a very interesting and suggestive\nphilosophical doctrine--the Law of Correspondences,--due in its explicit\nform to the Swedish philosopher, who was both scientist and mystic,\nEMANUEL SWEDENBORG. To deal in any way adequately with this important\ntopic is totally impossible within the confines of the present\ndiscussion.(2) But, to put the matter as briefly as possible, it may be\nsaid that SWEDENBORG maintains (and the conclusion, I think, is valid)\nthat all causation is from the spiritual world, physical causation being\nbut secondary, or apparent--that is to say, a mere reflection, as it\nwere, of the true process. He argues from this, thereby supplying a\nphilosophical basis for the unanimous belief of the nature-mystics, that\nevery natural object is the symbol (because the creation) of an idea or\nspiritual verity in its widest sense. Thus, there are symbols which are\ninherent in the nature of things, and symbols which are not. The\nformer are genuine, the latter merely artificial. Writing from the\ntranscendental point of view, ELIPHAS LEVI says: \"Ceremonies, vestments,\nperfumes, characters and figures being...necessary to enlist the\nimagination in the education of the will, the success of magical works\ndepends upon the faithful observance of all the rites, which are in\nno sense fantastic or arbitrary, having been transmitted to us\nby antiquity, and permanently subsisting by the essential laws of\nanalogical realisation and of the correspondence which inevitably\nconnects ideas and forms.\"(1b) Some scepticism, perhaps, may be\npermitted as to the validity of the latter part of this statement, and\nthe former may be qualified by the proviso that such things are only of\nvalue in the right education of the will, if they are, indeed, genuine,\nand not merely artificial, symbols. But the writer, as I think will\nbe admitted, has grasped the essential point, and, to conclude our\nexcursion, as we began it, with a definition, I will say that _the power\nof the talisman is the power of the mind (or imagination) brought into\nactivity by means of a suitable symbol_.\n\n\n(1) ELIHU RICH: _The Occult Sciences_, p. 346.\n\n(2) I may refer the reader to my _A Mathematical Theory of Spirit_\n(1912), chap. i., for a more adequate statement.\n\n(1b) ELIPHAS LEVI: _Transcendental Magic: its Doctrine and Ritual_\n(trans. by A. E. WAITE, 1896), p. 234.\n\n\n\n\nVII. CEREMONIAL MAGIC IN THEORY AND PRACTICE\n\nTHE word \"magic,\" if one may be permitted to say so, is itself almost\nmagical--magical in its power to conjure up visions in the human mind.\nFor some these are of bloody rites, pacts with the powers of darkness,\nand the lascivious orgies of the Saturnalia or Witches' Sabbath; in\nother minds it has pleasanter associations, serving to transport them\nfrom the world of fact to the fairyland of fancy, where the purse of\nFORTUNATUS, the lamp and ring of ALADDIN, fairies, gnomes, jinn, and\ninnumerable other strange beings flit across the scene in a marvellous\nkaleidoscope of ever-changing wonders. To the study of the magical\nbeliefs of the past cannot be denied the interest and fascination which\nthe marvellous and wonderful ever has for so many minds, many of whom,\nperhaps, cannot resist the temptation of thinking that there may be some\nelement of truth in these wonderful stories. But the study has a\ngreater claim to our attention; for, as I have intimated already, magic\nrepresents a phase in the development of human thought, and the magic\nof the past was the womb from which sprang the science of the present,\nunlike its parent though it be.\n\nWhat then is magic? According to the dictionary definition--and this\nwill serve us for the present--it is the (pretended) art of producing\nmarvellous results by the aid of spiritual beings or arcane spiritual\nforces. Magic, therefore, is the practical complement of animism.\nWherever man has really believed in the existence of a spiritual world,\nthere do we find attempts to enter into communication with that world's\ninhabitants and to utilise its forces.Professor LEUBA(1) and others\ndistinguish between propitiative behaviour towards the beings of\nthe spiritual world, as marking the religious attitude, and coercive\nbehaviour towards these beings as characteristic of the magical\nattitude; but one form of behaviour merges by insensible degrees into\nthe other, and the distinction (though a useful one) may, for our\npresent purpose, be neglected.\n\n\n(1) JAMES H. LEUBA: _The Psychological Origin and the Nature of\nReligion_ (1909), chap. ii.\n\n\nAnimism, \"the Conception of Spirit everywhere\" as Mr EDWARD CLODD(2)\nneatly calls it, and perhaps man's earliest view of natural phenomena,\npersisted in a modified form, as I have pointed out in \"Some\nCharacteristics of Mediaeval Thought,\" throughout the Middle Ages.\nA belief in magic persisted likewise. In the writings of the Greek\nphilosophers of the Neo-Platonic school, in that curious body of\nesoteric Jewish lore known as the Kabala, and in the works of later\noccult philosophers such as AGRIPPA and PARACELSUS, we find magic, or\nrather the theory upon which magic as an art was based, presented in\nits most philosophical form. If there is anything of value for modern\nthought in the theory of magic, here is it to be found; and it is, I\nthink, indeed to be found, absurd and fantastic though the practices\nbased upon this philosophy, or which this philosophy was thought to\nsubstantiate, most certainly are. I shall here endeavour to give a\nsketch of certain of the outstanding doctrines of magical philosophy,\nsome details concerning the art of magic, more especially as practiced\nin the Middle Ages in Europe, and, finally, an attempt to extract from\nthe former what I consider to be of real worth. We have already wandered\ndown many of the byways of magical belief, and, indeed, the word \"magic\"\nmay be made to cover almost every superstition of the past: To what we\nhave already gained on previous excursions the present, I hope, will add\nwhat we need in order to take a synthetic view of the whole subject.\n\n\n(2) EDWARD CLODD: _Animism the Seed of Religion_ (1905), p. 26.\n\n\nIn the first place, something must be said concerning what is called the\nDoctrine of Emanations, a theory of prime importance in Neo-Platonic\nand Kabalistic ontology. According to this theory, everything in the\nuniverse owes its existence and virtue to an emanation from God, which\ndivine emanation is supposed to descend, step by step (so to speak),\nthrough the hierarchies of angels and the stars, down to the things of\nearth, that which is nearer to the Source containing more of the divine\nnature than that which is relatively distant. As CORNELIUS AGRIPPA\nexpresses it: \"For God, in the first place is the end and beginning\nof all Virtues; he gives the seal of #the _Ideas_ to his servants, the\nIntelligences; who as faithful officers, sign all things intrusted\nto them with an Ideal Virtue; the Heavens and Stars, as instruments,\ndisposing the matter in the mean while for the receiving of those forms\nwhich reside in Divine Majesty (as saith Plato in Timeus) and to be\nconveyed by Stars; and the Giver of Forms distributes them by the\nministry of his Intelligences, which he hath set as Rulers and\nControllers over his Works, to whom such a power is intrusted to things\ncommitted to them that so all Virtues of Stones, Herbs, Metals, and all\nother things may come from the Intelligences, the Governors. The Form,\ntherefore, and Virtue of things comes first from the _Ideas_, then from\nthe ruling and governing Intelligences, then from the aspects of the\nHeavens disposing, and lastly from the tempers of the Elements\ndisposed, answering the influences of the Heavens, by which the\nElements themselves are ordered, or disposed. These kinds of operations,\ntherefore, are performed in these inferior things by express forms,\nand in the Heavens by disposing virtues, in Intelligences by mediating\nrules, in the Original Cause by _Ideas_ and exemplary forms, all which\nmust of necessity agree in the execution of the effect and virtue of\nevery thing.\n\n\"There is, therefore, a wonderful virtue and operation in every Herb\nand Stone, but greater in a Star, beyond which, even from the governing\nIntelligences everything receiveth and obtains many things for itself,\nespecially from the Supreme Cause, with whom all things do mutually and\nexactly correspond, agreeing in an harmonious consent, as it were in\nhymns always praising the highest Maker of all things.... There\nis, therefore, no other cause of the necessity of effects than the\nconnection of all things with the First Cause, and their correspondency\nwith those Divine patterns and eternal _Ideas_ whence every thing hath\nits determinate and particular place in the exemplary world, from whence\nit lives and receives its original being: And every virtue of herbs,\nstones, metals, animals, words and speeches, and all things that are of\nGod, is placed there.\"(1) As compared with the _ex nihilo_ creationism\nof orthodox theology, this theory is as light is to darkness. Of\ncourse, there is much in CORNELIUS AGRIPPA'S statement of it which is\ninacceptable to modern thought; but these are matters of form merely,\nand do not affect the doctrine fundamentally. For instance, as a nexus\nbetween spirit and matter AGRIPPA places the stars: modern thought\nprefers the ether. The theory of emanations may be, and was, as a\nmatter of fact, made the justification of superstitious practices of the\ngrossest absurdity, but on the other hand it may be made the basis of\na lofty system of transcendental philosophy, as, for instance, that of\nEMANUEL SWEDENBORG, whose ontology resembles in some respects that of\nthe Neo-Platonists. AGRIPPA uses the theory to explain all the marvels\nwhich his age accredited, marvels which we know had for the most part no\nexistence outside of man's imagination. I suggest, on the contrary, that\nthe theory is really needed to explain the commonplace, since, in the\nlast analysis, every bit of experience, every phenomenon, be it ever\nso ordinary--indeed the very fact of experience itself,--is most truly\nmarvellous and magical, explicable only in terms of spirit. As ELIPHAS\nLEVI well says in one of his flashes of insight: \"The supernatural\nis only the natural in an extraordinary grade, or it is the exalted\nnatural; a miracle is a phenomenon which strikes the multitude because\nit is unexpected; the astonishing is that which astonishes; miracles are\neffects which surprise those who are ignorant of their causes, or assign\nthem causes w hich are not in proportion to such effects.\"(1b) But I am\nanticipating the sequel.\n\n\n(1) H. C. AGRIPPA: _Occult Philosophy_, bk. i., chap. xiii. (WHITEHEAD'S\nedition, pp. 67-68).\n\n(1b) ELIPHAS LEVI: _Transcendental Magic, its Doctrine and Ritual_\n(trans. by A. E. WAITE, 1896), p. 192.\n\n\nThe doctrine of emanations makes the universe one vast harmonious whole,\nbetween whose various parts there is an exact analogy, correspondence,\nor sympathetic relation. \"Nature\" (the productive principle), says\nIAMBLICHOS (3rd-4th century), the Neo-Platonist, \"in her peculiar way,\nmakes a likeness of invisible principles through symbols in visible\nforms.\"(2) The belief that seemingly similar things sympathetically\naffect one another, and that a similar relation holds good between\ndifferent things which have been intimately connected with one another\nas parts within a whole, is a very ancient one. Most primitive peoples\nare very careful to destroy all their nail-cuttings and hair-clippings,\nsince they believe that a witch gaining possession of these might work\nthem harm. For a similar reason they refuse to reveal their REAL names,\nwhich they regard as part of themselves, and adopt nicknames for common\nuse. The belief that a witch can torment an enemy by making an image of\nhis person in clay or wax, correctly naming it, and mutilating it with\npins, or, in the case of a waxen image, melting it by fire, is a very\nancient one, and was held throughout and beyond the Middle Ages. The\nSympathetic Powder of Sir KENELM DIGBY we have already noticed, as well\nas other instances of the belief in \"sympathy,\" and examples of\nsimilar superstitions might be multiplied almost indefinitely. Such are\ngenerally grouped under the term \"sympathetic magic\"; but inasmuch as\nall magical practices assume that by acting on part of a thing, or a\nsymbolic representation of it, one acts magically on the whole, or on\nthe thing symbolised, the expression may in its broadest sense be said\nto involve the whole of magic.\n\n\n(2) IAMBLICHOS: _Theurgia, or the Egyptian Mysteries_ (trans. by Dr\nALEX. WILDER, New York, 1911), p. 239.\n\n\nThe names of the Divine Being, angels and devils, the planets of the\nsolar system (including sun and moon) and the days of the week, birds\nand beasts, colours, herbs, and precious stones--all, according to\nold-time occult philosophy, are connected by the sympathetic relation\nbelieved to run through all creation, the knowledge of which was\nessential to the magician; as well, also, the chief portions of the\nhuman body, for man, as we have seen, was believed to be a microcosm--a\nuniverse in miniature. I have dealt with this matter and exhibited\nsome of the supposed correspondences in \"The Belief in Talismans\".\nSome further particulars are shown in the annexed table, for which I\nam mainly indebted to AGRIPPA. But, as in the case of the zodiacal gems\nalready dealt with, the old authorities by no means agree as to the\nmajority of the planetary correspondences.\n\nTABLE OF OCCULT CORRESPONDENCES\n\n Arch-                       Part of                      Precious\n angel.   Angel.    Planet.   Human       Animal. Bird.    stone.\n                              Body.\n\n Raphael  Michael     Sun      Heart       Lion   Swan    Carbuncle\n Gabriel  Gabriel     Moon    Left foot    Cat    Owl     Crystal\n Camael   Zamael      Mars    Right hand   Wolf   Vulture Diamond\n Michael  Raphael   Mercury   Left hand    Ape    Stork   Agate\n Zadikel  Sachiel   Jupiter   Head         Hart   Eagle   Sapphire\n                                                         (=Lapis lazuli)\n Haniel   Anael      Venus   Generative    Goat   Dove    Emerald\n                              organs\n Zaphhiel Cassiel   Saturn   Right foot    Mole   Hoopoe  Onyx\n\n\nThe names of the angels are from Mr Mather's translation of _Clavicula\nSalomonis_; the other correspondences are from the second book of\nAgrippa's _Occult Philosophy_, chap. x.\n\n\nIn many cases these supposed correspondences are based, as will be\nobvious to the reader, upon purely trivial resemblances, and, in any\ncase, whatever may be said--and I think a great deal may be said--in\nfavour of the theory of symbology, there is little that may be adduced\nto support the old occultists' application of it.\n\nSo essential a part does the use of symbols play in all magical\noperations that we may, I think, modify the definition of \"magic\"\nadopted at the outset, and define \"magic\" as \"an attempt to employ the\npowers of the spiritual world for the production of marvellous results,\nBY THE AID OF SYMBOLS.\" It has, on the other hand, been questioned\nwhether the appeal to the spirit-world is an essential element in magic.\nBut a close examination of magical practices always reveals at the root\na belief in spiritual powers as the operating causes. The belief in\ntalismans at first sight seems to have little to do with that in a\nsupernatural realm; but, as we have seen, the talisman was always a\nsilent invocation of the powers of some spiritual being with which it\nwas symbolically connected, and whose sign was engraved thereon. And,\nas Dr T. WITTON DAVIES well remarks with regard to \"sympathetic magic\":\n\"Even this could not, at the start, be anything other than a symbolic\nprayer to the spirit or spirits having authority in these matters. In so\nfar as no spirit is thought of, it is a mere survival, and not magic at\nall....\"(1)\n\n\n(1) Dr T. WITTON DAVIES: _Magic, Divination, and Demonology among the\nHebrews and their Neighbours_ (1898), p. 17.\n\n\nWhat I regard as the two essentials of magical practices, namely,\nthe use of symbols and the appeal to the supernatural realm, are most\nobvious in what is called \"ceremonial magic\". Mediaeval ceremonial magic\nwas subdivided into three chief branches--White Magic, Black Magic, and\nNecromancy. White magic was concerned with the evocations of angels,\nspiritual beings supposed to be essentially superior to mankind,\nconcerning which I shall give some further details later--and the\nspirits of the elements,--which were, as I have mentioned in \"Some\nCharacteristics of Mediaeval Thought,\" personifications of the primeval\nforces of Nature. As there were supposed to be four elements, fire,\nair, water, and earth, so there were supposed to be four classes of\nelementals or spirits of the elements, namely, Salamanders, Sylphs,\nUndines, and Gnomes, inhabiting these elements respectively, and\nderiving their characters therefrom. Concerning these curious beings,\nthe inquisitive reader may gain some information from a quaint little\nbook, by the Abbe de MONTFAUCON DE VILLARS, entitled _The Count of\nGabalis, or Conferences about Secret Sciences_ (1670), translated into\nEnglish and published in 1680, which has recently been reprinted. The\nelementals, we learn therefrom, were, unlike other supernatural beings,\nthought to be mortal. They could, however, be rendered immortal by means\nof sexual intercourse with men or women, as the case might be; and it\nwas, we are told, to the noble end of endowing them with this great\ngift, that the sages devoted themselves.\n\nGoety, or black magic, was concerned with the evocation of demons and\ndevils--spirits supposed to be superior to man in certain powers, but\nutterly depraved. Sorcery may be distinguished from witchcraft, inasmuch\nas the sorcerer attempted to command evil spirits by the aid of charms,\n_etc_., whereas the witch or wizard was supposed to have made a pact\nwith the Evil One; though both terms have been rather loosely used,\n\"sorcery\" being sometimes employed as a synonym for \"necromancy\".\nNecromancy was concerned with the evocation of the spirits of the dead:\netymologically, the term stands for the art of foretelling events by\nmeans of such evocations, though it is frequently employed in the wider\nsense.\n\nIt would be unnecessary and tedious to give any detailed account of the\nmethods employed in these magical arts beyond some general remarks. Mr\nA. E. WAITE gives full particulars of the various rituals in his\n_Book of Ceremonial Magic_ (1911), to which the curious reader may be\nreferred. The following will, in brief terms, convey a general idea of a\nmagical evocation:--\n\nChoosing a time when there is a favourable conjunction of the planets,\nthe magician, armed with the implements of magical art, after much\nprayer and fasting, betakes himself to a suitable spot, alone, or\nperhaps accompanied by two trusty companions. All the articles he\nintends to employ, the vestments, the magic sword and lamp, the\ntalismans, the book of spirits, _etc_., have been specially prepared and\nconsecrated. If he is about to invoke a martial spirit, the magician's\nvestment will be of a red colour, the talismans in virtue of which\nhe may have power over the spirit will be of iron, the day chosen a\nTuesday, and the incense and perfumes employed of a nature analogous\nto Mars. In a similar manner all the articles employed and the rites\nperformed must in some way be symbolical of the spirit with which\nconverse is desired. Having arrived at the spot, the magician first of\nall traces the magic circle within which, we are told, no evil spirit\ncan enter; he then commences the magic rite, involving various prayers\nand conjurations, a medley of meaningless words, and, in the case of the\nblack art, a sacrifice. The spirit summoned then appears (at least, so\nwe are told), and, after granting the magician's request, is licensed to\ndepart--a matter, we are admonished, of great importance.\n\nThe question naturally arises, What were the results obtained by these\nmagical arts? How far, if at all, was the magician rewarded by the\nattainment of his desires? We have asked a similar question regarding\nthe belief in talismans, and the reply which we there gained undoubtedly\napplies in the present case as well. Modern psychical research, as I\nhave already pointed out, is supplying us with further evidence for\nthe survival of human personality after bodily death than the innate\nconviction humanity in general seems to have in this belief, and the\nmany reasons which idealistic philosophy advances in favour of it. The\nquestion of the reality of the phenomenon of \"materialisation,\" that is,\nthe bodily appearance of a discarnate spirit, such as is vouched for by\nspiritists, and which is what, it appears, was aimed at in necromancy\n(though why the discarnate should be better informed as to the future\nthan the incarnate, I cannot suppose), must be regarded as _sub\njudice_.(1) Many cases of fraud in connection with the alleged\nproduction of this phenomenon have been detected in recent times; but,\ninasmuch as the last word has not yet been said on the subject, we\nmust allow the possibility that necromancy in the past may have been\nsometimes successful. But as to the existence of the angels and\ndevils of magical belief--as well, one might add, of those of orthodox\nfaith,--nothing can be adduced in evidence of this either from the\nresults of psychical research or on _a priori_ grounds.\n\n\n(1) The late Sir WILLIAM CROOKES' _Experimental Researches in the\nPhenomena of Spiritualism_ contains evidence in favour of the reality of\nthis phenomenon very difficult to gainsay.\n\n\nPseudo-DIONYSIUS classified the angels into three hierarchies, each\nsubdivided into three orders, as under:--\n\n\n_First Hierarchy_.--Seraphim, Cherubim, and Thrones;\n\n_Second Hierarchy_.--Dominions, Powers, and Authorities (or Virtues);\n\n_Third Hierarchy_.--Principalities, Archangels, and Angels,--\n\nand this classification was adopted by AGRIPPA and others.\nPseudo-DIONYSIUS explains the names of these orders as follows: \"... the\nholy designation of the Seraphim denotes either that they are kindling\nor burning; and that of the Cherubim, a fulness of knowledge or stream\nof wisdom.... The appellation of the most exalted and pre-eminent\nThrones denotes their manifest exaltation above every grovelling\ninferiority, and their super-mundane tendency towards higher things;...\nand their invariable and firmly-fixed settlement around the veritable\nHighest, with the whole force of their powers.... The explanatory\nname of the Holy Lordships (Dominions) denotes a certain unslavish\nelevation... superior to every kind of cringing slavery, indomitable\nto every subserviency, and elevated above every dissimularity, ever\naspiring to the true Lordship and source of Lordship.... The appellation\nof the Holy Powers denotes a certain courageous and unflinching\nvirility... vigorously conducted to the Divine imitation, not forsaking\nthe Godlike movement through its own unmanliness, but unflinchingly\nlooking to the super-essential and powerful-making power, and becoming\na powerlike image of this, as far as is attainable....The appellation of\nthe Holy Authorities... denotes the beautiful and unconfused good\norder, with regard to Divine receptions, and the discipline of the\nsuper-mundane and intellectual authority... conducted indomitably,\nwith good order towards Divine things.... (And the appellation) of the\nHeavenly Principalities manifests their princely and leading function,\nafter the Divine example....\"(1) There is a certain grandeur in these\nviews, and if we may be permitted to understand by the orders of the\nhierarchy, \"discrete\" degrees (to use SWEDENBORG'S term) of spiritual\nreality--stages in spiritual involution,--we may see in them a certain\ntruth as well. As I said, all virtue, power, and knowledge which man\nhas from God was believed to descend to him by way of these angelical\nhierarchies, step by step; and thus it was thought that those of the\nlowest hierarchy alone were sent from heaven to man. It was such beings\nthat white magic pretended to evoke. But the practical occultists, when\nthey did not make them altogether fatuous, attributed to these angels\ncharacters not distinguishable from those of the devils. The description\nof the angels in the _Heptemeron_, or _Magical Elements_,(2) falsely at\n may be taken as fairly characteristic. Of MICHAEL and the other\nspirits of Sunday he writes: \"Their nature is to procure Gold, Gemmes,\nCarbuncles, Riches; to cause one to obtain favour and benevolence; to\ndissolve the enmities of men; to raise men to honors; to carry or take\naway infirmities.\" Of GABRIEL and the other spirits of Monday, he says:\n\"Their nature is to give silver; to convey things from place to place;\nto make horses swift, and to disclose the secrets of persons both\npresent and future.\" Of SAMAEL and the other spirits of Tuesday he says:\n\"Their nature is to cause wars, mortality, death and combustions; and\nto give two thousand Souldiers at a time; to bring death, infirmities\nor health,\" and so on for RAPHAEL, SACHIEL, ANAEL, CASSIEL, and their\ncolleagues.(1b)\n\n\n(1) _On the Heavenly Hierarchy_. See the Rev. JOHN PARKER'S translation\nof _The Works of_ DIONYSIUS _the Areopagite_, vol. ii. (1889), pp. 24,\n25, 31, 32, and 36.\n\n(2) The book, which first saw the light three centuries after its\nalleged author's death, was translated into English by ROBERT TURNER,\nand published in 1655 in a volume containing the spurious _Fourth\nBook of Occult Philosophy_, attributed to CORNELIUS AGRIPPA, and other\nmagical works. It is from this edition that I quote.\n\n(1b) _Op. cit_., pp. 90, 92, and 94.\n\n\nConcerning the evil planetary spirits, the spurious _Fourth Book of\nOccult Philosophy_, attributed to CORNELIUS AGRIPPA, informs us that\nthe spirits of Saturn \"appear for the most part with a tall, lean, and\nslender body, with an angry countenance, having four faces; one in the\nhinder part of the head, one on the former part of the head, and on each\nside nosed or beaked: there likewise appeareth a face on each knee, of\na black shining colour: their motion is the moving of the wince, with a\nkinde of earthquake: their signe is white earth, whiter than any Snow.\"\nThe writer adds that their \"particular forms are,--\n\n     A King having a beard, riding on a Dragon.\n     An Old man with a beard.\n     An Old woman leaning on a staffe.\n     A Hog.\n     A Dragon.\n     An Owl.\n     A black Garment.\n     A Hooke or Sickle.\n     A Juniper-tree.\"\n\nConcerning the spirits of Jupiter, he says that they \"appear with a body\nsanguine and cholerick, of a middle stature, with a horrible fearful\nmotion; but with a milde countenance, a gentle speech, and of the colour\nof Iron. The motion of them is flashings of Lightning and Thunder; their\nsigne is, there will appear men about the circle, who shall seem to be\ndevoured of Lions,\" their particular forms being--\n\n     \"A King with a Sword drawn, riding on a Stag.\n     A Man wearing a Mitre in long rayment.\n     A Maid with a Laurel-Crown adorned with Flowers.\n     A Bull.\n     A Stag.\n     A Peacock.\n     An azure Garment.\n     A Sword.\n     A Box-tree.\"\n\nAs to the Martian spirits, we learn that \"they appear in a tall body,\ncholerick, a filthy countenance, of colour brown, swarthy or red, having\nhorns like Harts horns, and Griphins claws, bellowing like wilde Bulls.\nTheir Motion is like fire burning; their signe Thunder and Lightning\nabout the Circle. Their particular shapes are,--\n\n     A King armed riding upon a Wolf.\n     A Man armed.\n     A Woman holding a buckler on her thigh.\n     A Hee-goat.\n     A Horse.\n     A Stag.\n     A red Garment.\n     Wool.\n     A Cheeslip.\"(1)\n\n\n(1) _Op. cit_., pp. 43-45.\n\nThe rest are described in equally fantastic terms.\n\nI do not think I shall be accused of being unduly sceptical if I say\nthat such beings as these could not have been evoked by any magical\nrites, because such beings do not and did not exist, save in the\nmagician's own imagination. The proviso, however, is important, for,\ninasmuch as these fantastic beings did exist in the imagination of the\ncredulous, therein they may, indeed, have been evoked. The whole of\nmagic ritual was well devised to produce hallucination. A firm faith\nin the ritual employed, and a strong effort of will to bring about the\ndesired result, were usually insisted upon as essential to the success\nof the operation.(2) A period of fasting prior to the experiment was\nalso frequently prescribed as necessary, which, by weakening the body,\nmust have been conducive to hallucination. Furthermore, abstention\nfrom the gratification of the sexual appetite was stipulated in certain\ncases, and this, no doubt, had a similar effect, especially as concerns\nmagical evocations directed to the satisfaction of the sexual impulse.\nAdd to these factors the details of the ritual itself, the nocturnal\nconditions under which it was carried out, and particularly the\nsuffumigations employed, which, most frequently, were of a narcotic\nnature, and it is not difficult to believe that almost any type of\nhallucination may have occurred. Such, as we have seen, was ELIPHAS\nLEVI'S view of ceremonial magic; and whatever may be said as concerns\nhis own experiment therein (for one would have thought that the\nessential element of faith was lacking in this case), it is undoubtedly\nthe true view as concerns the ceremonial magic of the past. As this\nauthor well says: \"Witchcraft, properly so-called, that is ceremonial\noperation with intent to bewitch, acts only on the operator, and serves\nto fix and confirm his will, by formulating it with persistence and\nlabour, the two conditions which make volition efficacious.\"(1b)\n\n\n(2) \"MAGICAL AXIOM. In the circle of its action, every word creates that\nwhich it affirms.\n\nDIRECT CONSEQUENCE. He who affirms the devil, creates or makes the\ndevil.\n\n\"_Conditions of Success in Infernal Evocations_. 1, Invincible\nobstinacy; 2, a conscience at once hardened to crime and most subject\nto remorse and fear; 3, affected or natural ignorance; 4, blind faith\nin all that is incredible, 5, a completely false idea of God. (ELIPHAS\nLEVI: _Op. cit_., pp. 297 and 298.)\n\n(1b) ELIPHAS LEVI: _Op. cit_., pp. 130 and 131.\n\n\nEMANUEL SWEDENBORG in one place writes: \"Magic is nothing but the\nperversion of order; it is especially the abuse of correspondences.\"(2)\nA study of the ceremonial magic of the Middle Ages and the following\ncentury or two certainly justifies SWEDENBORG in writing of magic as\nsomething evil. The distinction, rigid enough in theory, between white\nand black, legitimate and illegitimate, magic, was, as I have indicated,\nextremely indefinite in practice. As Mr A. E. WAITE justly remarks:\n\"Much that passed current in the west as White (_i.e_. permissible)\nMagic was only a disguised goeticism, and many of the resplendent angels\ninvoked with divine rites reveal their cloven hoofs. It is not too much\nto say that a large majority of past psychological experiments were\nconducted to establish communication with demons, and that for unlawful\npurposes. The popular conceptions concerning the diabolical spheres,\nwhich have been all accredited by magic, may have been gross\nexaggerations of fact concerning rudimentary and perverse intelligences,\nbut the wilful viciousness of the communicants is substantially\nuntouched thereby.\"(1b)\n\n\n(2) EMANUEL SWEDENBORG: _Arcana Caelestia_, SE 6692.\n\n(1b) ARTHUR EDWARD WAITE: _The Occult Sciences_ (1891), p. 51.\n\n\nThese \"psychological experiments\" were not, save, perhaps, in rare\ncases, carried out in the spirit of modern psychical research, with the\nhigh aim of the man of science. It was, indeed, far otherwise; selfish\nmotives were at the root of most of them; and, apart from what may be\ntermed \"medicinal magic,\" it was for the satisfaction of greed, lust,\nrevenge, that men and women had recourse to magical arts. The history of\ngoeticism and witchcraft is one of the most horrible of all histories.\nThe \"Grimoires,\" witnesses to the superstitious folly of the past, are\nfull of disgusting, absurd, and even criminal rites for the satisfaction\nof unlawful desires and passions. The Church was certainly justified in\nattempting to put down the practice of magic, but the means adopted in\nthis design and the results to which they led were even more abominable\nthan witchcraft itself. The methods of detecting witches and the\ntortures to which suspected persons were subjected to force them to\nconfess to imaginary crimes, employed in so-called civilised England and\nScotland and also in America, to say nothing of countries in which the\n\"Holy\" Inquisition held undisputed sway, are almost too horrible to\ndescribe. For details the reader may be referred to Sir WALTER SCOTT'S\n_Letters on Demonology and Witchcraft_ (1830), and (as concerns America)\nCOTTON MATHER'S The _Wonders of the Invisible World_ (1692). The\ncredulous Church and the credulous people were terribly afraid of the\npower of witchcraft, and, as always, fear destroyed their mental balance\nand made them totally disregard the demands of justice. The result may\nbe well illustrated by what almost inevitably happens when a country\ngoes to war; for war, as the Hon. BERTRAND RUSSELL has well shown,\nis fear's offspring. Fear of the enemy causes the military party to\npersecute in an insensate manner, without the least regard to justice,\nall those of their fellow-men whom they consider are not heart and soul\nwith them in their cause; similarly the Church relentlessly persecuted\nits supposed enemies, of whom it was so afraid. No doubt some of the\npoor wretches that were tortured and killed on the charge of witchcraft\nreally believed themselves to have made a pact with the devil, and were\nthus morally depraved, though, generally speaking, they were no more\nresponsible for their actions than any other madmen. But the majority\nof the persons persecuted as witches and wizards were innocent even of\nthis.\n\nHowever, it would, I think, be unwise to disregard the existence of\nanother side to the question of the validity and ethical value of\nmagic, and to use the word only to stand for something essentially evil.\nSWEDENBORG, we may note, in the course of a long passage from the work\nfrom which I have already quoted, says that by \"magic\" is signified \"the\nscience of spiritual things\"(1) His position appears to be that there is\na genuine magic, or science of spiritual things, and a false magic, that\nscience perverted: a view of the matter which I propose here to adopt.\nThe word \"magic\" itself is derived from the Greek \"magos,\" the wise man\nof the East, and hence the strict etymological meaning of the term is\n\"the wisdom or science of the magi\"; and it is, I think, significant\nthat we are told (and I see no reason to doubt the truth of it) that the\nmagi were among the first to worship the new-born CHRIST.(2)\n\n\n(1) _Op. cit_., SE 5223.\n\n(2) See The Gospel according to MATTHEW, chap. ii., verses 1 to 12.\n\n\nIf there be an abuse of correspondences, or symbols, there surely must\nalso be a use, to which the word \"magic\" is not inapplicable. As such,\nreligious ritual, and especially the sacraments of the Christian Church,\nwill, no doubt, occur to the minds of those who regard these symbols\nas efficacious, though they would probably hesitate to apply the term\n\"magical\" to them. But in using this term as applying thereto, I do\nnot wish to suggest that any such rites or ceremonies possess, or can\npossess, any CAUSAL efficacy in the moral evolution of the soul. The\nwill alone, in virtue of the power vouchsafed to it by the Source of all\npower, can achieve this; but I do think that the soul may be assisted by\nritual, harmoniously related to the states of mind which it is desired\nto induce. No doubt there is a danger of religious ritual, especially\nwhen its meaning is lost, being engaged in for its own sake. It is then\nmere superstition;(1) and, in view of the danger of this degeneracy,\nmany robust minds, such as the members of the Society of Friends, prefer\nto dispense with its aid altogether. When ritual is associated with\nerroneous doctrines, the results are even more disastrous, as I have\nindicated in \"The Belief in Talismans\". But when ritual is allied with,\nand based upon, as adequately symbolising, the high teaching of genuine\nreligion, it may be, and, in fact, is, found very helpful by many\npeople. As such its efficacy seems to me to be altogether magical, in\nthe best sense of that word.\n\n\n(1) As \"ELIPHAS LEVI\" well says: \"Superstition... is the sign surviving\nthe thought; it is the dead body of a religious rite.\" (_Op cit_., p.\n150.)\n\n\nBut, indeed, I think a still wider application of the word \"magic\" is\npossible. \"All experience is magic,\" says NOVALIS (1772-1801), \"and\nonly magically explicable\";(2a) and again: \"It is only because of the\nfeebleness of our perceptions and activity that we do not perceive\nourselves to be in a fairy world.\" No doubt it will be objected that the\ncommon experiences of daily life are \"natural,\" whereas magic postulates\nthe \"supernatural\". If, as is frequently done, we use the term\n\"natural,\" as relating exclusively to the physical realm, then, indeed,\nwe may well speak of magic as \"supernatural,\" because its aims are\npsychical. On the other hand, the term \"natural\" is sometimes employed\nas referring to the whole realm of order, and in this sense one can use\nthe word \"magic\" as descriptive of Nature herself when viewed in the\nlight of an idealistic philosophy, such as that of SWEDENBORG, in which\nall causation is seen to be essentially spiritual, the things of this\nworld being envisaged as symbols of ideas or spiritual verities, and\nthus physical causation regarded as an appearance produced in virtue of\nthe magical, non-causal efficacy of symbols.(1) Says CORNELIUS AGRIPPA:\n\"... every day some natural thing is drawn by art and some divine\nthing is drawn by Nature which, the Egyptians, seeing, called Nature a\nMagicianess (_i.e_.) the very Magical power itself, in the attracting of\nlike by like, and of suitable things by suitable.\"(2)\n\n\n(2a) NOVALIS: _Schriften_ (ed. by LUDWIG TIECK and FR. SCHLEGEL, 1805),\nvol. ii. p. 195\n\n(1) For a discussion of the essentially magical character of inductive\nreasoning, see my _The Magic of Experience_ (1915)\n\n(2) _Op. cit_., bk. i. chap. xxxvii. p. 119.\n\n\nI would suggest, in conclusion, that there is nothing really opposed\nto the spirit of modern science in the thesis that \"all experience\nis magic, and only magically explicable.\" Science does not pretend\nto reveal the fundamental or underlying cause of phenomena, does\nnot pretend to answer the final Why? This is rather the business\nof philosophy, though, in thus distinguishing between science and\nphilosophy, I am far from insinuating that philosophy should be\notherwise than scientific. We often hear religious but non-scientific\nmen complain because scientific and perhaps equally as religious men do\nnot in their books ascribe the production of natural phenomena to the\nDivine Power. But if they were so to do they would be transcending\ntheir business as scientists. In every science certain simple facts of\nexperience are taken for granted: it is the business of the scientist\nto reduce other and more complex facts of experience to terms of these\ndata, not to explain these data themselves. Thus the physicist attempts\nto reduce other related phenomena of greater complexity to terms of\nsimple force and motion; but, What are force and motion? Why does force\nproduce or result in motion? are questions which lie beyond the scope\nof physics. In order to answer these questions, if, indeed, this be\npossible, we must first inquire, How and why do these ideas of force and\nmotion arise in our minds? These problems land us in the psychical or\nspiritual world, and the term \"magic\" at once becomes significant.\n\n\"If, says THOMAS CARLYLE,... we... have led thee into the true Land of\nDreams; and... thou lookest, even for moments, into the region of\nthe Wonderful, and seest and feelest that thy daily life is girt with\nWonder, and based on Wonder, and thy very blankets and breeches are\nMiracles,--then art thou profited beyond money's worth....\"(1)\n\n\n(1) THOMAS CARLYLE: _Sartor Resartus_, bk. iii. chap. ix.\n\n\n\n\nVIII. ARCHITECTURAL SYMBOLISM\n\nI WAS once rash enough to suggest in an essay \"On Symbolism in Art\"(1)\nthat \"a true work of art is at once realistic, imaginative, and\nsymbolical,\" and that its aim is to make manifest the spiritual\nsignificance of the natural objects dealt with. I trust that those\nartists (no doubt many) who disagree with me will forgive me--a man\nof science--for having ventured to express any opinion whatever on the\nsubject. But, at any rate, if the suggestions in question are accepted,\nthen a criterion for distinguishing between art and craft is at once\navailable; for we may say that, whilst craft aims at producing works\nwhich are physically useful, art aims at producing works which are\nspiritually useful. Architecture, from this point of view, is a\ncombination of craft and art. It may, indeed, be said that the modern\narchitecture which creates our dwelling-houses, factories, and even to\na large extent our places of worship, is pure craft unmixed with art On\nthe other hand, it might be argued that such works of architecture are\nnot always devoid of decoration, and that \"decorative art,\" even though\nthe \"decorative artist\" is unconscious of this fact, is based upon rules\nand employs symbols which have a deep significance. The truly artistic\nelement in architecture, however, is more clearly manifest if we turn\nour gaze to the past. One thinks at once, of course, of the pyramids\nand sphinx of Egypt, and the rich and varied symbolism of design and\ndecoration of antique structures to be found in Persia and elsewhere in\nthe East. It is highly probable that the Egyptian pyramids were employed\nfor astronomical purposes, and thus subserved physical utility, but it\nseems no less likely that their shape was suggested by a belief in some\nsystem of geometrical symbolism, and was intended to embody certain of\ntheir philosophical or religious doctrines.\n\n\n(1) Published in _The Occult Review_ for August 1912, vol. xvi. pp. 98\nto 102.\n\n\nThe mediaeval cathedrals and churches of Europe admirably exhibit this\ncombination of art with craft. Craft was needed to design and construct\npermanent buildings to protect worshippers from the inclemency of the\nweather; art was employed not only to decorate such buildings, but\nit dictated to craft many points in connection with their design. The\nbuilders of the mediaeval churches endeavoured so to construct their\nworks that these might, as a whole and in their various parts, embody\nthe truths, as they believed them, of the Christian religion: thus the\ncruciform shape of churches, their orientation, etc. The practical\nvalue of symbolism in church architecture is obvious. As Mr F. E. HULME\nremarks, \"The sculptured fonts or stained-glass windows in the churches\nof the Middle Ages were full of teaching to a congregation of whom\nthe greater part could not read, to whom therefore one great avenue of\nknowledge was closed. The ignorant are especially impressed by pictorial\nteaching, and grasp its meaning far more readily than they can follow a\nwritten description or a spoken discourse.\"(1)\n\n\n(1) F. EDWARD HULME, F.L.S., F.S.A.: _The History, Principles, and\nPractice of Symbolism in Christian Art_ (1909), p. 2.\n\n\nThe subject of symbolism in church architecture is an extensive one,\ninvolving many side issues. In these excursions we shall consider only\none aspect of it, namely, the symbolic use of animal forms in English\nchurch architecture.\n\nAs Mr COLLINS, who has written, in recent years, an interesting work on\nthis topic of much use to archaeologists as a book of data,(2a) points\nout, the great sources of animal symbolism were the famous _Physiologus_\nand other natural history books of the Middle Ages (generally called\n\"Bestiaries\"), and the Bible, mystically understood. The modern tendency\nis somewhat unsympathetic towards any attempt to interpret the Bible\nsymbolically, and certainly some of the interpretations that have been\nforced upon it in the name of symbolism are crude and fantastic enough.\nBut in the belief of the mystics, culminating in the elaborate system of\ncorrespondences of SWEDENBORG, that every natural object, every event\nin the history of the human race, and every word of the Bible, has a\nsymbolic and spiritual significance, there is, I think, a fundamental\ntruth. We must, however, as I have suggested already, distinguish\nbetween true and forced symbolism. The early Christians employed the\nfish as a symbol of Christ, because the Greek word for fish, icqus,\nis obtained by _notariqon_(1) from the phrase <gr 'Ihsous Cristos Qeou\nUios, Swthr>--\"JESUS CHRIST, the Son of God, the Saviour.\" Of course,\nthe obvious use of such a symbol was its entire unintelligibility to\nthose who had not yet been instructed in the mysteries of the Christian\nfaith, since in the days of persecution some degree of secrecy was\nnecessary. But the symbol has significance only in the Greek language,\nand that of an entirely arbitrary nature. There is nothing in the nature\nof the fish, apart from its name in Greek, which renders it suitable\nto be used as a symbol of CHRIST. Contrast this pseudo-symbol, however,\nwith that of the Good Shepherd, the Lamb of God (fig. 34), or the Lion\nof Judah. Here we have what may be regarded as true symbols, something\nof whose meanings are clear to the smallest degree of spiritual sight,\neven though the second of them has frequently been badly misinterpreted.\n\n\n(2a) ARTHUR H. COLLINS, M.A.: _Symbolism of Animals and Birds\nrepresented in English Church Architecture_ (1913).\n\n(1) A Kabalistic process by which a word is formed by taking the initial\nletters of a sentence or phrase.\n\n\nIt was a belief in the spiritual or moral significance of nature similar\nto that of the mystical expositors of the Bible, that inspired the\nmediaeval naturalists. The Bestiaries almost invariably conclude the\naccount of each animal with the moral that might be drawn from its\nbehaviour. The interpretations are frequently very far-fetched, and\nas the writers were more interested in the morals than in the facts\nof natural history themselves, the supposed facts from which they drew\ntheir morals were frequently very far from being of the nature of facts.\nSometimes the product of this inaccuracy is grotesque, as shown by the\nfollowing quotation: \"The elephants are in an absurd way typical of Adam\nand Eve, who ate of the forbidden fruit, and also have the dragon for\ntheir enemy. It was supposed that the elephant... used to sleep by\nleaning against a tree. The hunters would come by night, and cut the\ntrunk through. Down he would come, roaring helplessly. None of his\nfriends would be able to help him, until a small elephant should come\nand lever him up with his trunk. This small elephant was symbolic of\nJesus Christ, Who came in great humility to rescue the human race which\nhad fallen 'through a tree.' \"(1)\n\n\n(1) A. H. COLLINS: _Symbolism of Animals, etc_., pp. 41 and 42.\n\n\nIn some cases, though the symbolism is based upon quite erroneous\nnotions concerning natural history, and is so far fantastic, it is not\ndevoid of charm. The use of the pelican to symbolise the Saviour is a\ncase in point. Legend tells us that when other food is unobtainable, the\npelican thrusts its bill into its breast (whence the red colour of the\nbill) and feeds its young with its life-blood. Were this only a fact,\nthe symbol would be most appropriate. There is another and far less\ncharming form of the legend, though more in accord with current\nperversions of Christian doctrine, according to which the pelican uses\nits blood to revive its young, after having slain them through anger\naroused by the great provocation which they are supposed to give it. For\nan example of the use of the pelican in church architecture see fig. 36.\n\nMention must also be made of the purely fabulous animals of the\nBestiaries, such as the basilisk, centaur, dragon, griffin, hydra,\nmantichora, unicorn, phoenix, _etc_. The centaur (fig. 39) was a beast,\nhalf man, half horse. It typified the flesh or carnal mind of man, and\nthe legend of the perpetual war between the centaur and a certain tribe\nof simple savages who were said to live in trees in India, symbolised\nthe combat between the flesh and the spirit.(1)\n\n\n(1) A H. COLLINS: _Symbolism of Animals, etc_., pp. 150 and 153.\n\n\nWith bow and arrow in its hands the centaur forms the astrological\nsign Sagittarius (or the Archer). An interesting example of this sign\noccurring in church architecture is to be found on the western doorway\nof Portchester Church--a most beautiful piece of Norman architecture.\n\"This sign of the Zodiac,\" writes the Rev. Canon VAUGHAN, M.A., a former\nVicar of Portchester, \"was the badge of King Stephen, and its presence\non the west front (of Portchester Church) seems to indicate, what was\noften the case elsewhere, that the elaborate Norman carving was not\ncarried out until after the completion of the building.\"(2) The facts,\nhowever, that this Sagittarius is accompanied on the other side of the\ndoorway by a couple of fishes, which form the astrological sign Pisces\n(or the Fishes), and that these two signs are what are termed, in\nastrological phraseology, the \"houses\" of the planet Jupiter, the\n\"Major Fortune,\" suggest that the architect responsible for the design,\ninfluenced by the astrological notions of his day, may have put the\nsigns there in order to attract Jupiter's beneficent influence. Or\nhe may have had the Sagittarius carved for the reason Canon VAUGHAN\nsuggests, and then, remembering how good a sign it was astrologically,\nhad the Pisces added to complete the effect.(1b)\n\n\n(2) Rev. Canon VAUGHAN, M.A.: A Short History of Portchester Castle, p.\n14.\n\n(1b) Two other possible explanations of the Pisces have been suggested\nby the Rev. A. HEADLEY. In his MS. book written in 1888, when he was\nVicar of Portchester, he writes: \"I have discovered an interesting proof\nthat it (the Church) was finished in Stephen's reign, namely, the figure\nof Sagittarius in the Western Doorway.\n\n\"Stephen adopted this as his badge for the double reason that it\nformed part of the arms of the city of Blois, and that the sun was\nin Sagittarius in December when he came to the throne. I, therefore,\nconclude that this badge was placed where it is to mark the completion\nof the church.\n\n\"There is another sign of the Zodiac in the archway, apparently Pisces.\nThis may have been chosen to mark the month in which the church was\nfinished, or simply on account of its nearness to the sea. At one time\nI fancied it might refer to March, the month in which Lady Day occurred,\nthus referring to the Patron Saint, St Mary. As the sun leaves Pisces\njust before Lady Day this does not explain it. Possibly in the old\ncalendar it might do so. This is a matter for further research.\" (I have\nto thank the Rev. H. LAWRENCE FRY, present Vicar of Portchester, for\nthis quotation, and the Rev. A. HEADLEY for permission to utilise it.)\n\n\nThe phoenix and griffin we have encountered already in our excursions.\nThe latter, we are told, inhabits desert places in India, where it can\nfind nothing for its young to eat. It flies away to other regions\nto seek food, and is sufficiently strong to carry off an ox. Thus it\nsymbolises the devil, who is ever anxious to carry away our souls to\nthe deserts of hell. Fig. 37 illustrates an example of the use of this\nsymbolic beast in church architecture.\n\nThe mantichora is described by PLINY (whose statements were\nunquestioningly accepted by the mediaeval naturalists), on the authority\nof CTESIAS (_fl_. 400 B.C.), as having \"A triple row of teeth, which fit\ninto each other like those of a comb, the face and ears of a man, and\nazure eyes, is the colour of blood, has the body of the lion, and a tail\nending in a sting, like that of the scorpion. Its voice resembles the\nunion of the sound of the flute and the trumpet; it is of excessive\nswiftness, and is particularly fond of human flesh.\"(1)\n\n\n(1) PLINY: _Natural History_, bk. viii. chap. xxx. (BOSTOCK and RILEY'S\ntrans., vol. ii., 1855, p. 280.)\n\n\nConcerning the unicorn, in an eighteenth-century work on natural history\nwe read that this is \"a Beast, which though doubted of by many Writers,\nyet is by others thus described: He has but one Horn, and that an\nexceedingly rich one, growing out of the middle of his Forehead. His\nHead resembles an Hart's, his Feet an Elephant's, his tail a Boar's, and\nthe rest of his Body an Horse's. The Horn is about a Foot and half in\nlength. His Voice is like the Lowing of an Ox. His Mane and Hair are\nof a yellowish Colour. His Horn is as hard as Iron, and as rough as any\nFile, twisted or curled, like a flaming Sword; very straight, sharp, and\nevery where black, excepting the Point. Great Virtues are attributed to\nit, in expelling of Poison and curing of several Diseases. He is not\na Beast of prey.\"(2) The method of capturing the animal believed in\nby mediaeval writers was a curious one. The following is a literal\ntranslation from the _Bestiary_ of PHILIPPE DE THAUN (12th century):--\n\n(2) (THOMAS BOREMAN): _A Description of Three Hundred Animals_ (1730),\np. 6.\n\n \"Monosceros is an animal which has one horn on its head,\n Therefore it is so named; it has the form of a goat,\n It is caught by means of a virgin, now hear in what manner.\n When a man intends to hunt it and to take and ensnare it\n He goes to the forest where is its repair;\n There he places a virgin, with her breast uncovered,\n And by its smell the monosceros perceives it;\n Then it comes to the virgin, and kisses her breast,\n Falls asleep on her lap, and so comes to its death;\n The man arrives immediately, and kills it in its sleep,\n Or takes it alive and does as he likes with it.\n It signifies much, I will not omit to tell it you.\n\n     \"Monosceros is Greek, it means _one horn_ in French:\n A beast of such a description signifies Jesus Christ;\n One God he is and shall be, and was and will continue so;\n He placed himself in the virgin, and took flesh for man's sake,\n And for virginity to show chastity;\n To a virgin he APPEARED and a virgin conceived him,\n A virgin she is, and will be, and will remain always.\n Now hear briefly the signification.\n\n     \"This animal in truth signifies God;\n Know that the virgin signifies St Mary;\n By her breast we understand similarly Holy Church;\n And then by the kiss it ought to signify,\n That a man when he sleeps is in semblance of death;\n God slept as man, who suffered death on the cross,\n And his destruction was our redemption,\n And his labour our repose,\n Thus God deceived the Devil by a proper semblance;\n Soul and body were one, so was God and man,\n And this is the signification of an animal of that description.\"(1)\n\n\n(1) _Popular Treatises on Science written during the Middle Ages\nin Anglo-Saxon, Anglo-Norman, and English_, ed. by THOMAS WRIGHT\n(Historical Society of Science, 1841), pp. 81-82.\n\nThis being the current belief concerning the symbolism of the unicorn\nin the Middle Ages, it is not surprising to find this animal utilised in\nchurch architecture; for an example see fig. 35.\n\nThe belief in the existence of these fabulous beasts may very probably\nhave been due to the materialising of what were originally nothing\nmore than mere arbitrary symbols, as I have already suggested of the\nphoenix.(1) Thus the account of the mantichora may, as BOSTOCK has\nsuggested, very well be a description of certain hieroglyphic figures,\nexamples of which are still to be found in the ruins of Assyrian and\nPersian cities. This explanation seems, on the whole, more likely\nthan the alternative hypothesis that such beliefs were due to\nmal-observation; though that, no doubt, helped in their formation.\n\n\n(1) \"Superstitions concerning Birds.\"\n\n\nIt may be questioned, however, whether the architects and preachers\nof the Middle Ages altogether believed in the strange fables of the\nBestiaries. As Mr COLLINS says in reply to this question: \"Probably they\nwere credulous enough. But, on the whole, we may say that the truth of\nthe story was just what they did not trouble about, any more than some\nclergymen are particular about the absolute truth of the stories they\ntell children from the pulpit. The application, the lesson, is the\nthing!\" With their desire to interpret Nature spiritually, we ought,\nI think, to sympathise. But there was one truth they had yet to learn,\nnamely, that in order to interpret Nature spiritually, it is necessary\nfirst to understand her aright in her literal sense.\n\n\n\n\nIX. THE QUEST OF THE PHILOSOPHER'S STONE\n\nTHE need of unity is a primary need of human thought. Behind the\nvaried multiplicity of the world of phenomena, primitive man, as I\nhave indicated on a preceding excursion, begins to seek, more or less\nconsciously, for that Unity which alone is Real. And this statement not\nonly applies to the first dim gropings of the primitive human mind,\nbut sums up almost the whole of science and philosophy; for almost all\nscience and philosophy is explicitly or implicitly a search for unity,\nfor one law or one love, one matter or one spirit. That which is the aim\nof the search may, indeed, be expressed under widely different terms,\nbut it is always conceived to be the unity in which all multiplicity is\nresolved, whether it be thought of as one final law of necessity, which\nall things obey, and of which all the various other \"laws of nature\" are\nso many special and limited applications; or as one final love for which\nall things are created, and to which all things aspire; as one matter of\nwhich all bodies are but varying forms; or as one spirit, which is the\nlife of all things, and of which all things are so many manifestations.\nEvery scientist and philosopher is a merchant seeking for goodly pearls,\nwilling to sell every pearl that he has, if he may secure the One Pearl\nbeyond price, because he knows that in that One Pearl all others are\nincluded.\n\nThis search for unity in multiplicity, however, is not confined to\nthe acknowledged scientist and philosopher. More or less unconsciously\neveryone is engaged in this quest. Harmony and unity are the very\nfundamental laws of the human mind itself, and, in a sense, all mental\nactivity is the endeavour to bring about a state of harmony and unity\nin the mind. No two ideas that are contradictory of one another, and are\nperceived to be of this nature, can permanently exist in any sane man's\nmind. It is true that many people try to keep certain portions of their\nmental life in water-tight compartments; thus some try to keep their\nreligious convictions and their business ideas, or their religious\nfaith and their scientific knowledge, separate from another one--and, it\nseems, often succeed remarkably well in so doing. But, ultimately, the\narbitrary mental walls they have erected will break down by the force\nof their own ideas. Contradictory ideas from different compartments will\nthen present themselves to consciousness at the same moment of time,\nand the result of the perception of their contradictory nature will\nbe mental anguish and turmoil, persisting until one set of ideas is\nconquered and overcome by the other, and harmony and unity are restored.\n\nIt is true of all of us, then, that we seek for Unity--unity in mind and\nlife. Some seek it in science and a life of knowledge; some seek it in\nreligion and a life of faith; some seek it in human love and find it in\nthe life of service to their fellows; some seek it in pleasure and the\ngratification of the senses' demands; some seek it in the harmonious\ndevelopment of all the facets of their being. Many the methods, right\nand wrong; many the terms under which the One is conceived, true\nand false--in a sense, to use the phraseology of a bygone system of\nphilosophy, we are all, consciously or unconsciously, following paths\nthat lead thither or paths that lead away, seekers in the quest of the\nPhilosopher's Stone.\n\nLet us, in these excursions in the byways of thought, consider for a\nwhile the form that the quest of fundamental unity took in the hands\nof those curious mediaeval philosophers, half mystics, half\nexperimentalists in natural things--that are known by the name of\n\"alchemists.\"\n\nThe common opinion concerning alchemy is that it was a pseudo-science or\npseudo-art flourishing during the Dark Ages, and having for its aim\nthe conversion of common metals into silver and gold by means of a most\nmarvellous and wholly fabulous agent called the Philosopher's Stone,\nthat its devotees were half knaves, half fools, whose views concerning\nNature were entirely erroneous, and whose objects were entirely\nmercenary. This opinion is not absolutely destitute of truth; as a\nscience alchemy involved many fantastic errors; and in the course of its\nhistory it certainly proved attractive to both knaves and fools. But if\nthis opinion involves some element of truth, it involves a far greater\nproportion of error. Amongst the alchemists are numbered some of the\ngreatest intellects of the Middle Ages--ROGER BACON (_c_. 1214-1294),\nfor example, who might almost be called the father of experimental\nscience. And whether or not the desire for material wealth was a\nsecondary object, the true aim of the genuine alchemist was a much\nnobler one than this as one of them exclaims with true scientific\nfervour: \"Would to God... all men might become adepts in our Art--for\nthen gold, the great idol of mankind, would lose its value, and we\nshould prize it only for its scientific teaching.\"(1) Moreover, recent\ndevelopments in physical and chemical science seem to indicate that the\nalchemists were not so utterly wrong in their concept of Nature as has\nformerly been supposed--that, whilst they certainly erred in both their\nmethods and their interpretations of individual phenomena, they did\nintuitively grasp certain fundamental facts concerning the universe\nofthe very greatest importance.\n\n\n(1) EIRENAEUS PHILALETHES: _An Open Entrance to the Closed Palace of the\nKing_. (See _The Hermetic Museum, Restored and Enlarged_, ed. by A. E.\nWAITE, 1893, vol. ii. p. 178.)\n\n\nSuppose, however, that the theories of the alchemists are entirely\nerroneous from beginning to end, and are nowhere relieved by the merest\nglimmer of truth. Still they were believed to be true, and this belief\nhad an important influence upon human thought. Many men of science\nhave, I am afraid, been too prone to regard the mystical views of the\nalchemists as unintelligible; but, whatever their theories may be to us,\nthese theories were certainly very real to them: it is preposterous to\nmaintain that the writings of the alchemists are without meaning, even\nthough their views are altogether false. And the more false their views\nare believed to be, the more necessary does it become to explain why\nthey should have gained such universal credit. Here we have problems\ninto which scientific inquiry is not only legitimate, but, I think, very\ndesirable,--apart altogether from the question of the truth or falsity\nof alchemy as a science, or its utility as an art. What exactly was the\nsystem of beliefs grouped under the term \"alchemy,\" and what was its\naim? Why were the beliefs held? What was their precise influence upon\nhuman thought and culture?\n\nIt was in order to elucidate problems of this sort, as well as to\ndetermine what elements of truth, if any, there are in the theories of\nthe alchemists, that The Alchemical Society was founded in 1912, mainly\nthrough my own efforts and those of my confreres, and for the first time\nsomething like justice was being done to the memory of the alchemists\nwhen the Society's activities were stayed by that greatest calamity of\nhistory, the European War.\n\nSome students of the writings of the alchemists have advanced a very\ncurious and interesting theory as to the aims of the alchemists, which\nmay be termed \"the transcendental theory\". According to this theory, the\nalchemists were concerned only with the mystical processes affecting\nthe soul of man, and their chemical references are only to be understood\nsymbolically. In my opinion, however, this view of the subject is\nrendered untenable by the lives of the alchemists themselves; for, as\nMr WAITE has very fully pointed out in his _Lives of Alchemystical\nPhilosophers_ (1888), the lives of the alchemists show them to have been\nmainly concerned with chemical and physical processes; and, indeed, to\ntheir labours we owe many valuable discoveries of a chemical nature. But\nthe fact that such a theory should ever have been formulated, and\nshould not be altogether lacking in consistency, may serve to direct our\nattention to the close connection between alchemy and mysticism.\n\nIf we wish to understand the origin and aims of alchemy we must\nendeavour to recreate the atmosphere of the Middle Ages, and to look at\nthe subject from the point of view of the alchemists themselves. Now,\nthis atmosphere was, as I have indicated in a previous essay, surcharged\nwith mystical theology and mystical philosophy. Alchemy, so to speak,\nwas generated and throve in a dim religious light. We cannot open a book\nby any one of the better sort of alchemists without noticing how closely\ntheir theology and their chemistry are interwoven, and what a remarkably\nreligious view they take of their subject. Thus one alchemist writes:\n\"In the first place, let every devout and God-fearing chemist and\nstudent of this Art consider that this arcanum should be regarded, not\nonly as a truly great, but as a most holy Art (seeing that it typifies\nand shadows out the highest heavenly good). Therefore, if any man desire\nto reach this great and unspeakable Mystery, he must remember that it is\nobtained not by the might of man, but by the grace of God, and that not\nour will or desire, but only the mercy of the Most High, can bestow it\nupon us. For this reason you must first of all cleanse your heart,\nlift it up to Him alone, and ask of Him this gift in true, earnest and\nundoubting prayer. He alone can give and bestow it.\"(1) Whilst another\nalchemist declares: \"I am firmly persuaded that any unbeliever who\ngot truly to know this Art, would straightway confess the truth of\nour Blessed Religion, and believe in the Trinity and in our Lord JESUS\nCHRIST.\"(2)\n\n\n(1) _The Sophic Hydrolith; or, Water Stone of the Wise_. (See _The\nHermetic Museum_, vol. i. pp. 74 and 75.)\n\n(2) PETER BONUS: _The New Pearl of Great Price_ (trans. by A. E. WAITE,\n1894), p. 275.\n\n\nNow, what I suggest is that the alchemists constructed their chemical\ntheories for the main part by means of _a priori_ reasoning, and that\nthe premises from which they started were (i.) the truth of mystical\ntheology, especially the doctrine of the soul's regeneration, and (ii.)\nthe truth of mystical philosophy, which asserts that the objects of\nNature are symbols of spiritual verities. There is, I think, abundant\nevidence to show that alchemy was a more or less deliberate attempt\nto apply, according to the principles of analogy, the doctrines of\nreligious mysticism to chemical and physical phenomena. Some of this\nevidence I shall attempt to put forward in this essay.\n\nIn the first place, however, I propose to say a few words more in\ndescription of the theological and philosophical doctrines which so\ngreatly influenced the alchemists, and which, I believe, they borrowed\nfor their attempted explanations of chemical and physical phenomena.\nThis system of doctrine I have termed \"mysticism\"--a word which is\nunfortunately equivocal, and has been used to denote various systems\nof religious and philosophical thought, from the noblest to the most\ndegraded. I have, therefore, further to define my usage of the term.\n\nBy mystical theology I mean that system of religious thought which\nemphasises the unity between Creator and creature, though not\nnecessarily to the extent of becoming pantheistic. Man, mystical\ntheology asserts, has sprung from God, but has fallen away from Him\nthrough self-love. Within man, however, is the seed of divine grace,\nwhereby, if he will follow the narrow road of self-renunciation, he may\nbe regenerated, born anew, becoming transformed into the likeness of God\nand ultimately indissolubly united to God in love. God is at once the\nCreator and the Restorer of man's soul, He is the Origin as well as the\nEnd of all existence; and He is also the Way to that End. In Christian\nmysticism, CHRIST is the Pattern, towards which the mystic strives;\nCHRIST also is the means towards the attainment of this end.\n\nBy mystical philosophy I mean that system of philosophical thought which\nemphasises the unity of the Cosmos, asserting that God and the spiritual\nmay be perceived immanent in the things of this world, because all\nthings natural are symbols and emblems of spiritual verities. As one of\nthe _Golden Verses_ attributed to PYTHAGORAS, which I have quoted in a\nprevious essay, puts it: \"The Nature of this Universe is in all things\nalike\"; commenting upon which, HIEROCLES, writing in the fifth or sixth\ncentury, remarks that \"Nature, in forming this Universe after the Divine\nMeasure and Proportion, made it in all things conformable and like to\nitself, analogically in different manners. Of all the different species,\ndiffused throughout the whole, it made, as it were, an Image of the\nDivine Beauty, imparting variously to the copy the perfections of the\nOriginal.\"(1) We have, however, already encountered so many instances of\nthis belief, that no more need be said here concerning it.\n\n\n(1) _Commentary of_ HIEROCLES _on the Golden Verses of_ PYTHAGORAS\n(trans. by N. ROWE, 1906), pp. 101 and 102.\n\n\nIn fine, as Dean INGE well says: \"Religious Mysticism may be defined as\nthe attempt to realise the presence of the living God in the soul and in\nnature, or, more generally, as _the attempt to realise, in thought\nand feeling, the immanence of the temporal in the eternal, and of the\neternal in the temporal_.\"(2)\n\n\n(2) WILLIAM RALPH INGE, M.A.: _Christian Mysticism_ (the Bampton\nLectures, 1899), p. 5.\n\n\nNow, doctrines such as these were not only very prevalent during the\nMiddle Ages, when alchemy so greatly flourished, but are of great\nantiquity, and were undoubtedly believed in by the learned class in\nEgypt and elsewhere in the East in those remote days when, as some\nthink, alchemy originated, though the evidence, as will, I hope, become\nplain as we proceed, points to a later and post-Christian origin for the\ncentral theorem of alchemy. So far as we can judge from their writings,\nthe more important alchemists were convinced of the truth of these\ndoctrines, and it was with such beliefs in mind that they commenced\ntheir investigations of physical and chemical phenomena. Indeed, if we\nmay judge by the esteem in which the Hermetic maxim, \"What is above\nis as that which is below, what is below is as that which is above, to\naccomplish the miracles of the One Thing,\" was held by every alchemist,\nwe are justified in asserting that the mystical theory of the spiritual\nsignificance of Nature--a theory with which, as we have seen, is closely\nconnected the Neoplatonic and Kabalistic doctrine that all things\nemanate in series from the Divine Source of all Being--was at the very\nheart of alchemy. As writes one alchemist: \"... the Sages have been\ntaught of God that this natural world is only an image and material copy\nof a heavenly and spiritual pattern; that the very existence of this\nworld is based upon the reality of its celestial archetype; and that God\nhas created it in imitation of the spiritual and invisible universe, in\norder that men might be the better enabled to comprehend His heavenly\nteaching, and the wonders of His absolute and ineffable power and\nwisdom. Thus the sage sees heaven reflected in Nature as in a mirror;\nand he pursues this Art, not for the sake of gold or silver, but for the\nlove of the knowledge which it reveals; he jealously conceals it from\nthe sinner and the scornful, lest the mysteries of heaven should be laid\nbare to the vulgar gaze.\"(1)\n\n\n(1) MICHAEL SENDIVOGIUS (?): _The New Chemical Light, Pt. II.,\nConcerning Sulphur_. (See _The Hermetic Museum_, vol. ii. p. 138.)\n\n\nThe alchemists, I hold, convinced of the truth of this view of Nature,\n_i.e_. that principles true of one plane of being are true also of all\nother planes, adopted analogy as their guide in dealing with the facts\nof chemistry and physics known to them. They endeavoured to explain\nthese facts by an application to them of the principles of mystical\ntheology, their chief aim being to prove the truth of these principles\nas applied to the facts of the natural realm, and by studying natural\nphenomena to become instructed in spiritual truth. They did not proceed\nby the sure, but slow, method of modern science, _i.e_. the method of\ninduction, which questions experience at every step in the construction\nof a theory; but they boldly allowed their imaginations to leap ahead\nand to formulate a complete theory of the Cosmos on the strength of but\nfew facts. This led them into many fantastic errors, but I would not\nventure to deny them an intuitive perception of certain fundamental\ntruths concerning the constitution of the Cosmos, even if they distorted\nthese truths and dressed them in a fantastic garb.\n\nNow, as I hope to make plain in the course of this excursion, the\nalchemists regarded the discovery of the Philosopher's Stone and the\ntransmutation of \"base\" metals into gold as the consummation of the\nproof of the doctrines of mystical theology as applied to chemical\nphenomena, and it was as such that they so ardently sought to achieve\nthe _magnum opus_, as this transmutation was called. Of course, it\nwould be useless to deny that many, accepting the truth of the great\nalchemical theorem, sought for the Philosopher's Stone because of what\nwas claimed for it in the way of material benefits. But, as I have\nalready indicated, with the nobler alchemists this was not the case, and\nthe desire for wealth, if present at all, was merely a secondary object.\n\nThe idea expressed in DALTON'S atomic hypothesis (1802), and universally\nheld during the nineteenth century, that the material world is made up\nof a certain limited number of elements unalterable in quantity, subject\nin themselves to no change or development, and inconvertible one into\nanother, is quite alien to the views of the alchemists. The alchemists\nconceived the universe to be a unity; they believed that all material\nbodies had been developed from one seed; their elements are merely\ndifferent forms of one matter and, therefore, convertible one into\nanother. They were thoroughgoing evolutionists with regard to the things\nof the material world, and their theory concerning the evolution of the\nmetals was, I believe, the direct outcome of a metallurgical application\nof the mystical doctrine of the soul's development and regeneration. The\nmetals, they taught, all spring from the same seed in Nature's womb,\nbut are not all equally matured and perfect; for, as they say, although\nNature always intends to produce only gold, various impurities impede\nthe process. In the metals the alchemists saw symbols of man in the\nvarious stages of his spiritual development. Gold, the most beautiful\nas well as the most untarnishable metal, keeping its beauty permanently,\nunaffected by sulphur, most acids, and fire--indeed, purified by such\ntreatment,--gold, to the alchemist, was the symbol of regenerate man,\nand therefore he called it \"a noble metal\". Silver was also termed\n\"noble\"; but it was regarded as less mature than gold, for, although\nit is undoubtedly beautiful and withstands the action of fire, it is\ncorroded by nitric acid and is blackened by sulphur; it was, therefore,\nconsidered to be analogous to the regenerate man at a lower stage of his\ndevelopment. Possibly we shall not be far wrong in using SWEDENBORG'S\nterms, \"celestial\" to describe the man of gold, \"spiritual\" to designate\nhim of silver. Lead, on the other hand, the alchemists regarded as a\nvery immature and impure metal: heavy and dull, corroded by sulphur and\nnitric acid, and converted into a calx by the action of fire,--lead,\nto the alchemists, was a symbol of man in a sinful and unregenerate\ncondition.\n\nThe alchemists assumed the existence of three principles in the metals,\ntheir obvious reason for so doing being the mystical threefold division\nof man into body, soul (_i.e_. affections and will), and spirit\n(_i.e_. intelligence), though the principle corresponding to body was\na comparatively late introduction in alchemical philosophy. This latter\nfact, however, is no argument against my thesis; because, of course,\nI do not maintain that the alchemists started out with their chemical\nphilosophy ready made, but gradually worked it out, by incorporating in\nit further doctrines drawn from mystical theology. The three principles\njust referred to were called \"mercury,\" \"sulphur,\" and \"salt\"; and they\nmust be distinguished from the common bodies so designated (though the\nalchemists themselves seem often guilty of confusing them). \"Mercury\"\nis the metallic principle _par excellence_, conferring on metals\ntheir brightness and fusibility, and corresponding to the spirit or\nintelligence in man.(1) \"Sulphur,\" the principle of combustion and\ncolour, is the analogue of the soul. Many alchemists postulated two\nsulphurs in the metals, an inward and an outward.(1b) The outward\nsulphur was thought to be the chief cause of metallic impurity, and the\nreason why all (known) metals, save gold and silver, were acted on by\nfire. The inward sulphur, on the other hand, was regarded as essential\nto the development of the metals: pure mercury, we are told, matured by\na pure inward sulphur yields pure gold. Here again it is evident that\nthe alchemists borrowed their theories from mystical theology; for,\nclearly, inward sulphur is nothing else than the equivalent to love of\nGod; outward sulphur to love of self. Intelligence (mercury) matured by\nlove to God (inward sulphur) exactly expresses the spiritual state of\nthe regenerate man according to mystical theology. There is no reason,\nother than their belief in analogy, why the alchemists should have held\nsuch views concerning the metals. \"Salt,\" the principle of solidity\nand resistance to fire, corresponding to the body in man, plays a\ncomparatively unimportant part in alchemical theory, as does its\nprototype in mystical theology.\n\n\n(1) The identification of the god MERCURY with THOTH, the Egyptian god\nof learning, is worth noticing in this connection.\n\n(1b) Pseudo-GEBER, whose writings were highly esteemed, for instance.\nSee R. RUSSEL'S translation of his works (1678), p. 160.\n\n\nNow, as I have pointed out already, the central theorem of mystical\ntheology is, in Christian terminology, that of the regeneration of the\nsoul by the Spirit of CHRIST. The corresponding process in alchemy is\nthat of the transmutation of the \"base\" metals into silver and gold by\nthe agency of the Philosopher's Stone. Merely to remove the evil sulphur\nof the \"base\" metals, thought the alchemists, though necessary, is not\nsufficient to transmute them into \"noble\" metals; a maturing process is\nessential, similar to that which they supposed was effected in Nature's\nwomb. Mystical theology teaches that the powers and life of the soul\nare not inherent in it, but are given by the free grace of God. Neither,\naccording to the alchemists, are the powers and life of nature in\nherself, but in that immanent spirit, the Soul of the World, that\nanimates her. As writes the famous alchemist who adopted the pleasing\npseudonym of \"BASIL VALENTINE\" (_c_. 1600), \"the power of growth... is\nimparted not by the earth, but by the life-giving spirit that is in\nit. If the earth were deserted by this spirit, it would be dead, and\nno longer able to afford nourishment to anything. For its sulphur or\nrichness would lack the quickening spirit without which there can be\nneither life nor growth.\"(1a) To perfect the metals, therefore, the\nalchemists argued, from analogy with mystical theology, which teaches\nthat men can be regenerated only by the power of CHRIST within the soul,\nthat it is necessary to subject them to the action of this world-spirit,\nthis one essence underlying all the varied powers of nature, this One\nThing from which \"all things were produced... by adaption, and which\nis the cause of all perfection throughout the whole world.\"(2a) \"This,\"\nwrites one alchemist, \"is the Spirit of Truth, which the world cannot\ncomprehend without the interposition of the Holy Ghost, or without the\ninstruction of those who know it. The same is of a mysterious nature,\nwondrous strength, boundless power.... By Avicenna this Spirit is named\nthe Soul of the World. For, as the Soul moves all the limbs of the Body,\nso also does this Spirit move all bodies. And as the Soul is in all\nthe limbs of the Body, so also is this Spirit in all elementary created\nthings. It is sought by many and found by few. It is beheld from afar\nand found near; for it exists in every thing, in every place, and at all\ntimes. It has the powers of all creatures; its action is found in all\nelements, and the qualities of all things are therein, even in the\nhighest perfection... it heals all dead and living bodies without other\nmedicine... converts all metallic bodies into gold, and there is nothing\nlike unto it under Heaven.\"(1b) It was this Spirit, concentrated in all\nits potency in a suitable material form, which the alchemists sought\nunder the name of \"the Philosopher's Stone\". Now, mystical theology\nteaches that the Spirit of CHRIST, by which alone the soul of man can be\ntinctured and transmuted into the likeness of God, is Goodness itself;\nconsequently, the alchemists argued that the Philosopher's Stone must\nbe, so to speak, Gold itself, or the very essence of Gold: it was to\nthem, as CHRIST is of the soul's perfection, at once the pattern and\nthe means of metallic perfection. \"The Philosopher's Stone,\" declares\n\"EIRENAEUS PHILALETHES\" (_nat. c_. 1623), \"is a certain heavenly,\nspiritual, penetrative, and fixed substance, which brings all metals\nto the perfection of gold or silver (according to the quality of the\nMedicine), and that by natural methods, which yet in their effects\ntranscend Nature.... Know, then, that it is called a stone, not because\nit is like a stone, but only because, by virtue of its fixed nature, it\nresists the action of fire as successfully as any stone. In species it\nis gold, more pure than the purest; it is fixed and incombustible like\na stone (_i.e_. it contains no outward sulphur, but only inward, fixed\nsulphur), but its appearance is that of a very fine powder, impalpable\nto the touch, sweet to the taste, fragrant to the smell, in potency a\nmost penetrative spirit, apparently dry and yet unctuous, and easily\ncapable of tingeing a plate of metal.... If we say that its nature is\nspiritual, it would be no more than the truth; if we described it as\ncorporeal the expression would be equally correct; for it is subtle,\npenetrative, glorified, spiritual gold. It is the noblest of all created\nthings after the rational soul, and has virtue to repair all defects\nboth in animal and metallic bodies, by restoring them to the most exact\nand perfect temper; wherefore is it a spirit or 'quintessence.'\"(1c)\n\n\n(1a) BASIL VALENTINE: _The Twelve Keys_. (See _The Hermetic Museum_,\nvol. i. pp. 333 and 334.)\n\n(2a) From the \"Smaragdine Table,\" attributed to HERMES TRISMEGISTOS\n(_ie_. MERCURY or THOTH).\n\n(1b) _The Book of the Revelation of_ HERMES, _interpreted by_\nTHEOPHRASTUS PARACELSUS, _concerning the Supreme Secret of the World_.\n(See BENEDICTUS FIGULUS, _A Golden and Blessed Casket of Nature's\nMarvels_, trans. by A. E. WAITE, 1893, pp. 36, 37, and 41.)\n\n(1c) EIRENAEUS PHILALETHES: _A Brief Guide to the Celestial Ruby_. (See\n_The Hermetic Museum_, vol. ii. pp. 246 and 249.)\n\n\nIn other accounts the Philosopher's Stone, or at least the _materia\nprima_ of which it is compounded, is spoken of as a despised substance,\nreckoned to be of no value. Thus, according to one curious alchemistic\nwork, \"This matter, so precious by the excellent Gifts, wherewith Nature\nhas enriched it, is truly mean, with regard to the Substances from\nwhence it derives its Original. Their price is not above the Ability of\nthe Poor. Ten Pence is more than sufficient to purchase the Matter of\nthe Stone.... The matter therefore is mean, considering the Foundation\nof the Art because it costs very little; it is no less mean, if one\nconsiders exteriourly that which gives it Perfection, since in that\nregard it costs nothing at all, in as much as _all the World has it in\nits Power_... so that... it is a constant Truth, that the Stone is a\nThing mean in one Sense, but that in another it is most precious, and\nthat there are none but Fools that despise it, by a just Judgment of\nGod.\"(1) And JACOB BOEHME (1575--1624) writes: \"The _philosopher's\nstone_ is a very dark, disesteemed stone, of a grey colour, but therein\nlieth the highest tincture.\"(2) In these passages there is probably some\nreference to the ubiquity of the Spirit of the World, already referred\nto in a former quotation. But this fact is not, in itself, sufficient\nto account for them. I suggest that their origin is to be found in the\nreligious doctrine that God's Grace, the Spirit of CHRIST that is the\nmeans of the transmutation of man's soul into spiritual gold, is free to\nall; that it is, at once, the meanest and the most precious thing in the\nwhole Universe. Indeed, I think it quite probable that the alchemists\nwho penned the above-quoted passages had in mind the words of ISAIAH,\n\"He was despised and we esteemed him not.\" And if further evidence\nis required that the alchemists believed in a correspondence between\nCHRIST--\"the Stone which the builders rejected\"--and the Philosopher's\nStone, reference may be made to the alchemical work called _The Sophic\nHydrolith: or Water Stone of the Wise_, a tract included in _The\nHermetic Museum_, in which this supposed correspondence is explicitly\nasserted and dealt with in some detail.\n\n\n(1) _A Discourse between Eudoxus and Pyrophilus, upon the Ancient War\nof the Knights_. See _The Hermetical Triumph: or, the Victorious\nPhilosophical Stone_ (1723), pp. 101 and 102.\n\n(2) JACOB BOEHME: _Epistles_ (trans. by J. E., 1649, reprinted 1886),\nEp. iv., SE III.\n\n\nApart from the alchemists' belief in the analogy between natural and\nspiritual things, it is, I think, incredible that any such theories of\nthe metals and the possibility of their transmutation or \"regeneration\"\nby such an extraordinary agent as the Philosopher's Stone would have\noccurred to the ancient investigators of Nature's secrets. When they\nhad started to formulate these theories, facts(1) were discovered which\nappeared to support them; but it is, I suggest, practically impossible\nto suppose that any or all of these facts would, in themselves, have\nbeen sufficient to give rise to such wonderfully fantastic theories as\nthese: it is only from the standpoint of the theory that alchemy was\na direct offspring of mysticism that its origin seems to be capable of\nexplanation.\n\n\n\n(1) One of those facts, amongst many others, that appeared to confirm\nthe alchemical doctrines, was the ease with which iron could apparently\nbe transmuted into copper. It was early observed that iron vessels\nplaced in contact with a solution of blue vitriol became converted (at\nleast, so far as their surfaces were concerned) into copper. This we now\nknow to be due to the fact that the copper originally contained in the\nvitriol is thrown out of solution, whilst the iron takes its place. And\nwe know, also, that no more copper can be obtained in this way from the\nblue vitriol than is actually used up in preparing it; and, further,\nthat all the iron which is apparently converted into copper can be got\nout of the residual solution by appropriate methods, if such be desired;\nso that the facts really support DALTON'S theory rather than the\nalchemical doctrines. But to the alchemist it looked like a real\ntransmutation of iron into copper, confirmation of his fond belief that\niron and other base metals could be transmuted into silver and gold by\nthe aid of the Great Arcanum of Nature.\n\n\nIn all the alchemical doctrines mystical connections are evident, and\nmystical origins can generally be traced. I shall content myself here\nwith giving a couple of further examples. Consider, in the first place,\nthe alchemical doctrine of purification by putrefaction, that the metals\nmust die before they can be resurrected and truly live, that through\ndeath alone are they purified--in the more prosaic language of modern\nchemistry, death becomes oxidation, and rebirth becomes reduction. In\nmany alchemical books there are to be found pictorial symbols of the\nputrefaction and death of metals and their new birth in the state of\nsilver or gold, or as the Stone itself, together with descriptions of\nthese processes. The alchemists sought to kill or destroy the body\nor outward form of the metals, in the hope that they might get at and\nutilise the living essence they believed to be immanent within. As\nPARACELSUS put it: \"Nothing of true value is located in the body of a\nsubstance, but in the virtue... the less there is of body, the more in\nproportion is the virtue.\" It seems to me quite obvious that in such\nideas as these we have the application to metallurgy of the mystic\ndoctrine of self-renunciation--that the soul must die to self before it\ncan live to God; that the body must be sacrificed to the spirit, and the\nindividual will bowed down utterly to the One Divine Will, before it can\nbecome one therewith.\n\nIn the second place, consider the directions as to the colours that\nmust be obtained in the preparation of the Philosopher's Stone, if\na successful issue to the Great Work is desired. Such directions are\nfrequently given in considerable detail in alchemical works; and,\nwithout asserting any exact uniformity, I think that I may state that\npractically all the alchemists agree that three great colour-stages are\nnecessary--(i.) an inky blackness, which is termed the \"Crow's Head\" and\nis indicative of putrefaction; (ii.) a white colour indicating that\nthe Stone is now capable of converting \"base\" metals into silver; this\npasses through orange into (iii.) a red colour, which shows that the\nStone is now perfect, and will transmute \"base\" metals into gold. Now,\nwhat was the reason for the belief in these three colour-stages, and\nfor their occurrence in the above order? I suggest that no alchemist\nactually obtained these colours in this order in his chemical\nexperiments, and that we must look for a speculative origin for the\nbelief in them. We have, I think, only to turn to religious mysticism\nfor this origin. For the exponents of religious mysticism unanimously\nagree to a threefold division of the life of the mystic. The first stage\nis called \"the dark night of the soul,\" wherein it seems as if the soul\nwere deserted by God, although He is very near. It is the time of trial,\nwhen self is sacrificed as a duty and not as a delight. Afterwards,\nhowever, comes the morning light of a new intelligence, which marks the\ncommencement of that stage of the soul's upward progress that is called\nthe \"illuminative life\". All the mental powers are now concentrated on\nGod, and the struggle is transferred from without to the inner man, good\nworks being now done, as it were, spontaneously. The disciple, in this\nstage, not only does unselfish deeds, but does them from unselfish\nmotives, being guided by the light of Divine Truth. The third stage,\nwhich is the consummation of the process, is termed \"the contemplative\nlife\". It is barely describable. The disciple is wrapped about with the\nDivine Love, and is united thereby with his Divine Source. It is the\nlife of love, as the illuminative life is that of wisdom. I suggest that\nthe alchemists, believing in this threefold division of the regenerative\nprocess, argued that there must be three similar stages in the\npreparation of the Stone, which was the pattern of all metallic\nperfection; and that they derived their beliefs concerning the\ncolours, and other peculiarities of each stage in the supposed chemical\nprocess, from the characteristics of each stage in the psychological\nprocess according to mystical theology.\n\nMoreover, in the course of the latter process many flitting thoughts and\naffections arise and deeds are half-wittingly done which are not of the\nsoul's true character; and in entire agreement with this, we read of\nthe alchemical process, in the highly esteemed \"Canons\" of D'ESPAGNET:\n\"Besides these decretory signs (_i.e_. the black, white, orange, and\nred colours) which firmly inhere in the matter, and shew its essential\nmutations, almost infinite colours appear, and shew themselves in\nvapours, as the Rainbow in the clouds, which quickly pass away and are\nexpelled by those that succeed, more affecting the air than the earth:\nthe operator must have a gentle care of them, because they are not\npermanent, and proceed not from the intrinsic disposition of the matter,\nbut from the fire painting and fashioning everything after its pleasure,\nor casually by heat in slight moisture.\"(1) That D'ESPAGNET is arguing,\nnot so much from actual chemical experiments, as from analogy with\npsychological processes in man, is, I think, evident.\n\n\n(1) JEAN D'ESPAGNET: _Hermetic Arcanum_, canon 65. (See _Collectanea\nHermetica_, ed. by W. WYNN WESTCOTT, vol. i., 1893, pp. 28 and 29.)\n\n\nAs well as a metallic, the alchemists believed in a physiological,\napplication of the fundamental doctrines of mysticism: their physiology\nwas analogically connected with their metallurgy, the same principles\nholding good in each case. PARACELSUS, as we have seen, taught that\nman is a microcosm, a world in miniature; his spirit, the Divine Spark\nwithin, is from God; his soul is from the Stars, extracted from the\nSpirit of the World; and his body is from the earth, extracted from the\nelements of which all things material are made. This view of man was\nshared by many other alchemists. The Philosopher's Stone, therefore (or,\nrather, a solution of it in alcohol) was also regarded as the Elixir of\nLife; which, thought the alchemists, would not endow man with physical\nimmortality, as is sometimes supposed, but restore him again to the\nflower of youth, \"regenerating\" him physiologically. Failing this, of\ncourse, they regarded gold in a potable form as the next most powerful\nmedicine--a belief which probably led to injurious effects in some\ncases.\n\nSuch are the facts from which I think we are justified in concluding,\nas I have said, \"that the alchemists constructed their chemical theories\nfor the main part by means of _a priori_ reasoning, and that the\npremises from which they started were (i.) the truth of mystical\ntheology, especially the doctrine of the soul's regeneration, and (ii.)\nthe truth of mystical philosophy, which asserts that the objects of\nnature are symbols of spiritual verities.\"(1)\n\n\n(1) In the following excursion we will wander again in the alchemical\nbypaths of thought, and certain objections to this view of the origin\nand nature of alchemy will be dealt with and, I hope, satisfactorily\nanswered.\n\n\nIt seems to follow, _ex hypothesi_, that every alchemical work ought to\npermit of two interpretations, one physical, the other transcendental.\nBut I would not venture to assert this, because, as I think, many of\nthe lesser alchemists knew little of the origin of their theories,\nnor realised their significance. They were concerned merely with\nthese theories in their strictly metallurgical applications, and any\ntranscendental meaning we can extract from their works was not intended\nby the writers themselves. However, many alchemists, I conceive,\nespecially the better sort, realised more or less clearly the dual\nnature of their subject, and their books are to some extent intended to\npermit of a double interpretation, although the emphasis is laid upon\nthe physical and chemical application of mystical doctrine. And there\nare a few writers who adopted alchemical terminology on the principle\nthat, if the language of theology is competent to describe chemical\nprocesses, then, conversely, the language of alchemy must be competent\nto describe psychological processes: this is certainly and entirely true\nof JACOB BOEHME, and, to some extent also, I think, of HENRY KHUNRATH\n(1560-1605) and THOMAS VAUGHAN (1622-1666).\n\nAs may be easily understood, many of the alchemists led most romantic\nlives, often running the risk of torture and death at the hands\nof avaricious princes who believed them to be in possession of the\nPhilosopher's Stone, and adopted such pleasant methods of extorting (or,\nat least, of trying to extort) their secrets. A brief sketch, which I\nquote from my _Alchemy: Ancient and Modern_ (1911), SE 54, of the lives\nof ALEXANDER SETHON and MICHAEL SENDIVOGIUS, will serve as an example:--\n\n\"The date and birthplace of ALEXANDER SETHON, a Scottish alchemist, do\nnot appear to have been recorded, but MICHAEL SENDIVOGIUS was probably\nborn in Moravia about 1566. Sethon, we are told, was in possession of\nthe arch-secrets of Alchemy. He visited Holland in 1602, proceeded after\na time to Italy, and passed through Basle to Germany; meanwhile he\nis said to have performed many transmutations. Ultimately arriving\nat Dresden, however, he fell into the clutches of the young Elector,\nChristian II., who, in order to extort his secret, cast him into prison\nand put him to the torture, but without avail. Now it so happened that\nSendivogius, who was in quest of the Philosopher's Stone, was staying\nat Dresden, and hearing of Sethon's imprisonment obtained permission to\nvisit him. Sendivogius offered to effect Sethon's escape in return\nfor assistance in his alchemistic pursuits, to which arrangement the\nScottish alchemist willingly agreed. After some considerable outlay of\nmoney in bribery, Sendivogius's plan of escape was successfully carried\nout, and Sethon found himself a free man; but he refused to betray the\nhigh secrets of Hermetic philosophy to his rescuer. However, before his\ndeath, which occurred shortly afterwards, he presented him with an ounce\nof the transmutative powder. Sendivogius soon used up this powder, we\nare told, in effecting transmutations and cures, and, being fond of\nexpensive living, he married Sethon's widow, in the hope that she was\nin the possession of the transmutative secret. In this, however, he was\ndisappointed; she knew nothing of the matter, but she had the manuscript\nof an alchemistic work written by her late husband. Shortly afterwards\nSendivogius printed at Prague a book entitled _The New Chemical Light_\nunder the name of 'Cosmopolita,' which is said to have been this work of\nSethon's, but which Sendivogius claimed for his own by the insertion\nof his name on the title page, in the form of an anagram. The tract _On\nSulphur_ which was printed at the end of the book in later editions,\nhowever, is said to have been the genuine work of the Moravian. Whilst\nhis powder lasted, Sendivogius travelled about, performing, we are told,\nmany transmutations. He was twice imprisoned in order to extort the\nsecrets of alchemy from him, on one occasion escaping, and on the other\noccasion obtaining his release from the Emperor Rudolph. Afterwards, he\nappears to have degenerated into an impostor, but this is said to have\nbeen a _finesse_ to hide his true character as an alchemistic adept. He\ndied in 1646.\"\n\nHowever, all the alchemists were not of the apparent character of\nSENDIVOGIUS--many of them leading holy and serviceable lives. The\nalchemist-physician J. B. VAN HELMONT (1577-1644), who was a man of\nextraordinary benevolence, going about treating the sick poor freely,\nmay be particularly mentioned. He, too, claimed to have performed the\ntransmutation of \"base\" metal into gold, as did also HELVETIUS (whom we\nhave already met), physician to the Prince of Orange, with a wonderful\npreparation given to him by a stranger. The testimony of these two\nlatter men is very difficult either to explain or to explain away, but\nI cannot deal with this question here, but must refer the reader to a\npaper on the subject by Mr GASTON DE MENGEL, and the discussion thereon,\npublished in vol. i. of _The Journal of the Alchemical Society_.\n\nIn conclusion, I will venture one remark dealing with a matter outside\nof the present inquiry. Alchemy ended its days in failure and fraud;\ncharlatans and fools were attracted to it by purely mercenary objects,\nwho knew nothing of the high aims of the genuine alchemists, and\nscientific men looked elsewhere for solutions of Nature's problems.\nWhy did alchemy fail? Was it because its fundamental theorems were\nerroneous? I think not. I consider the failure of the alchemical theory\nof Nature to be due rather to the misapplication of these fundamental\nconcepts, to the erroneous use of _a priori_ methods of reasoning, to a\nlack of a sufficiently wide knowledge of natural phenomena to which\nto apply these concepts, to a lack of adequate apparatus with which to\ninvestigate such phenomena experimentally, and to a lack of mathematical\norganons of thought with which to interpret such experimental results\nhad they been obtained. As for the basic concepts of alchemy themselves,\nsuch as the fundamental unity of the Cosmos and the evolution of the\nelements, in a word, the applicability of the principles of mysticism to\nnatural phenomena: these seem to me to contain a very valuable element\nof truth--a statement which, I think, modern scientific research\njustifies me in making,--though the alchemists distorted this truth and\nexpressed it in a fantastic form. I think, indeed, that in the modern\ntheories of energy and the all-pervading ether, the etheric and\nelectrical origin and nature of matter and the evolution of the\nelements, we may witness the triumphs of mysticism as applied to the\ninterpretation of Nature. Whether or not we shall ever transmute lead\ninto gold, I believe there is a very true sense in which we may say\nthat alchemy, purified by its death, has been proved true, whilst the\nmaterialistic view of Nature has been proved false.\n\n\n\n\nX. THE PHALLIC ELEMENT IN ALCHEMICAL DOCTRINE\n\nTHE problem of alchemy presents many aspects to our view, but, to my\nmind, the most fundamental of these is psychological, or, perhaps I\nshould say, epistemological. It has been said that the proper study of\nmankind is man; and to study man we must study the beliefs of man. Now\nso long as we neglect great tracts of such beliefs, because they have\nbeen, or appear to have been, superseded, so long will our study be\nincomplete and ineffectual. And this, let me add, is no mere excuse for\nthe study of alchemy, no mere afterthought put forward in justification\nof a predilection, but a plain statement of fact that renders this study\nan imperative need. There are other questions of interest--of very great\ninterest--concerning alchemy: questions, for instance, as to the\nscope and validity of its doctrines; but we ought not to allow their\nfascination and promise to distract our attention from the fundamental\nproblem, whose solution is essential to their elucidation.\n\nIn the preceding essay on \"The Quest of the Philosopher's Stone,\" which\nwas written from the standpoint I have sketched in the foregoing words,\nmy thesis was \"that the alchemists constructed their chemical theories\nfor the main part by means of _a priori_ reasoning, and that the\npremises from which they started were (i.) the truth of mystical\ntheology, especially the doctrine of the soul's regeneration, and (ii.)\nthe truth of mystical philosophy, which asserts that the objects of\nnature are symbols of spiritual verities.\" Now, I wish to treat my\npresent thesis, which is concerned with a further source from which the\nalchemists derived certain of their views and modes of expression by\nmeans of _a priori_ reasoning, in connection with, and, in a sense,\nas complementary to, my former thesis. I propose in the first place,\ntherefore, briefly to deal with certain possible objections to this view\nof alchemy.\n\nIt has, for instance, been maintained(1) that the assimilation of\nalchemical doctrines concerning the metals to those of mysticism\nconcerning the soul was an event late in the history of alchemy, and was\nundertaken in the interests of the latter doctrines. Now we know that\ncertain mystics of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries did borrow\nfrom the alchemists much of their terminology with which to discourse\nof spiritual mysteries--JACOB BOEHME, HENRY KHUNRATH, and perhaps THOMAS\nVAUGHAN, may be mentioned as the most prominent cases in point. But how\nwas this possible if it were not, as I have suggested, the repayment, in\na sense, of a sort of philological debt? Transmutation was an admirable\nvehicle of language for describing the soul's regeneration, just because\nthe doctrine of transmutation was the result of an attempt to apply\nthe doctrine of regeneration in the sphere of metallurgy; and similar\nremarks hold of the other prominent doctrines of alchemy.\n\n\n(1) See, for example, Mr A. E. WAITE'S paper, \"The Canon of Criticism\nin respect of Alchemical Literature,\" _The Journal of the Alchemical\nSociety_, vol. i. (1913), pp. 17-30.\n\n\nThe wonderful fabric of alchemical doctrine was not woven in a day, and\nas it passed from loom to loom, from Byzantium to Syria, from Syria to\nArabia, from Arabia to Spain and Latin Europe, so its pattern changed;\nbut it was always woven _a priori_, in the belief that that which is\nbelow is as that which is above. In its final form, I think, it is\ndistinctly Christian.\n\nIn the _Turba Philosophorum_, the oldest known work of Latin alchemy--a\nwork which, claiming to be of Greek origin, whilst not that, is\ncertainly Greek in spirit,--we frequently come across statements of a\ndecidedly mystical character. \"The regimen,\" we read, \"is greater than\nis perceived by reason, except through divine inspiration.\"(1) Copper,\nit is insisted upon again and again, has a soul as well as a body; and\nthe Art, we are told, is to be defined as \"the liquefaction of the body\nand the separation of the soul from the body, seeing that copper, like\na man, has a soul and a body.\"(2) Moreover, other doctrines are here\npropounded which, although not so obviously of a mystical character,\nhave been traced to mystical sources in the preceding excursion. There\nis, for instance, the doctrine of purification by means of putrefaction,\nthis process being likened to that of the resurrection of man. \"These\nthings being done,\" we read, \"God will restore unto it (the matter\noperated on) both the soul and the spirit thereof, and the weakness\nbeing taken away, that matter will be made strong, and after corruption\nwill be improved, even as a man becomes stronger after resurrection\nand younger than he was in this world.\"(1b) The three stages in the\nalchemical work--black, white, and red--corresponding to, and, as I\nmaintain, based on the three stages in the life of the mystic, are also\nmore than once mentioned. \"Cook them (the king and his wife), therefore,\nuntil they become black, then white, afterwards red, and finally until a\ntingeing venom is produced.\"(2b)\n\n\n(1) _The Turba Philosophorum, or Assembly of the Sages_ (trans. by A. E.\nWAITE, 1896), p. 128.\n\n(2) _Ibid_., p. 193, _cf_. pp. 102 and 152.\n\n(1b) _The Turba Philosophorum, or Assembly of the Sages_ (trans. by A.\nE. WAITE), p. 101, _cf_. pp. 27 and 197.\n\n(2b) _Ibid_., p. 98, _cf_. p. 29.\n\n\nIn view of these quotations, the alliance (shall I say?) between alchemy\nand mysticism cannot be asserted to be of late origin. And we shall\nfind similar statements if we go further back in time. To give but one\nexample: \"Among the earliest authorities,\" writes Mr WAITE, \"the _Book\nof Crates_ says that copper, like man, has a spirit, soul, and body,\"\nthe term \"copper\" being symbolical and applying to a stage in the\nalchemical work. But nowhere in the _Turba_ do we meet with the concept\nof the Philosopher's Stone as the medicine of the metals, a concept\ncharacteristic of Latin alchemy, and, to quote Mr WAITE again, \"it does\nnot appear that the conception of the Philosopher's Stone as a medicine\nof metals and of men was familiar to Greek alchemy;\"(3)\n\n(3) _Ibid_., p. 71.\n\nAll this seems to me very strongly to support my view of the origin of\nalchemy, which requires a specifically Christian mysticism only for this\nspecific concept of the Philosopher's Stone in its fully-fledged form.\nAt any rate, the development of alchemical doctrine can be seen to have\nproceeded concomitantly with the development of mystical philosophy and\ntheology. Those who are not prepared here to see effect and cause may be\nasked not only to formulate some other hypothesis in explanation of\nthe origin of alchemy, but also to explain this fact of concomitant\ndevelopment.\n\nFrom the standpoint of the transcendental theory of alchemy it has been\nurged \"that the language of mystical theology seemed to be hardly so\nsuitable to the exposition (as I maintain) or concealment of chemical\ntheories, as the language of a definite and generally credited branch of\nscience was suited to the expression of a veiled and symbolical process\nsuch as the regeneration of man.\"(1) But such a statement is only\npossible with respect to the latest days of alchemy, when there WAS a\nscience of chemistry, definite and generally credited. The science of\nchemistry, it must be remembered, had no growth separate from alchemy,\nbut evolved therefrom. Of the days before this evolution had been\naccomplished, it would be in closer accord with the facts to say that\ntheology, including the doctrine of man's regeneration, was in the\nposition of \"a definite and generally credited branch of science,\"\nwhereas chemical phenomena were veiled in deepest mystery and tinged\nwith the dangers appertaining to magic. As concerns the origin of\nalchemy, therefore, the argument as to suitability of language\nappears to support my own theory; it being open to assume that after\nformulation--that is, in alchemy's latter days--chemical nomenclature\nand theories were employed by certain writers to veil heterodox\nreligious doctrine.\n\n\n(1) PHILIP S. WELLBY, M.A., in _The Journal of the Alchemical Society_,\nvol. ii. (1914), p. 104.\n\n\nAnother recent writer on the subject, my friend the late Mr ABDUL-ALI,\nhas remarked that \"he thought that, in the mind of the alchemist at\nleast, there was something more than analogy between metallic and\npsychic transformations, and that the whole subject might well be\nassigned to the doctrinal category of ineffable and transcendent\nOneness. This Oneness comprehended all--soul and body, spirit and\nmatter, mystic visions and waking life--and the sharp metaphysical\ndistinction between the mental and the non-mental realms, so prominent\nduring the history of philosophy, was not regarded by these early\ninvestigators in the sphere of nature. There was the sentiment, perhaps\nonly dimly experienced, that not only the law, but the substance of\nthe Universe, was one; that mind was everywhere in contact with its own\nkindred; and that metallic transmutation would, somehow, so to speak,\nsignalise and seal a hidden transmutation of the soul.\"(1)\n\n\n(1) SIJIL ABDUL-ALI, in _The Journal of the Alchemical Society_, vol.\nii. (1914), p. 102.\n\n\nI am to a large extent in agreement with this view. Mr ABDUL-ALI\nquarrels with the term \"analogy,\" and, if it is held to imply any merely\nsuperficial resemblance, it certainly is not adequate to my own\nneeds, though I know not what other word to use. SWEDENBORG'S term\n\"correspondence\" would be better for my purpose, as standing for an\nessential connection between spirit and matter, arising out of the\ncausal relationship of the one to the other. But if SWEDENBORG believed\nthat matter and spirit were most intimately related, he nevertheless had\na very precise idea of their distinctness, which he formulated in his\nDoctrine of Degrees--a very exact metaphysical doctrine indeed. The\nalchemists, on the other hand, had no such clear ideas on the subject.\nIt would be even more absurd to attribute to them a Cartesian dualism.\nTo their ways of thinking, it was by no means impossible to grasp\nthe spiritual essences of things by what we should now call chemical\nmanipulations. For them a gas was still a ghost and air a spirit. One\ncould quote pages in support of this, but I will content myself with a\nfew words from the _Turba_--the antiquity of the book makes it of value,\nand anyway it is near at hand. \"Permanent water,\" whatever that may be,\nbeing pounded with the body, we are told, \"by the will of God it\nturns that body into spirit.\" And in another place we read that \"the\nPhilosophers have said: Except ye turn bodies into not-bodies, and\nincorporeal things into bodies, ye have not yet discovered the rule of\noperation.\"(1a) No one who could write like this, and believe it, could\nhold matter and spirit as altogether distinct. But it is equally obvious\nthat the injunction to convert body into spirit is meaningless if spirit\nand body are held to be identical. I have been criticised for crediting\nthe alchemists \"with the philosophic acumen of Hegel,\"(1b) but that is\njust what I think one ought to avoid doing. At the same time, however,\nit is extremely difficult to give a precise account of views which are\nvery far from being precise themselves. But I think it may be said,\nwithout fear of error, that the alchemist who could say, \"As above, so\nbelow,\" _ipso facto_ recognised both a very close connection between\nspirit and matter, and a distinction between them. Moreover, the\ndivision thus implied corresponded, on the whole, to that between the\nrealms of the known (or what was thought to be known) and the unknown.\nThe Church, whether Christian or pre-Christian, had very precise\n(comparatively speaking) doctrine concerning the soul's origin,\nduties, and destiny, backed up by tremendous authority, and speculative\nphilosophy had advanced very far by the time PLATO began to concern\nhimself with its problems. Nature, on the other hand, was a mysterious\nworld of magical happenings, and there was nothing deserving of the\nname of natural science until alchemy was becoming decadent. It is not\nsurprising, therefore, that the alchemists--these men who wished to\nprobe Nature's hidden mysteries--should reason from above to\nbelow; indeed, unless they had started _de novo_--as babes knowing\nnothing,--there was no other course open to them. And that they did\nadopt the obvious course is all that my former thesis amounts to. In\npassing, it is interesting to note that a sixteenth-century alchemist,\nwho had exceptional opportunities and leisure to study the works of the\nold masters of alchemy, seems to have come to a similar conclusion as\nto the nature of their reasoning. He writes: \"The Sages... after having\nconceived in their minds a Divine idea of the relations of the whole\nuniverse... selected from among the rest a certain substance, from which\nthey sought to elicit the elements, to separate and purify them,\nand then again put them together in a manner suggested by a keen and\nprofound observation of Nature.\"(1c)\n\n\n(1a) _op cit_., pp,. 65 and 110, _cf_. p. 154.\n\n(1b) _Vide_ a rather frivolous review of my _Alchemy: Ancient and\nModern_ in _The Outlook_ for 14th January 1911.\n\n(1c) EDWARD KELLY: _The Humid Path_. (See _The Alchemical Writings_ of\nEDWARD KELLY, edited by A. E. WAITE, 1893, pp. 59-60.)\n\n\nIn describing the realm of spirit as _ex hypothesi_ known, that of\nNature unknown, to the alchemists, I have made one important omission,\nand that, if I may use the name of a science to denominate a complex of\ncrude facts, is the realm of physiology, which, falling within that of\nNature, must yet be classed as _ex hypothesi_ known. But to elucidate\nthis point some further considerations are necessary touching the\ngeneral nature of knowledge. Now, facts may be roughly classed,\naccording to their obviousness and frequency of occurrence, into four\ngroups. There are, first of all, facts which are so obvious, to put\nit paradoxically, that they escape notice; and these facts are the\ncommonest and most frequent in their occurrence. I think it is Mr\nCHESTERTON who has said that, looking at a forest one cannot see the\ntrees because of the forest; and, in _The Innocence of Father Brown_, he\nhas a good story (\"The Invisible Man\") illustrating the point, in which\na man renders himself invisible by dressing up in a postman's uniform.\nAt any rate, we know that when a phenomenon becomes persistent it tends\nto escape observation; thus, continuous motion can only be appreciated\nwith reference to a stationary body, and a noise, continually repeated,\nbecomes at last inaudible. The tendency of often-repeated actions to\nbecome habitual, and at last automatic, that is to say, carried\nout without consciousness, is a closely related phenomenon. We\ncan understand, therefore, why a knowledge of the existence of the\natmosphere, as distinct from the wind, came late in the history of\nprimitive man, as, also, many other curious gaps in his knowledge. In\nthe second group we may put those facts which are common, that is, of\nfrequent occurrence, and are classed as obvious. Such facts are accepted\nat face-value by the primitive mind, and are used as the basis of\nexplanation of facts in the two remaining groups, namely, those facts\nwhich, though common, are apt to escape the attention owing to their\ninconspicuousness, and those which are of infrequent occurrence. When\nthe mind takes the trouble to observe a fact of the third group, or\nis confronted by one of the fourth, it feels a sense of surprise. Such\nfacts wear an air of strangeness, and the mind can only rest satisfied\nwhen it has shown them to itself as in some way cases of the second\ngroup of facts, or, at least, brought them into relation therewith. That\nis what the mind--at least the primitive mind--means by \"explanation\".\n\"It is obvious,\" we say, commencing an argument, thereby proclaiming\nour intention to bring that which is at first in the category of the\nnot-obvious, into the category of the obvious. It remains for a more\nsceptical type of mind--a later product of human evolution--to question\nobvious facts, to explain them, either, as in science, by establishing\ndeeper and more far-reaching correlations between phenomena, or in\nphilosophy, by seeking for the source and purpose of such facts, or,\nbetter still, by both methods.\n\nOf the second class of facts--those common and obvious facts which\nthe primitive mind accepts at face-value and uses as the basis of\nits explanations of such things as seem to it to stand in need of\nexplanation--one could hardly find a better instance than sex. The\nuniversality of sex, and the intermittent character of its phenomena,\nare both responsible for this. Indeed, the attitude of mind I have\nreferred to is not restricted to primitive man; how many people\nto-day, for instance, just accept sex as a fact, pleasant or unpleasant\naccording to their predilections, never querying, or feeling the need\nto query, its why and wherefore? It is by no means surprising, that when\nman first felt the need of satisfying himself as to the origin of the\nuniverse, he should have done so by a theory founded on what he knew\nof his own generation. Indeed, as I queried on a former occasion, what\nother source of explanation was open to him? Of what other form of\norigin was he aware? Seeing Nature springing to life at the kiss of the\nsun, what more natural than that she should be regarded as the divine\nMother, who bears fruits because impregnated by the Sun-God? It is\nnot difficult to understand, therefore, why primitive man paid divine\nhonours to the organs of sex in man and woman, or to such things as\nhe considered symbolical of them--that is to say, to understand the\nextensiveness of those religions which are grouped under the term\n\"phallicism\". Nor, to my mind, is the symbol of sex a wholly inadequate\none under which to conceive of the origin of things. And, as I have\nsaid before, that phallicism usually appears to have degenerated into\nimmorality of a very pronounced type is to be deplored, but an immoral\nview of human relations is by no means a necessary corollary to a sexual\ntheory of the universe.(1)\n\n\n(1) \"The reverence as well as the worship paid to the phallus, in early\nand primitive days, had nothing in it which partook of indecency; all\nideas connected with it were of a reverential and religious kind....\n\n\"The indecent ideas attached to the representation of the phallus were,\nthough it seems a paradox to say so, the results of a more advanced\ncivilization verging towards its decline, as we have evidence at Rome\nand Pompeii....\n\n\"To the primitive man (the reproductive force which pervades all nature)\nwas the most mysterious of all manifestations. The visible physical\npowers of nature--the sun, the sky, the storm--naturally claimed his\nreverence, but to him the generative power was the most mysterious of\nall powers. In the vegetable world, the live seed placed in the ground,\nand hence germinating, sprouting up, and becoming a beautiful and\numbrageous tree, was a mystery. In the animal world, as the cause of all\nlife, by which all beings came into existence, this power was a mystery.\nIn the view of primitive man generation was the action of the Deity\nitself. It was the mode in which He brought all things into existence,\nthe sun, the moon, the stars, the world, man were generated by Him.\nTo the productive power man was deeply indebted, for to it he owed the\nharvests and the flocks which supported his life; hence it naturally\nbecame an object of reverence and worship.\n\n\"Primitive man wants some object to worship, for an abstract idea\nis beyond his comprehension, hence a visible representation of the\ngenerative Deity was made, with the organs contributing to generation\nmost prominent, and hence the organ itself became a symbol of the\npower.\"--H, M. WESTROPP: _Primitive Symbolism as Illustrated in Phallic\nWorship, or the Reproductive Principle_ (1885), pp. 47, 48, and 57. {End\nof long footnote}\n\n\nThe Aruntas of Australia, I believe, when discovered by Europeans, had\nnot yet observed the connection between sexual intercourse and birth.\nThey believed that conception was occasioned by the woman passing near\na _churinga_--a peculiarly shaped piece of wood or stone, in which a\nspirit-child was concealed, which entered into her. But archaeological\nresearch having established the fact that phallicism has, at one time\nor another, been common to nearly all races, it seems probable that\nthe Arunta tribe represents a deviation from the normal line of mental\nevolution. At any rate, an isolated phenomenon, such as this, cannot be\nheld to controvert the view that regards phallicism as in this normal\nline. Nor was the attitude of mind that not only accepts sex at\nface-value as an obvious fact, but uses the concept of it to explain\nother facts, a merely transitory one. We may, indeed, not difficultly\ntrace it throughout the history of alchemy, giving rise to what I may\nterm \"The Phallic Element in Alchemical Doctrine\".\n\nIn aiming to establish this, I may be thought to be endeavouring to\nestablish a counter-thesis to that of the preceding essay on alchemy,\nbut, in virtue of the alchemists' belief in the mystical unity of all\nthings, in the analogical or correspondential relationship of all parts\nof the universe to each other, the mystical and the phallic views of\nthe origin of alchemy are complementary, not antagonistic. Indeed, the\nassumption that the metals are the symbols of man almost necessitates\nthe working out of physiological as well as mystical analogies, and\nthese two series of analogies are themselves connected, because the\nprinciple \"As above, so below\" was held to be true of man himself. We\nmight, therefore, expect to find a more or less complete harmony between\nthe two series of symbols, though, as a matter of fact, contradictions\nwill be encountered when we come to consider points of detail. The\nundoubtable antiquity of the phallic element in alchemical doctrine\nprecludes the idea that this element was an adventitious one, that\nit was in any sense an afterthought; notwithstanding, however, the\nevidence, as will, I hope, become apparent as we proceed, indicates that\nmystical ideas played a much more fundamental part in the genesis of\nalchemical doctrine than purely phallic ones--mystical interpretations\nfit alchemical processes and theories far better than do sexual\ninterpretations; in fact, sex has to be interpreted somewhat mystically\nin order to work out the analogies fully and satisfactorily.\n\nAs concerns Greek alchemy, I shall content myself with a passage from\na work _On the Sacred Art_, attributed to OLYMPIODORUS (sixth century\nA.D.), followed by some quotations from and references to the _Turba_.\nIn the former work it is stated on the authority of HORUS that \"The\nproper end of the whole art is to obtain the semen of the male secretly,\nseeing that all things are male and female. Hence (we read further)\nHorus says in a certain place: Join the male and the female, and you\nwill find that which is sought; as a fact, without this process of\nre-union, nothing can succeed, for Nature charms Nature,\" _etc_. The\n_Turba_ insistently commands those who would succeed in the Art, to\nconjoin the male with the female,(1) and, in one place, the male is said\nto be lead and the female orpiment.(2) We also find the alchemical work\nsymbolised by the growth of the embryo in the womb. \"Know,\" we are\ntold, \"... that out of the elect things nothing becomes useful without\nconjunction and regimen, because sperma is generated out of blood and\ndesire. For the man mingling with the woman, the sperm is nourished by\nthe humour of the womb, and by the moistening blood, and by heat,\nand when forty nights have elapsed the sperm is formed.... God has\nconstituted that heat and blood for the nourishment of the sperm until\nthe foetus is brought forth. So long as it is little, it is nourished\nwith milk, and in proportion as the vital heat is maintained, the bones\nare strengthened. Thus it behoves you also to act in this Art.\"(3)\n\n\n(1) _Vide_ pp. 60 92, 96 97, 134, 135 and elsewhere in Mr WAITE'S\ntranslation.\n\n(2) _Ibid_., p. 57\n\n(3) _Ibid_., pp. 179-181 (second recension); _cf_. pp. 103-104.\n\n\nThe use of the mystical symbols of death (putrefaction) and resurrection\nor rebirth to represent the consummation of the alchemical work, and\nthat of the phallic symbols of the conjunction of the sexes and the\ndevelopment of the foetus, both of which we have found in the _Turba_,\nare current throughout the course of Latin alchemy. In _The Chymical\nMarriage of Christian Rosencreutz_, that extraordinary document of what\nis called \"Rosicrucianism\"--a symbolic romance of considerable ability,\nwhoever its author was,(1)--an attempt is made to weld the two sets of\nsymbols--the one of marriage, the other of death and resurrection unto\nglory--into one allegorical narrative; and it is to this fusion of\nseemingly disparate concepts that much of its fantasticality is due. Yet\nthe concepts are not really disparate; for not only is the second\nbirth like unto the first, and not only is the resurrection unto glory\ndescribed as the Bridal Feast of the Lamb, but marriage is, in a manner,\na form of death and rebirth. To justify this in a crude sense, I might\nsay that, from the male standpoint at least, it is a giving of the\nlife-substance to the beloved that life may be born anew and increase.\nBut in a deeper sense it is, or rather should be, as an ideal, a mutual\nsacrifice of self for each other's good--a death of the self that it may\narise with an enriched personality.\n\n\n(1) See Mr WAITE'S _The Real History of the Rosicrucians_ (1887) for\ntranslation and discussion as to origin and significance. The work was\nfirst published (in German) at Strassburg in 1616.\n\n\nIt is when we come to an examination of the ideas at the root of, and\nassociated with, the alchemical concept of \"principles,\" that we find\nsome difficulty in harmonising the two series of symbols--the mystical\nand the phallic. In one place in the _Turba_ we are directed \"to take\nquicksilver, in which is the male potency or strength\";(2a) and this\nconcept of mercury as male is quite in accord with the mystical origin\nI have assigned in the preceding excursion to the doctrine of the\nalchemical principles. I have shown, I think, that salt, sulphur, and\nmercury are the analogues _ex hypothesi_ of the body, soul (affection\nand volition), and spirit (intelligence or understanding) in man; and\nthe affections are invariably regarded as especially feminine, the\nunderstanding as especially masculine. But it seems that the more common\nopinion, amongst Latin alchemists at any rate, was that sulphur was\nmale and mercury female. Writes BERNARD of TREVISAN: \"For the Matter\nsuffereth, and the Form acteth assimulating the Matter to itself, and\naccording to this manner the Matter naturally thirsteth after a Form,\nas a Woman desireth an Husband, and a Vile thing a precious one, and\nan impure a pure one, so also _Argent-vive_ coveteth a Sulphur, as that\nwhich should make perfect which is imperfect: So also a Body\nfreely desireth a Spirit, whereby it may at length arrive at its\nperfection.\"(1b) At the same time, however, Mercury was regarded as\ncontaining in itself both male and female potencies--it was the product\nof male and female, and, thus, the seed of all the metals. \"Nothing in\nthe World can be generated,\" to repeat a quotation from BERNARD,\nwithout these two Substances, to wit a Male and Female: From whence it\nappeareth, that although these two substances are not of one and the\nsame species, yet one Stone doth thence arise, and although they appear\nand are said to be two Substances, yet in truth it is but one, to wit,\n_Argent-vive_. But of this _Argent-vive_ a certain part is fixed and\ndigested, Masculine, hot, dry and secretly informing. But the other,\nwhich is the Female, is volatile, crude, cold, and moyst.\"(2b) EDWARD\nKELLY (1555-1595), who is valuable because he summarises authoritative\nopinion, says somewhat the same thing, though in clearer words: \"The\nactive elements... these are water and fire... may be called male,\nwhile the passive elements... earth and air... represent the female\nprinciple.... Only two elements, water and earth, are visible, and earth\nis called the hiding-place of fire, water the abode of air. In these two\nelements we have the broad law of limitation which divides the male from\nthe female. ... The first matter of minerals is a kind of viscous water,\nmingled with pure and impure earth... Of this viscous water and fusible\nearth, or sulphur, is composed that which is called quicksilver, the\nfirst matter of the metals. Metals are nothing but Mercury digested\nby different degrees of heat.\"(1c) There is one difference, however,\nbetween these two writers, inasmuch as BERNARD says that \"the Male and\nFemale abide together in closed Natures; the Female truly as it were\nEarth and Water, the Male as Air and Fire.\" Mercury for him arises\nfrom the two former elements, sulphur from the two latter.(2c) And the\ndifference is important as showing beyond question the _a priori_ nature\nof alchemical reasoning. The idea at the back of the alchemists' minds\nwas undoubtedly that of the ardour of the male in the act of coition and\nthe alleged, or perhaps I should say apparent, passivity of the female.\nConsequently, sulphur, the fiery principle of combustion, and such\nelements as were reckoned to be active, were denominated \"male,\" whilst\nmercury, the principle acted on by sulphur, and such elements as were\nreckoned to be passive, were denominated \"female\". As to the question\nof origin, I do not think that the palm can be denied to the mystical\nas distinguished from the phallic theory. And in its final form\nthe doctrine of principles is incapable of a sexual interpretation.\nMystically understood, man is capable of analysis into two\nprinciples--since \"body\" may be neglected as unimportant (a false view,\nI think, by the way) or \"soul\" and \"spirit\" may be united under one\nhead--OR into three; whereas the postulation of THREE principles on\na sexual basis is impossible. JOANNES ISAACUS HOLLANDUS (fifteenth\ncentury) is the earliest author in whose works I have observed explicit\nmention of THREE principles, though he refers to them in a manner\nseeming to indicate that the doctrine was no new one in his day. I have\nonly read one little tract of his; there is nothing sexual in it, and\nthe author's mental character may be judged from his remarks concerning\n\"the three flying spirits\"--taste, smell, and colour. These, he writes,\n\"are the life, soule, and quintessence of every thing, neither can these\nthree spirits be one without the other, as the Father, the Son, and\nthe Holy Ghost are one, yet three Persons, and one is not without the\nother.\"(1d)\n\n\n(2a) Mr WAITE's translation, p. 79.\n\n(1b) BERNARD, Earl of TREVISAN: _A Treatise of the Philosopher's Stone_,\n1683. (See _Collectanea Chymica: A Collection of Ten Several Treatises\nin Chymistry_, 1684, p. 92.)\n\n(2b) _Ibid_., p. 91.\n\n(1c) EDWARD KELLY: _The Stone of the Philosophers_. (See _The Alchemical\nWritings of_ EDWARD KELLY, edited by A. E. WAITE, 1893, pp. 9 and 11 to\n13.)\n\n(2c) _The Answer of_ BERNARDUS TREVISANUS, _to the Epistle of Thomas\nof Bononira, Physician to K. Charles the 8th_. (See JOHN FREDERICK\nHOUPREGHT: _Aurifontina Chymica_, 1680, p. 208.)\n\n(1d) _One Hundred and Fourteen Experiments and Cures of the Famous\nPhysitian_ THEOPHRASTUS PARACELSUS. _Whereunto is added... certain\nSecrets of_ ISAAC HOLLANDUS, _concerning the Vegetall and Animall Work_\n(1652), pp. 29 and 30.\n\nWhen the alchemists described an element or principle as male or female,\nthey meant what they said, as I have already intimated, to the extent,\nat least, of firmly believing that seed was produced by the two metallic\nsexes. By their union metals were thought to be produced in the womb of\nthe earth; and mines were shut in order that by the birth and growth of\nnew metal the impoverished veins might be replenished. In this way, too,\nwas the _magnum opus_, the generation of the Philosopher's Stone--in\nspecies gold, but purer than the purest--to be accomplished. To conjoin\nthat which Nature supplied, to foster the growth and development of that\nwhich was thereby produced; such was the task of the alchemist. \"For\nthere are Vegetables,\" says BERNARD of TREVISAN in his _Answer to Thomas\nof Bononia_, \"but Sensitives more especially, which for the most part\nbeget their like, by the Seeds of the Male and Female for the most\npart concurring and conmixt by copulation; which work of Nature the\nPhilosophick Art imitates in the generation of gold.\"(1)\n\n\n(1) _Op. cit_., p. 216.\n\n\nMercury, as I have said, was commonly regarded as the seed of the\nmetals, or as especially the female seed, there being two seeds, one the\nmale, according to BERNARD, more ripe, perfect and active, the other the\nfemale. \"more immature and in a sort passive(2) \"... our Philosophick\nArt,\" he says in another place, following a description of the\ngeneration of man, \"... is like this procreation of Man; for as in\n_Mercury_ (of which Gold is by Nature generated in Mineral Vessels) a\nnatural conjunction\n\n\n(2) _Ibid_., p. 217; _cf_. p. 236\n\nis made of both the Seeds, Male and Female, so by our artifice, an\nartificial and like conjunction is made of Agents and Patients.\"(1) \"All\nteaching,\" says KELLY, \"that changes Mercury is false and vain, for this\nis the original sperm of metals, and its moisture must not be dried\nup, for otherwise it will not dissolve,\"(2) and quotes ARNOLD (_ob. c_.\n1310) to a similar effect.(3) One wonders how far the fact that human\nand animal seed is fluid influenced the alchemists in their choice of\nmercury, the only metal liquid at ordinary temperatures, as the seed of\nthe metals. There are, indeed, other good reasons for this choice, but\nthat this idea played some part in it, and, at least, was present at the\nback of the alchemists' minds, I have little doubt.\n\nThe most philosophic account of metallic seed is that, perhaps, of the\nmysterious adept \"EIRENAEUS PHILALETHES,\" who distinguishes between\nit and mercury in a rather interesting manner. He writes: \"Seed is the\nmeans of generic propagation given to all perfect things here below;\nit is the perfection of each body; and anybody that has no seed must be\nregarded as imperfect. Hence there can be no doubt that there is such\na thing as metallic seed.... All metallic seed is the seed of gold; for\ngold is the intention of Nature in regard to all metals. If the base\nmetals are not gold, it is only through some accidental hindrance; they\nare-all potentially gold. But, of course, this seed of gold is most\neasily obtainable from well-matured gold itself.... Remember that I am\nnow speaking of metallic seed, and not of Mercury.... The seed of metals\nis hidden out of sight still more completely than that of animals;\nnevertheless, it is within the compass of our Art to extract it. The\nseed of animals and vegetables is something separate, and may be cut\nout, or otherwise separately exhibited; but metallic seed is diffused\nthroughout the metal, and contained in all its smallest parts; neither\ncan it be discerned from its body: its extraction is therefore a task\nwhich may well tax the ingenuity of the most experienced philosopher;\nthe virtues of the whole metal have to be intensified, so as to convert\nit into the sperm of our seed, which, by circulation, receives the\nvirtues of superiors and inferiors, then next becomes wholly form, or\nheavenly virtue, which can communicate this to others related to it\nby homogeneity of matter. ... The place in which the seed resides\nis--approximately speaking--water; for, to speak properly and exactly,\nthe seed is the smallest part of the metal, and is invisible; but as\nthis invisible presence is diffused throughout the water of its kind,\nand exerts its virtue therein, nothing being visible to the eye but\nwater, we are left to conclude from rational induction that this inward\nagent (which is, properly speaking, the seed) is really there. Hence we\ncall the whole of the water seed, just as we call the whole of the\ngrain seed, though the germ of life is only a smallest particle of the\ngrain.\"(1b)\n\n\n(1) _The Answer of_ BERNARDUS TREVISANUS, _etc_. _Op. cit_. p. 218.\n\n(2) _op. cit_., p. 22.\n\n(3) _Ibid_., p. 16.\n\n(1b) EIRENAEUS PHILALETHES: _The Metamorphosis of Metals_. (See _The\nHermetic Museum_, vol. ii. pp. 238-240.)\n\n\nTo say that \"PHILALETHES'\" seed resembles the modern electron is,\nperhaps, to draw a rather fanciful analogy, since the electron is a\nvery precise idea, the result of the mathematical interpretation of the\nresults of exact experimentation. But though it would be absurd to speak\nof this concept of the one seed of all metals as an anticipation of the\nelectron, to apply the expression \"metallic seed\" to the electron, now\nthat the concept of it has been reached, does not seem so absurd.\n\nAccording to \"PHILALETHES,\" the extraction of the seed is a very\ndifficult process, accomplishable, however, by the aid of mercury--the\nwater homogeneous therewith. Mercury, again, is the form of the seed\nthereby obtained. He writes: \"When the sperm hidden in the body of\ngold is brought out by means of our Art, it appears under the form\nof Mercury, whence it is exalted into the quintessence which is first\nwhite, and then, by means of continuous coction, becomes red.\" And\nagain: \"There is a womb into which the gold (if placed therein) will, of\nits own accord, emit its seed, until it is debilitated and dies, and\nby its death is renewed into a most glorious King, who thenceforward\nreceives power to deliver all his brethren from the fear of death.\"(1)\n\n\n(1) EIRENAEUS PHILALETHES: _The Metamorphosis of Metals_. (See _The\nHermetic Museum_, vol. ii. pp. 241 and 244.)\n\n\nThe fifteenth-century alchemist THOMAS NORTON was peculiar in his views,\ninasmuch as he denied that metals have seed. He writes: \"Nature never\nmultiplies anything, except in either one or the other of these two\nways: either by decay, which we call putrefaction, or, in the case of\nanimate creatures, by propagation. In the case of metals there can be no\npropagation, though our Stone exhibits something like it.... Nothing\ncan be multiplied by inward action unless it belong to the vegetable\nkingdom, or the family of sensitive creatures. But the metals are\nelementary objects, and possess neither seed nor sensation.\"(1)\n\n\n(1) THOMAS NORTON: _The Ordinal of Alchemy_. (See _The Hermetic Museum_,\nvol. ii. pp. 15 and 16.)\n\n\nHis theory of the origin of the metals is astral rather than phallic.\n\"The only efficient cause of metals,\" he says, \"is the mineral virtue,\nwhich is not found in every kind of earth, but only in certain places\nand chosen mines, into which the celestial sphere pours its rays in a\nstraight direction year by year, and according to the arrangement of\nthe metallic substance in these places, this or that metal is gradually\nformed.\"(2)\n\n\n(2) _Ibid_., pp. 15 and 16.\n\n\nIn view of the astrological symbolism of these metals, that gold should\nbe masculine, silver feminine, does not surprise us, because the idea\nof the masculinity of the sun and the femininity of the moon is a bit\nof phallicism that still remains with us. It was by the marriage of gold\nand silver that very many alchemists considered that the _magnum opus_\nwas to be achieved. Writes BERNARD of TREVISAN: \"The subject of this\nadmired Science (alchemy) is _Sol_ and _Luna_, or rather Male and\nFemale, the Male is hot and dry, the Female cold and moyst.\" The aim of\nthe work, he tells us, is the extraction of the spirit of gold, which\nalone can enter into bodies and tinge them. Both _Sol_ and _Luna_ are\nabsolutely necessary, and \"whoever...shall think that a Tincture can be\nmade without these two Bodyes,... he proceedeth to the Practice like one\nthat is blind.\"(1)\n\n\n(1) BERNARD, Earl of TREVISAN: _A Treatise, etc., Op. cit_. pp. 83 and\n87.\n\n\nKELLY has teaching to the same effect, the Mercury of the Philosophers\nbeing for him the menstruum or medium wherein the copulation of Gold\nwith Silver is to be accomplished. Mercury, in fact, seems to have been\neverything and to have been capable of effecting everything in the eyes\nof the alchemists. Concerning gold and silver, KELLY writes: \"Only one\nmetal, viz. gold, is absolutely perfect and mature. Hence it is called\nthe perfect male body... Silver is less bounded by aqueous immaturity\nthan the rest of the metals, though it may indeed be regarded as to\na certain extent impure, still its water is already covered with the\ncongealing vesture of its earth, and it thus tends to perfection. This\ncondition is the reason why silver is everywhere called by the Sages\nthe perfect female body.\" And later he writes: \"In short, our whole\nMagistery consists in the union of the male and female, or active and\npassive, elements through the mediation of our metallic water and a\nproper degree of heat. Now, the male and female are two metallic bodies,\nand this I will again prove by irrefragable quotations from the Sages.\"\nSome of the quotations will be given: \"Avicenna: 'Purify husband and\nwife separately, in order that they may unite more intimately; for if\nyou do not purify them, they cannot love each other. By conjunction\nof the two natures you get a clear and lucid nature, which, when it\nascends, becomes bright and serviceable.'... Senior: 'I, the Sun, am\nhot and dry, and thou, the Moon, are cold and moist; when we are wedded\ntogether in a closed chamber, I will gently steal away thy soul.'...\nRosinus: 'When the Sun, my brother, for the love of me (silver) pours\nhis sperm (_i.e_. his solar fatness) into the chamber (_i.e_. my Lunar\nbody), namely, when we become one in a strong and complete complexion\nand union, the child of our wedded love will be born.... 'Rosary': 'The\nferment of the Sun is the sperm of the man, the ferment of the Moon,\nthe sperm of the woman. Of both we get a chaste union and a true\ngeneration.'... Aristotle: 'Take your beloved son, and wed him to his\nsister, his white sister, in equal marriage, and give them the cup of\nlove, for it is a food which prompts to union.' \"(1a) KELLY, of course,\naccepts the traditional authorship of the works from which he quotes,\nthough in many cases such authorship is doubtful, to say the least. The\nalchemical works ascribed to ARISTOTLE (384-322 B.C.), for instance, are\nbeyond question forgeries. Indeed, the symbol of a union between brother\nand sister, here quoted, could hardly be held as acceptable to Greek\nthought, to which incest was the most abominable and unforgiveable sin.\nIt seems likelier that it originated with the Egyptians, to whom such\nunions were tolerable in fact. The symbol is often met with in Latin\nalchemy. MICHAEL MAIER (1568-1622) also says: \"_conjunge fratrem cum\nsorore et propina illis poculum amoris_,\" the words forming a motto to\na picture of a man and woman clasped in each other's arms, to whom an\nolder man offers a goblet. This symbolic picture occurs in his _Atalanta\nFugiens, hoc est, Emblemata nova de Secretis Naturae Chymica, etc_.\n(Oppenheim, 1617). This work is an exceedingly curious one. It consists\nof a number of carefully executed pictures, each accompanied by a motto,\na verse of poetry set to music, with a prose text. Many of the\npictures are phallic in conception, and practically all of them are\nanthropomorphic. Not only the primary function of sex, but especially\nits secondary one of lactation, is made use of. The most curious of\nthese emblematic pictures, perhaps, is one symbolising the conjunction\nof gold and silver. It shows on the right a man and woman, representing\nthe sun and moon, in the act of coition, standing up to the thighs in a\nlake. On the left, on a hill above the lake, a woman (with the moon as\nhalo) gives birth to a child. A boy is coming out of the water towards\nher. The verse informs us that: \"The bath glows red at the conception\nof the boy, the air at his birth.\" We learn also that \"there is a stone,\nand yet there is not, which is the noble gift of God. If God grants it,\nfortunate will be he who shall receive it.\"(1)\n\n\n(1a) EDWARD KELLY: _The Stone of the Philosophers, Op. cit_., pp 13, 14,\n33, 35, 36, 38-40, and 47.\n\n(1) _Op. Cit_., p. 145\n\n\nConcerning the nature of gold, there is a discussion in _The Answer of_\nBERNARDUS TREVISANUS _to the Epistle of Thomas of Bononia_, with which\nI shall close my consideration of the present aspect of the subject.\nIts interest for us lies in the arguments which are used and held to be\nvalid. \"Besides, you say that Gold, as most think, is nothing else than\n_Quick-silver_ coagulated naturally by the force of _Sulphur_; yet so,\nthat nothing of the _Sulphur_ which generated the Gold, doth remain\nin the substance of the Gold: as in an humane _Embryo_, when it is\nconceived in the Womb, there remains nothing of the Father's Seed,\naccording to _Aristotle's_ opinion, but the Seed of the Man doth only\ncoagulate the _menstrual_ blood of the Woman: in the same manner you\nsay, that after _Quick-silver_ is so coagulated, the form of Gold is\nperfected in it, by virtue of the Heavenly Bodies, and especially of the\nSun.\"(1) BERNARD, however, decides against this view, holding that gold\ncontains both mercury and sulphur, for \"we must not imagine, according\nto their mistake who say, that the Male Agent himself approaches the\nFemale in the coagulation, and departs afterwards; because, as is known\nin every generation, the conception is active and passive: Both the\nactive and the passive, that is, all the four Elements, must always\nabide together, otherwise there would be no mixture, and the hope of\ngenerating an off-spring would be extinguished.\"(2)\n\n\n(1) _Op. cit_., pp. 206 and 207.\n\n(2) _Ibid_., pp. 212 and 213.\n\n\nIn conclusion, I wish to say something of the role of sex in spiritual\nalchemy. But in doing this I am venturing outside the original field of\ninquiry of this essay and making a by no means necessary addition to my\nthesis; and I am anxious that what follows should be understood as such,\nso that no confusion as to the issues may arise.\n\nIn the great alchemical collection of J. J. MANGET, there is a curious\nwork (originally published in 1677), entitled _Mutus Liber_, which\nconsists entirely of plates, without letterpress. Its interest for us in\nour present concern is that the alchemist, from the commencement of\nthe work until its achievement, is shown working in conjunction with a\nwoman. We are reminded of NICOLAS FLAMEL (1330-1418), who is reputed to\nhave achieved the _magnum opus_ together with his wife PERNELLE, as well\nas of the many other women workers in the Art of whom we read. It would\nbe of interest in this connection to know exactly what association of\nideas was present in the mind of MICHAEL MAIER when he commanded the\nalchemist: \"Perform a work of women on the molten white lead, that is,\ncook,\"(1a) and illustrated his behest with a picture of a pregnant woman\nwatching a fire over which is suspended a cauldron and on which are\nthree jars. There is a cat in the background, and a tub containing two\nfish in the foreground, the whole forming a very curious collection of\nemblems. Mr WAITE, who has dealt with some of these matters, luminously,\nthough briefly, says: \"The evidences with which we have been dealing\nconcern solely the physical work of alchemy and there is nothing of its\nmystical aspects. The _Mutus Liber_ is undoubtedly on the literal side\nof metallic transmutation; the memorials of Nicholas Flamel are also\non that side,\" _etc_. He adds, however, that \"It is on record that an\nunknown master testified to his possession of the mystery, but he added\nthat he had not proceeded to the work because he had failed to meet\nwith an elect woman who was necessary thereto\"; and proceeds to say: \"I\nsuppose that the statement will awaken in most minds only a vague sense\nof wonder, and I can merely indicate in a few general words that which\nI see behind it. Those Hermetic texts which bear a spiritual\ninterpretation and are as if a record of spiritual experience present,\nlike the literature of physical alchemy, the following aspects of\nsymbolism: (_a_) the marriage of sun and moon; (_b_) of a mystical king\nand queen; (_c_) an union between natures which are one at the root but\ndiverse in manifestation; (_d_) a transmutation which follows this union\nand an abiding glory therein. It is ever a conjunction between male and\nfemale in a mystical sense; it is ever the bringing together by art\nof things separated by an imperfect order of things; it is ever the\nperfection of natures by means of this conjunction. But if the mystical\nwork of alchemy is an inward work in consciousness, then the union\nbetween male and female is an union in consciousness; and if we remember\nthe traditions of a state when male and female had not as yet been\ndivided, it may dawn upon us that the higher alchemy was a practice for\nthe return into this ineffable mode of being. The traditional doctrine\nis set forth in the _Zohar_ and it is found in writers like Jacob\nBoehme; it is intimated in the early chapters of Genesis and, according\nto an apocryphal saying of Christ, the kingdom of heaven will be\nmanifested when two shall be as one, or when that state has been once\nagain attained. In the light of this construction we can understand why\nthe mystical adept went in search of a wise woman with whom the work\ncould be performed; but few there be that find her, and he confessed to\nhis own failure. The part of woman in the physical practice of alchemy\nis like a reflection at a distance of this more exalted process, and\nthere is evidence that those who worked in metals and sought for a\nmaterial elixir knew that there were other and greater aspects of the\nHermetic mystery.\"(1b)\n\n\n(1a) MICHAEL MATER: _Atalanta Fugiens_ (1617), p. 97.\n\n(1b) A E. WAITE: \"Woman and the Hermetic Mystery,\" _The Occult Review_\n(June 1912), vol. xv. pp. 325 and 326.\n\n\nSo far Mr WAITE, whose impressive words I have quoted at some length;\nand he has given us a fuller account of the theory as found in the\n_Zohar_ in his valuable work on _The Secret Doctrine in Israel_ (1913).\nThe _Zohar_ regards marriage and the performance of the sexual function\nin marriage as of supreme importance, and this not merely because\nmarriage symbolises a divine union, unless that expression is held to\ninclude all that logically follows from the fact, but because, as it\nseems, the sexual act in marriage may, in fact, become a ritual of\ntranscendental magic.\n\nAt least three varieties of opinion can be traced from the view of sex\nwe have under consideration, as to the nature of the perfect man, and\nhence of the most adequate symbol for transmutation. According to one,\nand this appears to have been JACOB BOEHME'S view, the perfect man is\nconceived of as non-sexual, the male and female elements united in him\nhaving, as it were, neutralised each other. According to another, he is\npictured as a hermaphroditic being, a concept we frequently come across\nin alchemical literature. It plays a prominent part in MAIER'S book\n_Atalanta Fugiens_, to which reference has already been made. MAIER'S\nhermaphrodite has two heads, one male, one female, but only one body,\none pair of arms, and one pair of legs. The two sexual organs, which\nare placed side by side, are delineated in the illustrations with\nconsiderable care, showing the importance MAIER attached to the idea.\nThis concept seems to me not only crude, but unnatural and repellent.\nBut it may be said of both the opinions I have mentioned, that they\nconfuse between union and identity. It is the old mistake, with respect\nto a lesser goal, of those who hope for absorption in the Divine Nature\nand consequent loss of personality. It seems to be forgotten that\na certain degree of distinction is necessary to the joy of union.\n\"Distinction\" and \"separation,\" it should be remembered, have different\nconnotations. If the supreme joy is that of self-sacrifice, then the\nself must be such that it can be continually sacrificed, else the joy\nis a purely transitory one, or rather, is destroyed at the moment of\nits consummation. Hence, though sacrificed, the self must still remain\nitself.\n\nThe third view of perfection, to which these remarks naturally lead,\nis that which sees it typified in marriage. The mystic-philosopher\nSWEDENBORG has some exceedingly suggestive things to say on the matter\nin his extraordinary work on _Conjugial Love_, which, curiously enough,\nseem largely to have escaped the notice of students of these high\nmysteries.\n\nSWEDENBORG'S heaven is a sexual heaven, because for him sex is primarily\na spiritual fact, and only secondarily, and because of what it is\nprimarily, a physical fact; and salvation is hardly possible, according\nto him, apart from a genuine marriage (whether achieved here or\nhereafter). Man and woman are considered as complementary beings, and\nit is only through the union of one man with one woman that the perfect\nangel results. The altruistic tendency of such a theory as contrasted\nwith the egotism of one in which perfection is regarded as obtainable\nby each personality of itself alone, is a point worth emphasising. As\nto the nature of this union, it is, to use SWEDENBORG'S own terms, a\nconjunction of the will of the wife with the understanding of the man,\nand reciprocally of the understanding of the man with the will of the\nwife. It is thus a manifestation of that fundamental marriage between\nthe good and the true which is at the root of all existence; and it is\nbecause of this fundamental marriage that all men and women are born\ninto the desire to complete themselves by conjunction. The symbol\nof sexual intercourse is a legitimate one to use in speaking of this\nheavenly union; indeed, we may describe the highest bliss attainable\nby the soul, or conceivable by the mind, as a spiritual orgasm. Into\nconjugal love \"are collected,\" says SWEDENBORG, \"all the blessednesses,\nblissfulnesses, delightsomenesses, pleasantnesses, and pleasures, which\ncould possibly be conferred upon man by the Lord the Creator.\"(1) In\nanother place he writes: \"Married partners (in heaven) enjoy similar\nintercourse with each other as in the world, but more delightful and\nblessed; yet without prolification, for which, or in place of which,\nthey have spiritual prolification, which is that of love and wisdom.\"\n\"The reason,\" he adds, \"why the intercourse then is more delightful and\nblessed is, that when conjugial love becomes of the spirit, it becomes\nmore interior and pure, and consequently more perceptible; and every\ndelightsomeness grows according to the perception, and grows even until\nits blessedness is discernible in its delightsomeness.\"(1b) Such love,\nhowever, he says, is rarely to be found on earth.\n\n\n(1) EMANUEL SWEDENBORG: _The Delights of Wisdom relating to Conjugial\nLove_ (trans. by A. H. SEARLE, 1891), SE 68.\n\n(1b) EMANUEL SWEDENBORG: _Op. cit_., SE 51.\n\n\nA learned Japanese speaks with approval of Idealism as a \"dream where\nsensuousness and spirituality find themselves to be blood brothers or\nsisters.\"(2) It is a statement which involves either the grossest\nand most dangerous error, or the profoundest truth, according to the\nunderstanding of it. Woman is a road whereby man travels either to God\nor the devil. The problem of sex is a far deeper problem than appears at\nfirst sight, involving mysteries both the direst and most holy. It is\nby no means a fantastic hypothesis that the inmost mystery of what a\ncertain school of mystics calls \"the Secret Tradition\" was a sexual\none. At any rate, the fact that some of those, at least, to whom alchemy\nconnoted a mystical process, were alive to the profound spiritual\nsignificance of sex, renders of double interest what they have to\nintimate of the achievement of the _Magnum Opus_ in man.\n\n\n(2) YONE NOGUCHI: _The Spirit of Japanese Art_ (1915), p. 37.\n\n\n\n\nXI. ROGER BACON: AN APPRECIATION\n\nIT has been said that \"a prophet is not without honour, save in his own\ncountry.\" Thereto might be added, \"and in his own time\"; for, whilst\nthere is continuity in time, there is also evolution, and England of\nto-day, for instance, is not the same country as England of the Middle\nAges. In his own day ROGER BACON was accounted a magician, whose\nheretical views called for suppression by the Church. And for many a\nlong day afterwards was he mainly remembered as a co-worker in the black\nart with Friar BUNGAY, who together with him constructed, by the aid of\nthe devil and diabolical rites, a brazen head which should possess the\npower of speech--the experiment only failing through the negligence of\nan assistant.(1) Such was ROGER BACON in the memory of the later Middle\nAges and many succeeding years; he was the typical alchemist, where that\nterm carries with it the depth of disrepute, though indeed alchemy was\nfor him but one, and that not the greatest, of many interests.\n\n\n(1) The story, of course, is entirely fictitious. For further\nparticulars see Sir J. E. SANDYS' essay on \"Roger Bacon in English\nLiterature,\" in _Roger Bacon Essays_ (1914), referred to below.\n\n\nIlchester, in Somerset, claims the honour of being the place of ROGER\nBACON'S birth, which interesting and important event occurred, probably,\nin 1214. Young BACON studied theology, philosophy, and what then passed\nunder the name of \"science,\" first at Oxford, then the centre of liberal\nthought, and afterwards at Paris, in the rigid orthodoxy of whose\nprofessors he found more to criticise than to admire. Whilst at Oxford\nhe joined the Franciscan Order, and at Paris he is said, though this\nis probably an error, to have graduated as Doctor of Theology. During\n1250-1256 we find him back in England, no doubt engaged in study and\nteaching. About the latter year, however, he is said to have been\nbanished--on a charge of holding heterodox views and indulging in\nmagical practices--to Paris, where he was kept in close confinement and\nforbidden to write. Mr LITTLE,(1) however, believes this to be an error,\nbased on a misreading of a passage in one of BACON'S works, and that\nROGER was not imprisoned, but stricken with sickness. At any rate it is\nnot improbable that some restrictions as to his writing were placed on\nhim by his superiors of the Franciscan Order. In 1266 BACON received a\nletter from Pope CLEMENT asking him to send His Holiness his works in\nwriting without delay. This letter came as a most pleasant surprise to\nBACON; but he had nothing of importance written, and in great haste\nand excitement, therefore, he composed three works explicating his\nphilosophy, the _Opus Majus_, the _Opus Minus_, and the _Opus Tertium_,\nwhich were completed and dispatched to the Pope by the end of the\nfollowing year. This, as Mr ROWBOTTOM remarks, is \"surely one of the\nliterary feats of history, perhaps only surpassed by Swedenborg when he\nwrote six theological and philosophical treatises in one year.\"(1b)\n\n\n(1) See his contribution, \"On Roger Bacon's Life and Works,\" to _Roger\nBacon Essays_.\n\n(1b) B. R. ROWBOTTOM: \"Roger Bacon,\" _The Journal of the Alchemical\nSociety_, vol. ii. (1914), p. 77.\n\n\n\nThe works appear to have been well received. We next find BACON at\nOxford writing his _Compendium Studii Philosophiae_, in which work he\nindulged in some by no means unjust criticisms of the clergy, for which\nhe fell under the condemnation of his order, and was imprisoned in\n1277 on a charge of teaching \"suspected novelties\". In those days any\nknowledge of natural phenomena beyond that of the quasi-science of\nthe times was regarded as magic, and no doubt some of ROGER BACON'S\n\"suspected novelties\" were of this nature; his recognition of the\nvalue of the writings of non-Christian moralists was, no doubt, another\n\"suspected novelty\". Appeals for his release directed to the Pope\nproved fruitless, being frustrated by JEROME D'ASCOLI, General of the\nFranciscan Order, who shortly afterwards succeeded to the Holy See under\nthe title of NICHOLAS IV. The latter died in 1292, whereupon RAYMOND\nGAUFREDI, who had been elected General of the Franciscan Order, and\nwho, it is thought, was well disposed towards BACON, because of certain\nalchemical secrets the latter had revealed to him, ordered his release.\nBACON returned to Oxford, where he wrote his last work, the _Compendium\nStudii Theologiae_. He died either in this year or in 1294.(1)\n\n\n(1) For further details concerning BACON'S life, EMILE CHARLES: _Roger\nBacon, sa Vie, ses Ouvrages, ses Doctrines_ (1861); J. H. BRIDGES: _The\nLife & Work of Roger Bacon, an Introduction to the Opus Majus_ (edited\nby H. G. JONES, 1914); and Mr A. G. LITTLE'S essay in _Roger Bacon\nEssays_, may be consulted.\n\n\nIt was not until the publication by Dr SAMUEL JEBB, in 1733, of the\ngreater part of BACON'S _Opus Majus_, nearly four and a half centuries\nafter his death, that anything like his rightful position in the history\nof philosophy began to be assigned to him. But let his spirit be no\nlonger troubled, if it were ever troubled by neglect or slander, for the\nworld, and first and foremost his own country, has paid him due honour.\nHis septcentenary was duly celebrated in 1914 at his _alma mater_,\nOxford, his statue has there been raised as a memorial to his greatness,\nand savants have meted out praise to him in no grudging tones.(2)\nIndeed, a voice has here and there been heard depreciating his\nbetter-known namesake FRANCIS,(3) so that the later luminary should not,\nstanding in the way, obscure the light of the earlier; though, for my\npart, I would suggest that one need not be so one-eyed as to fail to see\nboth lights at once.\n\n(2) See _Roger Bacon, Essays contributed by various Writers on the\nOccasion of the Commemoration of the Seventh Centenary of his Birth_.\nCollected and edited by A. G. LITTLE (1914); also Sir J. E. SANDYS'\n_Roger Bacon_ (from _The Proceedings of the British Association_, vol.\nvi., 1914).\n\n(3) For example, that of ERNST DUHRING. See an article entitled \"The Two\nBacons,\" translated from his _Kritische Geschichte der Philosophie_ in\n_The Open Court_ for August 1914.\n\n\nTo those who like to observe coincidences, it may be of interest that\nthe septcentenary of the discoverer of gunpowder should have coincided\nwith the outbreak of the greatest war under which the world has yet\ngroaned, even though gunpowder is no longer employed as a military\npropellant.\n\nBACON'S reference to gunpowder occurs in his _Epistola de Secretis\nOperibus Artis et Naturae, et de Nullitate Magiae_ (Hamburg, 1618) a\nlittle tract written against magic, in which he endeavours to show, and\nsucceeds very well in the first eight chapters, that Nature and art can\nperform far more extraordinary feats than are claimed by the workers\nin the black art. The last three chapters are written in an alchemical\njargon of which even one versed in the symbolic language of alchemy can\nmake no sense. They are evidently cryptogramic, and probably deal with\nthe preparation and purification of saltpetre, which had only recently\nbeen discovered as a distinct body.(1) In chapter xi. there is reference\nto an explosive body, which can only be gunpowder; by means of it, says\nBACON, you may, \"if you know the trick, produce a bright flash and a\nthundering noise.\" He mentions two of the ingredients, saltpetre and\nsulphur, but conceals the third (_i.e_. charcoal) under an anagram.\nClaims have, indeed, been put forth for the Greek, Arab, Hindu, and\nChinese origins of gunpowder, but a close examination of the original\nancient accounts purporting to contain references to gunpowder, shows\nthat only incendiary and not explosive bodies are really dealt with. But\nwhilst ROGER BACON knew of the explosive property of a mixture in right\nproportions of sulphur, charcoal, and pure saltpetre (which he no doubt\naccidentally hit upon whilst experimenting with the last-named body), he\nwas unaware of its projective power. That discovery, so detrimental\nto the happiness of man ever since, was, in all probability, due to\nBERTHOLD SCHWARZ about 1330.\n\n\n(1) For an attempted explanation of this cryptogram, and evidence that\nBACON was the discoverer of gunpowder, see Lieut.-Col. H. W. L. HIME'S\n_Gunpowder and Ammunition: their Origin and Progress_ (1904).\n\n\nROGER BACON has been credited(1) with many other discoveries. In the\nwork already referred to he allows his imagination freely to speculate\nas to the wonders that might be accomplished by a scientific utilisation\nof Nature's forces--marvellous things with lenses, in bringing distant\nobjects near and so forth, carriages propelled by mechanical means,\nflying machines...--but in no case is the word \"discovery\" in any\nsense applicable, for not even in the case of the telescope does BACON\ndescribe means by which his speculations might be realised.\n\n(1) For instance by Mr M. M. P. MUIR. See his contribution, on \"Roger\nBacon: His Relations to Alchemy and Chemistry,\" to _Roger Bacon Essays_.\n\n\nOn the other hand, ROGER BACON has often been maligned for his beliefs\nin astrology and alchemy, but, as the late Dr BRIDGES (who was quite\nsceptical of the claims of both) pointed out, not to have believed\nin them in BACON'S day would have been rather an evidence of mental\nweakness than otherwise. What relevant facts were known supported\nalchemical and astrological hypotheses. Astrology, Dr BRIDGES writes,\n\"conformed to the first law of Comte's _philosophia prima_, as being the\nbest hypothesis of which ascertained phenomena admitted.\"(1) And in his\nalchemical speculations BACON was much in advance of his contemporaries,\nand stated problems which are amongst those of modern chemistry.\n\n\n(1) _Op. cit_., p.84.\n\n\nROGER BACON'S greatness does not lie in the fact that he discovered\ngunpowder, nor in the further fact that his speculations have been\nvalidated by other men. His greatness lies in his secure grip of\nscientific method as a combination of mathematical reasoning and\nexperiment. Men before him had experimented, but none seemed to have\nrealised the importance of the experimental method. Nor was he, of\ncourse, by any means the first mathematician--there was a long line of\nGreek and Arabian mathematicians behind him, men whose knowledge of the\nscience was in many cases much greater than his--or the most learned\nmathematician of his day; but none realised the importance of\nmathematics as an organon of scientific research as he did; and he was\nassuredly the priest who joined mathematics to experiment in the bonds\nof sacred matrimony. We must not, indeed, look for precise rules of\ninductive reasoning in the works of this pioneer writer on scientific\nmethod. Nor do we find really satisfactory rules of induction even in\nthe works of FRANCIS BACON. Moreover, the latter despised mathematics,\nand it was not until in quite recent years that the scientific world\ncame to realise that ROGER'S method is the more fruitful--witness the\nmodern revolution in chemistry produced by the adoption of mathematical\nmethods.\n\nROGER BACON, it may be said, was many centuries in advance of his time;\nbut it is equally true that he was the child of his time; this may\naccount for his defects judged by modern standards. He owed not a little\nto his contemporaries: for his knowledge and high estimate of philosophy\nhe was largely indebted to his Oxford master GROSSETESTE (_c_.\n1175-1253), whilst PETER PEREGRINUS, his friend at Paris, fostered his\nlove of experiment, and the Arab mathematicians, whose works he knew,\ninclined his mind to mathematical studies. He was violently opposed to\nthe scholastic views current in Paris at his time, and attacked great\nthinkers like THOMAS AQUINAS (_c_. 1225-1274) and ALBERTUS MAGNUS\n(1193-1280), as well as obscurantists, such as ALEXANDER of HALES (_ob_.\n1245). But he himself was a scholastic philosopher, though of no servile\ntype, taking part in scholastic arguments. If he declared that he would\nhave all the works of ARISTOTLE burned, it was not because he hated\nthe Peripatetic's philosophy--though he could criticise as well as\nappreciate at times,--but because of the rottenness of the translations\nthat were then used. It seems commonplace now, but it was a truly\nwonderful thing then: ROGER BACON believed in accuracy, and was by no\nmeans destitute of literary ethics. He believed in correct translation,\ncorrect quotation, and the acknowledgment of the sources of one's\nquotations--unheard-of things, almost, in those days. But even he was\nnot free from all the vices of his age: in spite of his insistence upon\nexperimental verification of the conclusions of deductive reasoning,\nin one place, at least, he adopts a view concerning lenses from another\nwriter, of which the simplest attempt at such verification would have\nrevealed the falsity. For such lapses, however, we can make allowances.\n\nAnother and undeniable claim to greatness rests on ROGER BACON'S\nbroad-mindedness. He could actually value at their true worth the moral\nphilosophies of non-Christian writers--SENECA (_c_. 5 B.C.-A.D. 65) and\nAL GHAZZALI (1058-1111), for instance. But if he was catholic in the\noriginal meaning of that term, he was also catholic in its restricted\nsense. He was no heretic: the Pope for him was the Vicar of CHRIST, whom\nhe wished to see reign over the whole world, not by force of arms,\nbut by the assimilation of all that was worthy in that world. To his\nmind--and here he was certainly a child of his age, in its best sense,\nperhaps--all other sciences were handmaidens to theology, queen of\nthem all. All were to be subservient to her aims: the Church he called\n\"Catholic\" was to embrace in her arms all that was worthy in the works\nof \"profane\" writers--true prophets of God, he held, in so far as\nwriting worthily they unconsciously bore testimony to the truth of\nChristianity,--and all that Nature might yield by patient experiment and\nspeculation guided by mathematics. Some minds see in this a defect in\nhis system, which limited his aims and outlook; others see it as the\nunifying principle giving coherence to the whole. At any rate, the\nChurch, as we have seen, regarded his views as dangerous, and restrained\nhis pen for at least a considerable portion of his life.\n\nROGER BACON may seem egotistic in argument, but his mind was humble to\nlearn. He was not superstitious, but he would listen to common folk who\nworked with their hands, to astrologers, and even magicians, denying\nnothing which seemed to him to have some evidence in experience: if he\ndenied much of magical belief, it was because he found it lacking in\nsuch evidence. He often went astray in his views; he sometimes failed\nto apply his own method, and that method was, in any case, primitive and\ncrude. But it was the RIGHT method, in embryo at least, and ROGER BACON,\nin spite of tremendous opposition, greater than that under which any man\nof science may now suffer, persisted in that method to the end, calling\nupon his contemporaries to adopt it as the only one which results in\nright knowledge. Across the centuries--or, rather, across the gulf that\ndivides this world from the next--let us salute this great and noble\nspirit.\n\n\n\n\nXII. THE CAMBRIDGE PLATONISTS\n\nTHERE is an opinion, unfortunately very common, that religious mysticism\nis a product of the emotional temperament, and is diametrically opposed\nto the spirit of rationalism. No doubt this opinion is not without some\nelement of justification, and one could quote the works of not a few\nreligious mystics to the effect that self-surrender to God implies, not\nmerely a giving up of will, but also of reason. But that this teaching\nis not an essential element in mysticism, that it is, indeed, rather its\nperversion, there is adequate evidence to demonstrate. SWEDENBORG is,\nI suppose, the outstanding instance of an intellectual mystic; but the\nessential unity of mysticism and rationalism is almost as forcibly made\nevident in the case of the Cambridge Platonists. That little band of\n\"Latitude men,\" as their contemporaries called them, constitutes one of\nthe finest schools of philosophy that England has produced; yet their\nworks are rarely read, I am afraid, save by specialists. Possibly,\nhowever, if it were more commonly known what a wealth of sound\nphilosophy and true spiritual teaching they contain, the case would be\notherwise.\n\nThe Cambridge Platonists--BENJAMIN WHICHCOTE, JOHN SMITH, NATHANAEL\nCULVERWEL, RALPH CUDWORTH, and HENRY MORE are the more outstanding\nnames--were educated as Puritans; but they clearly realised the\nfundamental error of Puritanism, which tended to make a man's eternal\nsalvation depend upon the accuracy and extent of his beliefs; nor could\nthey approve of the exaggerated import given by the High Church party to\nmatters of Church polity. The term \"Cambridge Platonists\" is, perhaps,\nless appropriate than that of \"Latitudinarians,\" which latter name\nemphasises their broad-mindedness (even if it carries with it something\nof disapproval). For although they owed much to PTATO, and, perhaps,\nmore to PLOTINUS (_c_. A.D. 203-262), they were Christians first and\nPlatonists afterwards, and, with the exception, perhaps, of MORE, they\ntook nothing from these philosophers which was not conformable to the\nScriptures.\n\nBENJAMIN WHICHCOTE was born in 1609, at Whichcote Hall, in the parish of\nStoke, Shropshire. In 1626 he entered Emmanuel College, Cambridge,\nthen regarded as the chief Puritan college of the University. Here his\ncollege tutor was ANTHONY TUCKNEY (1599-1670), a man of rare character,\ncombining learning, wit, and piety. Between WHICHCOTE and TUCKNEY there\ngrew up a firm friendship, founded on mutual affection and esteem. But\nTUCKNEY was unable to agree with all WHICHCOTE'S broad-minded views\nconcerning reason and authority; and in later years this gave rise to\na controversy between them, in which TUCKNEY sought to controvert\nWHICHCOTE'S opinions: it was, however, carried on without acrimony, and\ndid not destroy their friendship.\n\nWHICHCOTE became M.A., and was elected a fellow of his college, in 1633,\nhaving obtained his B.A. four years previously. He was ordained by\nJOHN WILLIAMS in 1636, and received the important appointment of Sunday\nafternoon lecturer at Trinity Church. His lectures, which he gave with\nthe object of turning men's minds from polemics to the great moral and\nspiritual realities at the basis of the Christian religion, from mere\nformal discussions to a true searching into the reason of things, were\nwell attended and highly appreciated; and he held the appointment for\ntwenty years. In 1634 he became college tutor at Emmanuel. He possessed\nall the characteristics that go to make up an efficient and well-beloved\ntutor, and his personal influence was such as to inspire all his\npupils, amongst whom were both JOHN SMITH and NATHANAEL CULVERWEL, who\nconsiderably amplified his philosophical and religious doctrines. In\n1640 he became B.D., and nine years after was created D.D. The college\nliving of North Cadbury, in Somerset, was presented to him in 1643,\nand shortly afterwards he married. In the next year, however, he was\nrecalled to Cambridge, and installed as Provost of King's College in\nplace of the ejected Dr SAMUEL COLLINS. But it was greatly against his\nwish that he received the appointment, and he only consented to do so on\nthe condition that part of his stipend should be paid to COLLINS--an act\nwhich gives us a good insight into the character of the man. In 1650 he\nresigned North Cadbury, and the living was presented to CUDWORTH (see\nbelow), and towards the end of this year he was elected Vice-Chancellor\nof the University in succession to TUCKNEY. It was during his\nVice-Chancellorship that he preached the sermon that gave rise to the\ncontroversy with the latter. About this time also he was presented\nwith the living of Milton, in Cambridgeshire. At the Restoration he\nwas ejected from the Provostship, but, having complied with the Act\nof Uniformity, he was, in 1662, appointed to the cure of St Anne's,\nBlackfriars. This church being destroyed in the Great Fire, WHICHCOTE\nretired to Milton, where he showed great kindness to the poor. But some\nyears later he returned to London, having received the vicarage of St\nLawrence, Jewry. His friends at Cambridge, however, still saw him on\noccasional visits, and it was on one such visit to CUDWORTH, in 1683,\nthat he caught the cold which caused his death.\n\nJOHN SMITH was born at Achurch, near Oundle, in 1618. He entered\nEmmanuel College in 1636, became B.A. in 1640, and proceeded to M.A. in\n1644, in which year he was appointed a fellow of Queen's College. Here\nhe lectured on arithmetic with considerable success. He was noted for\nhis great learning, especially in theology and Oriental languages,\nas well as for his justness, uprightness, and humility. He died of\nconsumption in 1652.\n\nNATHANAEL CULVERWEL was probably born about the same year as SMITH. He\nentered Emmanuel College in 1633, gained his B.A. in 1636, and became\nM.A. in 1640. Soon afterwards he was elected a fellow of his college.\nHe died about 1651. Beyond these scant details, nothing is known of his\nlife. He was a man of very great erudition, as his posthumous treatise\non _The Light of Nature_ makes evident.\n\nHENRY MORE was born at Grantham in 1614. From his earliest days he\nwas interested in theological problems, and his precociousness in this\nrespect appears to have brought down on him the wrath of an uncle.\nHis early education was conducted at Eton. In 1631 he entered Christ's\nCollege, Cambridge, graduated B.A. in 1635, and received his M.A.\nin 1639. In the latter year he was elected a fellow of Christ's and\nreceived Holy Orders. He lived a very retired life, refusing all\npreferment, though many valuable and honourable appointments were\noffered to him. Indeed, he rarely left Christ's, except to visit\nhis \"heroine pupil,\" Lady CONWAY, whose country seat, Ragley, was in\nWarwickshire. Lady CONWAY (_ob_. 1679) appears to be remembered only for\nthe fact that, dying whilst her husband was away, her physician, F. M.\nVAN HELMONT (1618-1699) (son of the famous alchemist, J. B. VAN HELMONT,\nwhom we have met already on these excursions), preserved her body in\nspirits of wine, so that he could have the pleasure of beholding it on\nhis return. She seems to have been a woman of considerable learning,\nthough not free from fantastic ideas. Her ultimate conversion to\nQuakerism was a severe blow to MORE, who, whilst admiring the holy lives\nof the Friends, regarded them as enthusiasts. MORE died in 1687.\n\nMORE'S earliest works were in verse, and exhibit fine feeling. The\nfollowing lines, quoted from a poem on \"Charitie and Humilitie,\" are\nfull of charm, and well exhibit MORE'S character:--\n\n     \"Farre have I clambred in my mind\n     But nought so great as love I find:\n     Deep-searching wit, mount-moving might,\n     Are nought compar'd to that great spright.\n     Life of Delight and soul of blisse!\n     Sure source of lasting happinesse!\n     Higher than Heaven! lower than hell!\n     What is thy tent? Where maist thou dwell?\n         My mansion highs humilitie,\n     Heaven's vastest capabilitie\n     The further it doth downward tend\n     The higher up it doth ascend;\n     If it go down to utmost nought\n     It shall return with that it sought.\"(1)\n\n\n(1) See _The Life of the Learned and Pious Dr Henry More... by_ RICHARD\nWARD, A.M., _to which are annexed Divers Philosophical Poems and Hymns_.\nEdited by M. F. HOWARD (1911), pp. 250 and 251.\n\n\n\nLater he took to prose, and it must be confessed that he wrote too much\nand frequently descended to polemics (for example, his controversy\nwith the alchemist THOMAS VAUGHAN, in which both combatants freely used\nabuse).\n\nAlthough in his main views MORE is thoroughly characteristic of the\nschool to which he belonged, many of his less important opinions are\nmore or less peculiar to himself.\n\nThe relation between MORE's and DESCARTES' (1596-1650) theories as to\nthe nature of spirit is interesting. When MORE first read DESCARTES'\nworks he was favourably impressed with his views, though without\nentirely agreeing with him on all points; but later the difference\nbecame accentuated. DESCARTES regarded extension as the chief\ncharacteristic of matter, and asserted that spirit was extra-spatial. To\nMORE this seemed like denying the existence of spirit, which he regarded\nas extended, and he postulated divisibility and impenetrability as the\nchief characteristics of matter. In order, however, to get over some of\nthe inherent difficulties of this view, he put forward the suggestion\nthat spirit is extended in four dimensions: thus, its apparent (_i.e_.\nthree-dimensional) extension can change, whilst its true (_i.e_.\nfour-dimensional) extension remains constant; just as the surface of a\npiece of metal can be increased by hammering it out, without increasing\nthe volume of the metal. Here, I think, we have a not wholly inadequate\nsymbol of the truth; but it remained for BERKELEY  (1685-1753) to show\n position, by demonstrating that, since space and extension are\nperceptions of the mind, and thus exist only in the mind as ideas, space\nexists in spirit: not spirit in space.\n\nMORE was a keen believer in witchcraft, and eagerly investigated all\ncases of these and like marvels that came under his notice. In this\nhe was largely influenced by JOSEPH GLANVIL (1636-1680), whose book\non witchcraft, the well-known _Saducismus Triumphatus_, MORE largely\ncontributed to, and probably edited. MORE was wholly unsuited for\npsychical research; free from guile himself, he was too inclined\nto judge others to be of this nature also. But his common sense and\ncritical attitude towards enthusiasm saved him, no doubt, from many\nfalls into the mire of fantasy.\n\nAs Principal TULLOCH has pointed out, whilst MORE is the most\ninteresting personality amongst the Cambridge Platonists, his works\nare the least interesting of those of his school. They are dull and\nscholastic, and MORE'S retired existence prevented him from grasping in\ntheir fulness some of the more acute problems of life. His attempt to\nharmonise catastrophes with Providence, on the ground that the evil of\ncertain parts may be necessary for the good of the whole, just as dark\ncolours, as well as bright, are essential to the beauty of a\npicture--a theory which is practically the same as that of modern\nAbsolutism,(1)--is a case in point. No doubt this harmony may be\naccomplished, but in another key.\n\n\n(1) Cf. BERNARD BOSANQUET, LL.D., D.C.L.: _The Principle of\nIndividuality and Value_ (1912).\n\n\nRALPH CUDWORTH was born at Aller, in Somersetshire, in 1617. He entered\nEmmanuel College in 1632, three years afterwards gained his B.A., and\nbecame M.A. in 1639. In the latter year he was elected a fellow of his\ncollege. Later he obtained the B.D. degree. In 1645 he was appointed\nMaster of Clare Hall, in place of the ejected Dr PASHE, and was elected\nRegius Professor of Hebrew. On 31st March 1647 he preached a sermon\nof remarkable eloquence and power before the House of Commons, which\nadmirably expresses the attitude of his school as concerns the nature\nof true religion. I shall refer to it again later. In 1650 CUDWORTH was\npresented with the college living of North Cadbury, which WHICHCOTE\nhad resigned, and was made D.D. in the following year. In 1654 he was\nelected Master of Christ's College, with an improvement in his financial\nposition, there having been some difficulty in obtaining his stipend at\nClare Hall. In this year he married. In 1662 Bishop SHELDON presented\nhim with the rectory of Ashwell, in Hertfordshire. He died in 1688. He\nwas a pious man of fine intellect; but his character was marred by a\ncertain suspiciousness which caused him wrongfully to accuse MORE, in\n1665, of attempting to forestall him in writing a work on ethics, which\nshould demonstrate that the principles of Christian morality are not\nbased on any arbitrary decrees of God, but are inherent in the nature\nand reason of things. CUDWORTH'S great work--or, at least, the first\npart, which alone was completed,--_The Intellectual System of the\nWorld_, appeared in 1678. In it CUDWORTH deals with atheism on\nthe ground of reason, demonstrating its irrationality. The book is\nremarkable for the fairness and fulness with which CUDWORTH states the\narguments in favour of atheism.\n\nSo much for the lives and individual characteristics of the Cambridge\nPlatonists: what were the great principles that animated both their\nlives and their philosophy? These, I think, were two: first, the\nessential unity of religion and morality; second, the essential unity of\nrevelation and reason.\n\nWith clearer perception of ethical truth than either Puritan or High\nChurchman, the Cambridge Platonists saw that true Christianity is\nneither a matter of mere belief, nor consists in the mere performance\nof good works; but is rather a matter of character. To them Christianity\nconnoted regeneration. \"Religion,\" says WHICHCOTE, \"is the Frame and\nTEMPER of our Minds, and the RULE of our Lives\"; and again, \"Heaven is\nFIRST a Temper, and THEN a Place.\"(1) To the man of heavenly temper,\nthey taught, the performance of good works would be no irksome matter\nimposed merely by a sense of duty, but would be done spontaneously as a\ndelight. To drudge in religion may very well be necessary as an initial\nstage, but it is not its perfection.\n\n\n(1) My quotations from WHICHCOTE and SMITH are taken from the selection\nof their discourses edited by E. T. CAMPAGNAC, M.A. (1901).\n\n\nIn his sermon before the House of Commons, CUDWORTH well exposes\nthe error of those who made the mere holding of certain beliefs the\nessential element in Christianity. There are many passages I should like\nto quote from this eloquent discourse, but the following must suffice:\n\"We must not judge of our knowing of Christ, by our skill in Books\nand Papers, but by our keeping of his Commandments... He is the best\nChristian, whose heart beats with the truest pulse towards heaven; not\nhe whose head spinneth out the finest cobwebs. He that endeavours really\nto mortifie his lusts, and to comply with that truth in his life, which\nhis Conscience is convinced of; is neerer a Christian, though he never\nheard of Christ; then he that believes all the vulgar Articles of the\nChristian faith, and plainly denyeth Christ in his life.... The great\nMysterie of the Gospel, it doth not lie only in CHRIST WITHOUT US,\n(though we must know also what he hath done for us) but the very Pith\nand Kernel of it, consists in _*Christ inwardly formed_ in our hearts.\nNothing is truly Ours, but what lives in our Spirits. SALVATION it self\ncannot SAVE us, as long as it is onely without us; no more then HEALTH\ncan cure us, and make us sound, when it is not within us, but somewhere\nat distance from us; no more than _Arts and Sciences_, whilst they lie\nonely in Books and Papers without us; can make us learned.\"(1)\n\n\n(1) RALPH CUDWORTH, B.D.: _A Sermon Preached before the Honourable House\nof Commons at Westminster, Mar_. 31, 1647 (1st edn.), pp. 3, 14, 42, and\n43.\n\n\nThe Cambridge Platonists were not ascetics; their moral doctrine was one\nof temperance. Their sound wisdom on this point is well evident in\nthe following passage from WHICHCOTE: \"What can be alledged for\nIntemperance; since Nature is content with very few things? Why should\nany one over-do in this kind? A Man is better in Health and Strength, if\nhe be temperate. We enjoy ourselves more in a sober and temperate Use of\nourselves.\"(2)\n\n\n(2) BENJAMIN WHICHCOTE: _The Venerable Nature and Transcendant Benefit\nof Christian Religion. Op. cit_., p. 40.\n\n\nThe other great principle animating their philosophy was, as I have\nsaid, the essential unity of reason and revelation. To those who argued\nthat self-surrender implied a giving up of reason, they replied that \"To\ngo against REASON, is to go against GOD: it is the self same thing, to\ndo that which the Reason of the Case doth require; and that which God\nHimself doth appoint: Reason is the DIVINE Governor of Man's Life; it\nis the very Voice of God.\"(3) Reason, Conscience, and the Scriptures,\nthese, taught the Cambridge Platonists, testify of one another and are\nthe true guides which alone a man should follow. All other authority\nthey repudiated. But true reason is not merely sensuous, and the only\nway whereby it may be gained is by the purification of the self from the\ndesires that draw it away from the Source of all Reason. \"God,\" writes\nMORE, \"reserves His choicest secrets for the purest Minds,\" adding his\nconviction that \"true Holiness (is) the only safe Entrance into Divine\nKnowledge.\" Or as SMITH, who speaks of \"a GOOD LIFE as the PROLEPSIS and\nFundamental principle of DIVINE SCIENCE,\" puts it, \"... if... KNOWLEDGE\nbe not attended with HUMILITY and a deep sense of SELF-PENURY and\n_*Self-emptiness_, we may easily fall short of that True Knowledge of\nGod which we seem to aspire after.\"(1b) Right Reason, however, they\ntaught, is the product of the sight of the soul, the true mystic vision.\n\n\n(3) BENJAMIN WHICHCOTE: _Moral and Religious Aphorisms OP. cit_., p. 67.\n\n(1b) JOHN SMITH: _A Discourse concerning the true Way or Method of\nattaining to Divine Knowledge. Op. cit_., pp. 80 and 96.\n\n\nIn what respects, it may be asked in conclusion, is the philosophy of\nthe Cambridge Platonists open to criticism? They lacked, perhaps, a\nsufficiently clear concept of the Church as a unity, and although they\nclearly realised that Nature is a symbol which it is the function of\nreason to interpret spiritually, they failed, I think, to appreciate\nthe value of symbols. Thus they have little to teach with respect to the\nSacraments of the Church, though, indeed, the highest view, perhaps,\nis that which regards every act as potentially a sacrament; and, whilst\nadmiring his morality, they criticised BOEHME as an enthusiast. But,\nalthough he spoke in a very different language, spiritually he had much\nin common with them. Compared with what is of positive value in their\nphilosophy, however, the defects of the Cambridge Platonists are but\ncomparatively slight. I commend their works to lovers of spiritual\nwisdom.","title":"Bygone Beliefs: Being a Series of Excursions in the Byways of Thought","tradition":"philosophy-ethics","translated_text":null,"word_count":54328}