{"collection":"philosophy-ethics","full_text_available":true,"graph_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/api/page/gutenberg_22914/graph","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/page/gutenberg_22914","id":"gutenberg_22914","license":"Public Domain (US)","rights_basis":"gutenberg_metadata_copyright_false","source":"gutenberg","source_url":"https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/22914","summary":null,"tags":["Category: Classics of Literature","Category: History - Early Modern (c. 1450-1750)","Category: Philosophy & Ethics","Category: Science - Chemistry/Biochemistry","Chemistry","Chemistry -- Early works to 1800"],"text":"E-text prepared by Robert Shimmin, Linda Cantoni, and the Project\nGutenberg Online Distributed Proofreading Team (http://www.pgdp.net).\nColor title-page images were generously provided by the University of\nPennsylvania Schoenberg Center for Electronic Text & Image\n(http://dewey.library.upenn.edu/sceti).\n\n\n\nTranscriber's Notes:\n\n   This e-book was prepared from a facsimile of the 1661 first\n   edition and contains spelling, capitalization, and punctuation\n   inconsistencies typical of the era. These have been preserved\n   as they appear in the original.\n\n   Printer errors have also been preserved. Those mentioned in\n   the Errata at the end of the book are noted with [Errata:\n   corrected text]. Other obvious printer errors are noted with\n   [Transcriber's Note: corrected text] where the meaning might\n   be unclear without the correction. See also the printer's note\n   preceding the Errata, which contains material omitted from the\n   text (the place where it should be inserted is marked in the\n   text with a Transcriber's Note).\n\n   There are a number of sidenotes in this book, most of which\n   function as footnotes (e.g., citations to other works) and some\n   of which function as true sidenotes. For the sake of clarity,\n   sidenotes functioning as footnotes have been converted to\n   numbered footnotes, with number markers at appropriate places\n   in the text.\n\n   A character with a macron is represented by an equal sign.\n   E.g., [=a] indicates \"a\" with macron.\n\n   A table of contents has been provided for the reader's\n   convenience.\n\n\n\n\n\nTHE\n\nSCEPTICAL CHYMIST:\n\nOR\n\nCHYMICO-PHYSICAL\n\nDoubts & Paradoxes,\n\nTouching the\n\nSPAGYRIST'S PRINCIPLES\n\nCommonly call'd\n\nHYPOSTATICAL,\n\nAs they are wont to be Propos'd and Defended by the Generality of\n\nALCHYMISTS.\n\nWhereunto is praemis'd Part of another Discourse relating to the same\nSubject.\n\n\nBY\n\nThe Honourable _ROBERT BOYLE_, Esq;\n\n\n_LONDON,_\n\nPrinted by _J. Cadwell_ for _J. Crooke_, and are to be Sold at the\n_Ship_ in St. _Paul's_ Church-Yard.\n\n_MDCLXI._\n\n\n\n\nCONTENTS\n\n\nA Praeface Introductory\nPhysiological Considerations\nThe First Part\nThe Second Part\nThe Third Part\nThe Fourth Part\nThe Fifth Part\nThe Sixth Part\nThe Conclusion\nPrinter's Note\nErrata\n\n\n\n\nA\n\nPRAEFACE\n\nINTRODUCTORY\n\n_To the following Treatise._\n\n\n_To give the Reader an account, Why the following Treatise is suffer'd\nto pass abroad so maim'd and imperfect, I must inform him that 'tis\nnow long since, that to gratify an ingenious Gentleman, I set down\nsome of the Reasons that kept me from fully acquiescing either in the\nPeripatetical, or in the Chymical Doctrine, of the Material Principles\nof mixt Bodies. This Discourse some years after falling into the hands\nof some Learned men, had the good luck to be so favourably receiv'd,\nand advantageously spoken of by them, that having had more then\nordinary Invitations given me to make it publick, I thought fit to\nreview it, that I might retrench some things that seem'd not so fit to\nbe shewn to every Reader, And substitute some of those other things\nthat occurr'd to me of the trials and observations I had since made.\nWhat became of my papers, I elsewhere mention in a Preface where I\ncomplain of it: But since I writ That, I found many sheets that\nbelong'd to the subjects I am now about to discourse of. Wherefore\nseeing that I had then in my hands as much of the first Dialogue as\nwas requisite to state the Case, and serve for an Introduction as well\nto the conference betwixt_ Carneades _and_ Eleutherius, _as to some\nother Dialogues, which for certain reasons are not now herewith\npublish'd, I resolv'd to supply, as well as I could, the Contents of a\nPaper belonging to the second of the following Discourses, which I\ncould not possibly retrive, though it were the chief of them all. And\nhaving once more try'd the Opinion of Friends, but not of the same,\nabout this imperfect work, I found it such, that I was content in\ncomplyance with their Desires; that not only it should be publish'd,\nbut that it should be publish'd as soon as conveniently might be. I\nhad indeed all along the Dialogues spoken of my self, as of a third\nPerson; For, they containing Discourses which were among the first\nTreatises that I ventur'd long ago to write of matters Philosophical,\nI had reason to desire, with the Painter, to_ latere pone tabulam,\n_and hear what men would say of them, before I own'd my self to be\ntheir Author. But besides that now I find, 'tis not unknown to many\nwho it is that writ them, I am made to believe that 'tis not\ninexpedient, they should be known to come from a Person not altogether\na stranger to Chymical Affairs. And I made the lesse scruple to let\nthem come abroad uncompleated, partly, because my affairs and\nPrae-ingagements to publish divers other Treatises allow'd me small\nhopes of being able in a great while to compleat these Dialogues. And\npartly, because I am not unapt to think, that they may come abroad\nseasonably enough, though not for the Authors reputation, yet for\nother purposes. For I observe, that of late Chymistry begins, as\nindeed it deserves, to be cultivated by Learned Men who before\ndespis'd it; and to be pretended to by many who never cultivated it,\nthat they may be thought not to ignore it: Whence it is come to passe,\nthat divers Chymical Notions about Matters Philosophical are taken for\ngranted and employ'd, and so adopted by very eminent Writers both\nNaturalists and Physitians. Now this I fear may prove somewhat\nprejudicial to the Advancement of solid Philosophy: For though I am a\ngreat Lover of Chymical Experiments, and though I have no mean esteem\nof divers Chymical Remedies, yet I distinguish these from their\nNotions about the causes of things, and their manner of Generation.\nAnd for ought I can hitherto discern, there are a thousand_ Phaenomena\n_in Nature, besides a Multitude of Accidents relating to the humane\nBody, which will scarcely be clearly & satisfactorily made out by them\nthat confine themselves to deduce things from Salt, Sulphur and\nMercury, and the other Notions peculiar to the Chymists, without\ntaking much more Notice than they are wont to do, of the Motions and\nFigures, of the small Parts of Matter, and the other more Catholick\nand Fruitful affections of Bodies. Wherefore it will not perhaps be\nnow unseasonable to let our_ Carneades _warne Men, not to subscribe to\nthe grand Doctrine of the Chymists touching their three Hypostatical\nPrinciples, till they have a little examin'd it, and consider'd, how\nthey can clear it from his Objections, divers of which 'tis like they\nmay never have thought on; since a Chymist scarce would, and none but\na Chymist could propose them. I hope also it will not be unacceptable\nto several Ingenious Persons, who are unwilling to determine of any\nimportant Controversie, without a previous consideration of what may\nbe said on both sides, and yet have greater desires to understand\nChymical Matters, than Opportunities of learning them, to find here\ntogether, besides several Experiments of my own purposely made to\nIllustrate the Doctrine of the Elements, divers others scarce to be\nmet with, otherwise then Scatter'd among many Chymical Books. And to\nFind these Associated Experiments so Deliver'd as that an Ordinary\nReader, if he be but Acquainted with the usuall Chymical Termes, may\neasily enough Understand Them; and even a wary One may safely rely on\nThem. These Things I add, because a Person any Thing vers'd in the\nWritings of Chymists cannot but Discern by their obscure, Ambiguous,\nand almost AEnigmatical Way of expressing what they pretend to Teach,\nthat they have no Mind, to be understood at all, but by_ the Sons of\nArt _(as they call them) nor to be Understood even by these without\nDifficulty And Hazardous Tryalls. Insomuch that some of Them Scarce\never speak so candidly, as when they make use of that known Chymical\nSentence;_ Ubi palam locuti fumus, ibi nihil diximus. _And as the\nobscurity of what some Writers deliver makes it very difficult to be\nunderstood; so the Unfaithfulness of too many others makes it unfit to\nbe reli'd on. For though unwillingly, Yet I must for the truths sake,\nand the Readers, warne him not to be forward to believe Chymical\nExperiments when they are set down only by way of Prescriptions, and\nnot of Relations; that is, unless he that delivers them mentions his\ndoing it upon his own particular knowledge, or upon the Relation of\nsome credible person, avowing it upon his own experience. For I am\ntroubled, I must complain, that even Eminent Writers, both Physitians\nand Philosophers, whom I can easily name, if it be requir'd, have of\nlate suffer'd themselves to be so far impos'd upon, as to Publish and\nBuild upon Chymical Experiments, which questionless they never try'd;\nfor if they had, they would, as well as I, have found them not to be\ntrue. And indeed it were to be wish'd, that now that those begin to\nquote Chymical Experiments that are not themselves Acquainted with\nChymical Operations, men would Leave off that Indefinite Way of\nVouching the Chymists say this, or the Chymists affirme that, and\nwould rather for each Experiment they alledge name the Author or\nAuthors, upon whose credit they relate it; For, by this means they\nwould secure themselves from the suspition of falshood (to which the\nother Practice Exposes them) and they would Leave the Reader to Judge\nof what is fit for him to Believe of what is Deliver'd, whilst they\nemploy not their own great names to Countenance doubtfull Relations;\nand they will also do Justice to the Inventors or Publishers of true\nExperiments, as well as upon the Obtruders of false ones. Whereas by\nthat general Way of quoting the Chymists, the candid Writer is\nDefrauded of the particular Praise, and the Impostor escapes the\nPersonal Disgrace that is due to him._\n\n_The remaining Part of this Praeface must be imploy'd in saying\nsomething for_ Carneades, _and something for my Self._\n\n_And first_, Carneades _hopes that he will be thought to have disputed\ncivilly and Modestly enough for one that was to play the Antagonist\nand the Sceptick. And if he any where seem to sleight his Adversaries\nTenents and Arguments, he is willing to have it look'd upon as what he\nwas induc'd to, not so much by his Opinion of them, as the Examples\nof_ Themistius _and_ Philoponus, _and the custom of such kind of\nDisputes._\n\n_Next, In case that some of his Arguments shall not be thought of the\nmost Cogent sort that may be, he hopes it will be consider'd that it\nought not to be Expected, that they should be So. For, his Part being\nchiefly but to propose Doubts and Scruples, he does enough, if he\nshews that his Adversaries Arguments are not strongly Concluding,\nthough his own be not so neither. And if there should appear any\ndisagreement betwixt the things he delivers in divers passages, he\nhopes it will be consider'd, that it is not necessary that all the\nthings a Sceptick Proposes, should be consonant; since it being his\nwork to Suggest doubts against the Opinion he questions, it is\nallowable for him to propose two or more severall_ Hypotheses _about\nthe same thing: And to say that it may be accounted for this way, or\nthat way, or the other Way, though these wayes be perhaps inconsistent\namong Themselves. Because it is enough for him, if either of the\nproposed_ Hypotheses _be but as probable as that he calls a question.\nAnd if he proposes many that are Each of them probable, he does the\nmore satisfie his doubts, by making it appear the more difficult to be\nsure, that that which they alwayes differ from is the true. And our_\nCarneades _by holding the Negative, he has this Advantage, that if\namong all the Instances he brings to invalidate all the Vulgar\nDoctrine of those he Disputes with, any one be Irrefragable, that\nalone is sufficient to overthrow a Doctrine which Universally asserts\nwhat he opposes. For, it cannot be true, that all Bodies whatsoever\nthat are reckon'd among the Perfectly mixt Ones, are Compounded of\nsuch a Determinate Number of such or such Ingredients, in case any one\nsuch Body can be produc'd, that is not so compounded; and he hopes\ntoo, that Accurateness will be the less expected from him, because his\nundertaking obliges him to maintain such Opinions in Chymistry, and\nthat chiefly by Chymical Arguments, as are Contrary to the very\nPrinciples of the Chymists; From whose writings it is not Therefore\nlike he should receive any intentionall Assistance, except from some\nPassages of the Bold and Ingenious_ Helmont, _with whom he yet\ndisagrees in many things (which reduce him to explicate Divers\nChymical_ Phaenomena, _according to other Notions;) And of whose\nRatiocinations, not only some seem very Extravagant, but even the Rest\nare not wont to be as considerable as his Experiments. And though it\nbe True indeed, that some_ Aristotelians _have occasionally written\nagainst the Chymical Doctrine he Oppugnes, yet since they have done it\naccording to their Principles, And since our_ Carneades _must as well\noppose their_ Hypothesis _as that of the Spagyrist, he was fain to\nfight his Adversaries with their own Weapons, Those of the\nPeripatetick being Improper, if not hurtfull for a Person of his\nTenents; besides that those_ Aristotelians, _(at Least, those he met\nwith,) that have written against the Chymists, seem to have had so\nlittle Experimental Knowledge in Chymical Matters, that by their\nfrequent Mistakes and unskilfull Way of Oppugning, they have too often\nexpos'd Themselves to the Derision of their Adversaries, for writing\nso Confidently against what they appear so little to understand._\n\n_And Lastly_, Carneades _hopes, he shall doe the Ingenious this Piece\nof service, that by having Thus drawn the Chymists Doctrine out of\ntheir Dark and Smoakie Laboratories, and both brought it into the open\nlight, and shewn the weakness of their Proofs, that have hitherto\nbeen wont to be brought for it, either Judicious Men shall henceforth\nbe allowed calmly and after due information to disbelieve it, or those\nabler Chymists, that are zealous for the reputation of it, will be\noblig'd to speak plainer then hitherto has been done, and maintain it\nby better Experiments and Arguments then Those_ Carneades _hath\nexamin'd: so That he hopes, the Curious will one Way or other Derive\neither satisfaction or instruction from his endeavours. And as he is\nready to make good the profession he makes in the close of his\nDiscourse, he being ready to be better inform'd, so he expects either\nto be indeed inform'd, or to be let alone. For Though if any Truly\nknowing Chymists shall Think fit in a civil and rational way to shew\nhim any truth touching the matter in Dispute That he yet discernes\nnot,_ Carneades _will not refuse either to admit, or to own a\nConviction: yet if any impertinent Person shall, either to get Himself\na Name, or for what other end soever, wilfully or carelesly mistake\nthe State of the Controversie, or the sence of his Arguments, or shall\nrail instead of arguing, as hath been done of Late in Print by divers\nChymists;_[1] _or lastly, shall write against them in a canting way; I\nmean, shall express himself in ambiguous or obscure termes, or argue\nfrom experiments not intelligibly enough Deliver'd_, Carneades\n_professes, That he values his time so much, as not to think the\nanswering such Trifles worth the loss of it._\n\n[Footnote 1: G. and F. and H. and others, in their books against one\nanother.]\n\n_And now having said thus much for_ Carneades, _I hope the Reader will\ngive me leave to say something too for my self._\n\n_And first, if some morose Readers shall find fault with my having\nmade the Interlocutors upon occasion complement with one another, and\nthat I have almost all along written these Dialogues in a stile more\nFashionable then That of meer scholars is wont to be, I hope I shall\nbe excus'd by them that shall consider, that to keep a due_ decorum\n_in the Discourses, it was fit that in a book written by a Gentleman,\nand wherein only Gentlemen are introduc'd as speakers, the Language\nshould be more smooth, and the Expressions more civil than is usual in\nthe more Scholastick way of writing. And indeed, I am not sorry to\nhave this Opportunity of giving an example how to manage even Disputes\nwith Civility; whence perhaps some Readers will be assisted to discern\na Difference betwixt Bluntness of speech and Strength of reason, and\nfind that a man may be a Champion for Truth, without being an Enemy to\nCivility; and may confute an Opinion without railing at Them that hold\nit; To whom he that desires to convince and not to provoke them, must\nmake some amends by his Civility to their Persons, for his severity\nto their mistakes; and must say as little else as he can, to displease\nthem, when he says that they are in an error._\n\n_But perhaps other Readers will be less apt to find fault with the\nCivility of my Disputants, than the Chymists will be, upon the reading\nof some Passages of the following Dialogue, to accuse_ Carneades _of\nAsperity. But if I have made my Sceptick sometimes speak sleightingly\nof the Opinions he opposes, I hope it will not be found that I have\ndone any more, than became the Part he was to act of an Opponent:\nEspecially, if what I have made him say be compar'd with what the\nPrince of the Romane Orators himself makes both great Persons and\nFriends say of one anothers Opinions, in his excellent Dialogues,_ De\nNatura Deorum: _And I shall scarce be suspected of Partiality, in the\ncase, by them that take Notice that there is full as much (if not far\nmore) liberty of sleighting their Adversaries Tenents to be met with\nin the Discourses of those with whom_ Carneades _disputes. Nor needed\nI make the Interlocutors speak otherwise then freely in a Dialogue,\nwherein it was sufficiently intimated, that I meant not to declare my\nown Opinion of the Arguments propos'd, much lesse of the whole\nControversy it self otherwise than as it may by an attentive Reader be\nguess'd at by some Passages of_ Carneades: _(I say, some Passages,\nbecause I make not all that he says, especially in the heat of\nDisputation, mine,) partly in this Discourse, and partly in some other\nDialogues betwixt the same speakers (though they treat not immediately\nof the Elements) which have long layn by me, and expect the\nEntertainment that these present Discourses will meet with. And indeed\nthey will much mistake me, that shall conclude from what I now\npublish, that I am at Defyance with Chymistry, or would make my\nReaders so. I hope the_ Specimina _I have lately publish'd of an\nattempt to shew the usefulness of Chymical Experiments to\nContemplative Philosophers, will give those that shall read them other\nthoughts of me: & I had a design (but wanted opportunity) to publish\nwith these Papers an Essay I have lying by me, the greater part of\nwhich is Apologetical for one sort of Chymists. And at least, as for\nthose that know me, I hope the pain I have taken in the fire will both\nconvince them, that I am far from being an Enemy to the Chymists Art,\n(though I am no friend to many that disgrace it by professing it,) and\nperswade them to believe me when I declare that I distinguish betwixt\nthose Chymists that are either Cheats, or but Laborants, and the true_\nAdepti; _By whom, could I enjoy their Conversation, I would both\nwillingly and thankfully be instructed; especially concerning the\nNature and Generation of Metals: And possibly, those that know how\nlittle I have remitted of my former addictedness to make Chymical\nExperiments, will easily believe, that one of the chief Designes of\nthis Sceptical Discourse was, not so much to discredit Chymistry, as\nto give an occasion and a kind of necessity to the more knowing\nArtists to lay aside a little of their over-great Reservedness, &\neither explicate or prove the Chymical Theory better than ordinary\nChymists have done, or by enriching us with some of their nobler\nsecrets to evince that Their art is able to make amends even for the\ndeficiencies of their Theory: And thus much I shall here make bold to\nadd, that we shall much undervalue Chymistry, if we imagine, that it\ncannot teach us things farr more useful, not only to Physick but to\nPhilosophy, than those that are hitherto known to vulgar Chymists. And\nyet as for inferiour Spagyrists themselves, they have by their labours\ndeserv'd so well of the Common-wealth of Learning, that methinks 'tis\nPity they should ever misse the Truth which they have so industriously\nsought. And though I be no Admirer of the Theorical Part of their Art,\nyet my conjectures will much deceive me, if the Practical Part be not\nmuch more cultivated than hitherto it has been, and do not both employ\nPhilosophy and Philosophers, and help to make men such. Nor would I\nthat have been diverted by other Studies as well as affairs, be\nthought to pretend being a profound Spagyrist, by finding so many\nfaults in the Doctrine wherein the Generality of Chymists scruples not\nto Acquiesce: For besides that 'tis most commonly far easier to frame\nObjections against any propos'd_ Hypothesis, _than to propose an_\nHypothesis _not lyable to Objections (besides this I say) 'tis no such\ngreat matter, if whereas Beginners in Chymistry are commonly at once\nimbu'd with the Theory and Operations of their profession, I who had\nthe good Fortune to Learn the Operations from illiterate Persons,\nupon whose credit I was not Tempted to take up any opinion about them,\nshould consider things with lesse prejudice, and consequently with\nother Eyes than the Generality of Learners; And should be more\ndispos'd to accommodate the_ Phaenomena _that occur'd to me to other\nNotions than to those of the Spagyrists. And having at first\nentertain'd a suspition That the Vulgar Principles were lesse General\nand comprehensive, or lesse considerately Deduc'd from Chymical\nOperations, than was believ'd; it was not uneasie for me both to Take\nnotice of divers_ Phaenomena, _overlook'd by prepossest Persons, that\nseem'd not to suite so well with the_ Hermetical _Doctrine; and, to\ndevise some Experiments likely to furnish me with Objections against\nit, not known to many, that having practis'd Chymistry longer\nperchance then I have yet liv'd, may have far more Experience, Than I,\nof particular processes._\n\n_To conclude, whether the Notions I have propos'd, and the Experiments\nI have communicated, be considerable, or not, I willingly leave others\nto Judge; and This only I shall say for my Self, That I have\nendeavour'd to deliver matters of Fact, so faithfully, that I may as\nwell assist the lesse skilful Readers to examine the Chymical_\nHypothesis, _as provoke the Spagyrical Philosophers to illustrate it:\nwhich if they do, and that either the Chymical opinion, or the\nPeripatetick, or any other Theory of the Elements differing from that\nI am most inclin'd to, shall be intelligibly explicated, and duly\nprov'd to me; what I have hitherto discours'd will not hinder it from\nmaking a Proselyte of a Person that Loves Fluctuation of Judgment\nlittle enough to be willing to be eas'd of it by any thing but\nError._\n\n\n\n\nPHYSIOLOGICAL\n\nCONSIDERATIONS\n\nTouching\n\n_The experiments wont to be employed to evince either the IV\nPeripatetick Elements, or the III Chymical Principles of Mixt Bodies._\n\nPart of the First Dialogue.\n\n\nI Perceive that divers of my Friends have thought it very strange to\nhear me speak so irresolvedly, as I have been wont to do, concerning\nthose things which some take to be the Elements, and others to be the\nPrinciples of all mixt Bodies. But I blush not to acknowledge that I\nmuch lesse scruple to confess that I Doubt, when I do so, then to\nprofess that I Know what I do not: And I should have much stronger\nExpectations then I dare yet entertain, to see Philosophy solidly\nestablish't, if men would more carefully distinguish those things that\nthey know, from those that they ignore or do but think, and then\nexplicate clearly the things they conceive they understand,\nacknowledge ingenuously what it is they ignore, and profess so\ncandidly their Doubts, that the industry of intelligent persons might\nbe set on work to make further enquiries, and the easiness of less\ndiscerning Men might not be impos'd on. But because a more particular\naccompt will probably be expected of my unsatisfyedness not only with\nthe Peripatetick, but with the Chymical Doctrine of the Primitive\nIngredients of Bodies: It may possibly serve to satisfy others of the\nexcusableness of my disatisfaction to peruse the ensuing Relation of\nwhat passed a while since at a meeting of persons of several opinions,\nin a place that need not here be named; where the subject whereof we\nhave been speaking, was amply and variously discours'd of.\n\nIt was on one of the fairest dayes of this Summer that the inquisitive\n_Eleutherius_ came to invite me to make a visit with him to his friend\n_Carneades_. I readily consented to this motion, telling him that if\nhe would but permit me to go first and make an excuse at a place not\nfar off, where I had at that hour appointed to meet, but not about a\nbusiness either of moment, or that could not well admit of a delay, I\nwould presently wait on him, because of my knowing _Carneades_ to be\nso conversant with nature and with Furnaces, and so unconfin'd to\nvulgar Opinions, that he would probably by some ingenious Paradox or\nother, give our mindes at least a pleasing Exercise, and perhaps\nenrich them with some solid instruction. _Eleutherius_ then first\ngoing with me to the place where my Apology was to be made, I\naccompanied him to the lodging of _Carneades_, where when we were\ncome, we were told by the Servants, that he was retired with a couple\nof Friends (whose names they also told us) to one of the Arbours in\nhis Garden, to enjoy under its coole shades a delightful protection\nfrom the yet troublesome heat of the Sun.\n\n_Eleutherius_ being perfectly acquainted with that Garden immediately\nled me to the Arbour, and relying on the intimate familiarity that had\nbeen long cherish'd betwixt him and _Carneades_; in spight of my\nReluctancy to what might look like an intrusion upon his privacy,\ndrawing me by the hand, he abruptly entered the Arbour, where we found\n_Carneades_, _Philoponus_, and _Themistius_, sitting close about a\nlittle round Table, on which besides paper, pen, and inke, there lay\ntwo or three open Books; _Carneades_ appeared not at all troubled at\nthis surprise, but rising from the Table, received his Friend with\nopen looks and armes, and welcoming me also with his wonted freedom\nand civility, invited us to rest our selves by him, which, as soon as\nwe had exchanged with his two Friends (who were ours also) the\ncivilities accustomed on such occasions, we did. And he presently\nafter we had seated our selves, shutting the Books that lay open, and\nturning to us with a smiling countenance seemed ready to begin some\nsuch unconcerning discourse as is wont to pass or rather waste the\ntime in promiscuous companies.\n\nBut _Eleutherius_ guessing at what he meant to do, prevented him by\ntelling him, I perceive _Carneades_ by the books that you have been\nnow shutting, and much more by the posture wherein I found Persons\nqualifi'd [Errata: so qualify'd] to discourse of serious matters; and\nso accustom'd to do it, that you three were before our coming, engag'd\nin some Philosophical conference, which I hope you will either\nprosecute, and allow us to be partakers of, in recompence of the\nfreedome we have us'd in presuming to surprise you, or else give us\nleave to repair the injury we should otherwise do you, by leaving you\nto the freedom we have interrupted, and punishing our selves for our\nboldness by depriving our selves of the happiness of your company.\nWith these last words he and I rose up, as if we meant to be gone, But\n_Carneades_ suddenly laying hold on his arme, and stopping him by it,\nsmileingly told him, We are not so forward to lose good company as you\nseem to imagine; especially since you are pleas'd to desire to be\npresent at what we shall say, about such a Subject as that You found\nus considering. For that, being the number of the Elements,\nPrinciples, or Materiall Ingredients of Bodies, is an enquiry whose\ntruth is of that Importance, and of that Difficulty, that it may as\nwell deserve as require to be searched into by such skilfull\nIndagators of Nature as your selves. And therefore we sent to invite\nthe bold and acute _Leucippus_ to lend us some light by his Atomical\nParadox, upon which we expected such pregnant hints, that 'twas not\nwithout a great deal of trouble that we had lately word brought us\nthat he was not to be found; and we had likewise begg'd the Assistance\nof your presence and thoughts, had not the messenger we employ'd to\n_Leucippus_ inform'd us, that as he was going, he saw you both pass by\ntowards another part of the Town; And this frustrated expectation of\n_Leucippus_ his company, who told me but last night that he would be\nready to give me a meeting where I pleas'd to day, having very long\nsuspended our conference about the freshly mention'd Subject, it was\nso newly begun when you came in, that we shall scarce need to repeat\nany thing to acquaint you with what has pass'd betwixt us before your\narrival, so that I cannot but look upon it as a fortunate Accident\nthat you should come so seasonably, to be not hearers alone, but we\nhope Interlocutors at our conference. For we shall not only allow of\nyour presence at it, but desire your Assistance in it; which I adde\nboth for other reasons, and because though these learned Gentlemen\n(sayes he, turning to his two friends) need not fear to discourse\nbefore any Auditory, provided it be intelligent enough to understand\nthem, yet for my part (continues he with a new smile,) I shall not\ndare to vent my unpremeditated thoughts before two such Criticks,\nunless by promising to take your turnes of speaking, You will allow me\nmine of quarrelling, with what has been said. He and his friends added\ndivers things to convince us that they were both desirous that we\nshould hear them, and resolved against our doing so, unless we allowed\nthem sometimes to hear us. _Elutherius_ [Transcriber's Note:\nEleutherius] after having a while fruitlesly endeavoured to obtain\nleave to be silent promis'd he would not be so alwayes, provided that\nhe were permitted according to the freedom of his Genious and\nPrinciples to side with one of them in the managing of one Argument,\nand, if he saw cause, with his Antagonist, in the Prosecution of\nanother, without being confin'd to stick to any one party or Opinion,\nwhich was after some debate accorded him. But I conscious to my own\nDisability's told them resolutely that _I_ was as much more willing as\nmore fit to be a hearer then a speaker, among such knowing Persons,\nand on so abstruse a Subject. And that therefore I beseeched them\nwithout necessitating me to proclaim my weaknesses, to allow me to\nlessen them by being a silent Auditor of their Discourses: to suffer\nme to be at which I could present them no motive, save that their\ninstructions would make them in me a more intelligent Admirer. I\nadded, that I desir'd not to be idle whilst they were imploy'd, but\nwould if they pleas'd, by writing down in short hand what should be\ndelivered, preserve Discourses that I knew would merit to be lasting.\nAt first _Carneades_ and his two friends utterly rejected this motion;\nand all that my Resoluteness to make use of my ears, not tongue, at\ntheir debates, could do, was to make them acquiesce in the Proposition\nof _Eleutherius_, who thinking himself concern'd, because he brought\nme thither, to afford me some faint assistance, was content that I\nshould register their Arguments, that I might be the better able after\nthe conclusion of their conference to give them my sence upon the\nSubject of it, (The number of Elements or Principles:) which he\npromis'd I should do at the end of the present Debates, if time would\npermit, or else at our next meeting. And this being by him undertaken\nin my name, though without my consent, the company would by no means\nreceive my Protestation against it, but casting, all at once, their\neyes on _Carneades_, they did by that and their unanimous silence,\ninvite him to begin; which (after a short pause, during which he\nturn'd himself to _Eleutherius_ and me) he did in this manner.\n\nNotwithstanding the subtile reasonings I have met with in the books of\nthe Peripateticks, and the pretty experiments that have been shew'd me\nin the Laboratories of Chymists, I am of so diffident, or dull a\nNature, as to think that if neither of them can bring more cogent\narguments to evince the truth of their assertion then are wont to be\nbrought; a Man may rationally enough retain some doubts concerning the\nvery number of those materiall Ingredients of mixt bodies, which some\nwould have us call Elements, and others principles. Indeed when I\nconsidered that the Tenents concerning the Elements are as\nconsiderable amongst the Doctrines of natural Philosophy as the\nElements themselves are among the bodies of the Universe, I expected\nto find those Opinions solidly establish'd, upon which so many others\nare superstructed. But when I took the pains impartially to examine\nthe bodies themselves that are said to result from the blended\nElements, and to torture them into a confession of their constituent\nPrinciples, I was quickly induc'd to think that the number of the\nElements has been contended about by Philosophers with more\nearnestness then success. This unsatisfiedness of mine has been much\nwonder'd at, by these two Gentlemen (at which words he pointed at\n_Themistius_ and _Philoponus_) who though they differ almost as much\nbetwixt themselves about the question we are to consider, as I do from\neither of them, yet they both agree very well in this, that there is a\ndeterminate number of such ingredients as I was just now speaking of,\nand that what that number is, I say not, may be, (for what may not\nsuch as they perswade?) but is wont to be clearly enough demonstrated\nboth by Reason and Experience. This has occasion'd our present\nConference. For our Discourse this afternoon, having fallen from one\nsubject to another, and at length setl'd on this, they proffer'd to\ndemonstrate to me, each of them the truth of his opinion, out of both\nthe Topicks that I have freshly nam'd. But on the former (that of\nReason strictly so taken) we declin'd insisting at the present, lest\nwe should not have time enough before supper to go thorough the\nReasons and Experiments too. The latter of which we unanimously\nthought the most requisite to be seriously examin'd. I must desire you\nthen to take notice Gentlemen (continued _Carneades_) that my present\nbusiness doth not oblige me so to declare my own opinion on the\nSubject in question, as to assert or deny the truth either of the\nPeripatetick, or the Chymical Doctrine concerning the number of the\nElements, but only to shew you that neither of these Doctrines hath\nbeen satisfactorily proved by the arguments commonly alledged on its\nbehalfe. So that if I really discern (as perhaps I think I do) that\nthere may be a more rational account then ordinary, given of one of\nthese opinions, I am left free to declare my self of it,\nnotwithstanding my present engagement, it being obvious to all your\nobservation, that a solid truth may be generally maintained by no\nother, then incompetent Arguments. And to this Declaration I hope it\nwill be needless to add, that my task obliges me not to answer the\nArguments that may be drawn either for _Themistius_ or _Philoponus's_\nOpinion from the Topick of reason, as opposed to experiments; since\n'tis these only that I am to examine and not all these neither, but\nsuch of them alone as either of them shall think fit to insist on, and\nas have hitherto been wont to be brought either to prove that 'tis\nthe four Peripatetick Elements, or that 'tis the three Chymical\nPrinciples that all compounded bodies consist of. These things (adds\n_Carneades_) I thought my self obliged to premise, partly lest you\nshould do these Gentlemen (pointing at _Themistius_ and _Philoponus_,\nand smiling on them) the injury of measuring their parts by the\narguments they are ready to propose, the lawes of our Conference\nconfining them to make use of those that the vulgar of Philosophers\n(for even of them there is a vulgar) has drawn up to their hands; and\npartly, that you should not condemn me of presumption for disputing\nagainst persons over whom I can hope for no advantage, that _I_ must\nnot derive from the nature, or rules of our controversy, wherein I\nhave but a negative to defend, and wherein too I am like on several\noccasions to have the Assistance of one of my disagreeing adversaries\nagainst the other.\n\n_Philoponus_ and _Themistius_ soon returned this complement with\ncivilities of the like nature, in which _Eleutherius_ perceiving them\nengaged, to prevent the further loss of that time of which they were\nnot like to have very much to spare, he minded them that their\npresent businesse was not to exchange complements, but Arguments: and\nthen addressing his speech to _Carneades_, I esteem it no small\nhappinesse (saies he) that I am come here so luckily this Evening. For\nI have been long disquieted with Doubts concerning this very subject\nwhich you are now ready to debate. And since a Question of this\nimportance is to be now discussed by persons that maintain such\nvariety of opinions concerning it, and are both so able to enquire\nafter truth, and so ready to embrace it by whomsoever and on what\noccasion soever it is presented them; I cannot but promise my self\nthat I shall before we part either lose my Doubts or the hopes of ever\nfinding them resolved; _Eleutherius_ paused not here; but to prevent\ntheir answer, added almost in the same breath; and I am not a little\npleased to find that you are resolved on this occasion to insist\nrather on Experiments then Syllogismes. For I, and no doubt You, have\nlong observed, that those Dialectical subtleties, that the Schoolmen\ntoo often employ about Physiological Mysteries, are wont much more to\ndeclare the wit of him that uses them, then increase the knowledge or\nremove the doubts of sober lovers of truth. And such captious\nsubtleties do indeed often puzzle and sometimes silence men, but\nrarely satisfy them. Being like the tricks of Jugglers, whereby men\ndoubt not but they are cheated, though oftentimes they cannot declare\nby what slights they are imposed on. And therefore I think you have\ndone very wisely to make it your businesse to consider the _Phaenomena_\nrelating to the present Question, which have been afforded by\nexperiments, especially since it might seem injurious to our senses,\nby whose mediation we acquire so much of the knowledge we have of\nthings corporal, to have recourse to far-fetched and abstracted\nRatiocination [Errata: Ratiocinations], to know what are the sensible\ningredients of those sensible things that we daily see and handle, and\nare supposed to have the liberty to untwist (if I may so speak) into\nthe primitive bodies they consist of. He annexed that he wished\ntherefore they would no longer delay his expected satisfaction, if\nthey had not, as he feared they had, forgotten something preparatory\nto their debate; and that was to lay down what should be all along\nunderstood by the word Principle or Element. _Carneades_ thank'd him\nfor his admonition, but told him that they had not been unmindful of\nso requisite a thing. But that being Gentlemen and very far from the\nlitigious humour of loving to wrangle about words or terms or notions\nas empty; they had before his coming in, readily agreed promiscuously\nto use when they pleased, Elements and Principles as terms equivalent:\nand to understand both by the one and the other, those primitive and\nsimple Bodies of which the mixt ones are said to be composed, and into\nwhich they are ultimately resolved. And upon the same account (he\nadded) we agreed to discourse of the opinions to be debated, as we\nhave found them maintained by the Generality of the assertors of the\nfour Elements of the one party, and of those that receive the three\nPrinciples on the other, without tying our selves to enquire\nscrupulously what notion either _Aristotle_ or _Paracelsus_, or this\nor that Interpreter, or follower of either of those great persons,\nframed of Elements or Principles; our design being to examine, not\nwhat these or those writers thought or taught, but what we find to be\nthe obvious and most general opinion of those, who are willing to be\naccounted Favourers of the Peripatetick or Chymical Doctrine,\nconcerning this subject.\n\nI see not (saies _Eleutherius_) why you might not immediately begin to\nargue, if you were but agreed which of your two friendly Adversaries\nshall be first heard. And it being quickly resolv'd on that\n_Themistius_ should first propose the Proofs for his Opinion, because\nit was the antienter, and the more general, he made not the company\nexpect long before he thus addressed himself to _Eleutherius_, as to\nthe Person least interessed in the dispute.\n\nIf you have taken sufficient notice of the late Confession which was\nmade by _Carneades_, and which (though his Civility dressed it up in\ncomplementall Expressions) was exacted of him by his Justice, I\nsuppose You will be easily made sensible, that I engage in this\nControversie with great and peculiar Disadvantages, besides those\nwhich his Parts and my Personal Disabilities would bring to any other\ncause to be maintained by me against him. For he justly apprehending\nthe force of truth, though speaking by no better a tongue then mine,\nhas made it the chief condition of our Duell, that I should lay aside\nthe best Weapons I have, and those I can best handle; Whereas if I\nwere allowed the freedom, in pleading for the four Elements, to employ\nthe Arguments suggested to me by Reason to demonstrate them, I should\nalmost as little doubt of making You a Proselyte to those unsever'd\nTeachers, Truth and _Aristotle_, as I do of your Candour and your\nJudgment. And I hope you will however consider, that that great\nFavorite and Interpreter of Nature, _Aristotle_, who was (as his\n_Organum_ witnesses) the greatest Master of Logick that ever liv'd,\ndisclaim'd the course taken by other petty Philosophers (Antient and\nModern) who not attending the Coherence and Consequences of their\nOpinions, are more sollicitous to make each particular Opinion\nplausible independently upon the the [Transcriber's Note: extra \"the\"\nin original] rest, then to frame them all so, as not only to be\nconsistent together, but to support each other. For that great Man in\nhis vast and comprehensive Intellect, so fram'd each of his Notions,\nthat being curiously adapted into one Systeme, they need not each of\nthem any other defence then that which their mutuall Coherence gives\nthem: As 'tis in an Arch, where each single stone, which if sever'd\nfrom the rest would be perhaps defenceless, is sufficiently secur'd by\nthe solidity and entireness of the whole Fabrick of which it is a\npart. How justly this may be apply'd to the present case, I could\neasily shew You, if I were permitted to declare to You, how harmonious\n_Aristotles_ Doctrine of the Elements is with his other Principles of\nPhilosophy; and how rationally he has deduc'd their number from that\nof the combinations of the four first Qualities from the kinds of\nsimple Motion belonging to simple bodies, and from I know not how many\nother Principles and _Phaenomena_ of Nature, which so conspire with his\nDoctrine of the Elements, that they mutually strengthen and support\neach other. But since 'tis forbidden me to insist on Reflections of\nthis kind, I must proceed to tell You, that though the Assertors of\nthe four Elements value Reason so highly, and are furnish'd with\nArguments enough drawn from thence, to be satisfi'd that there must be\nfour Elements, though no Man had ever yet made any sensible tryal to\ndiscover their Number, yet they are not destitute of Experience to\nsatisfie others that are wont to be more sway'd by their senses then\ntheir Reason. And I shall proceed to consider the testimony of\nExperience, when I shall have first advertis'd You, that if Men were\nas perfectly rational as 'tis to be wish'd they were, this sensible\nway of Probation would be as needless as 'tis wont to be imperfect.\nFor it is much more high and Philosophical to discover things _a\npriore_, then _a posteriore_. And therefore the Peripateticks have not\nbeen very sollicitous to gather Experiments to prove their Doctrines,\ncontenting themselves with a few only, to satisfie those that are not\ncapable of a Nobler Conviction. And indeed they employ Experiments\nrather to illustrate then to demonstrate their Doctrines, as\nAstronomers use Sphaeres of pastboard, to descend to the capacities of\nsuch as must be taught by their senses, for want of being arriv'd to a\nclear apprehension of purely Mathematical Notions and Truths. I speak\nthus _Eleutherius_ (adds _Themistius_) only to do right to Reason, and\nnot out of Diffidence of the Experimental proof I am to alledge. For\nthough I shall name but one, yet it is such a one as will make all\nother appear as needless as it self will be found Satisfactory. For if\nYou but consider a piece of green-Wood burning in a Chimney, You will\nreadily discern in the disbanded parts of it the four Elements, of\nwhich we teach It and other mixt bodies to be compos'd. The fire\ndiscovers it self in the flame by its own light; the smoke by\nascending to the top of the chimney, and there readily vanishing into\nair, like a River losing it self in the Sea, sufficiently manifests to\nwhat Element it belongs and gladly returnes. The water in its own form\nboyling and hissing at the ends of the burning Wood betrayes it self\nto more then one of our senses; and the ashes by their weight, their\nfiriness, and their dryness, put it past doubt that they belong to the\nElement of Earth. If I spoke (continues _Themistius_) to less knowing\nPersons, I would perhaps make some Excuse for building upon such an\nobvious and easie _Analysis_, but 'twould be, I fear, injurious, not\nto think such an Apology needless to You, who are too judicious either\nto think it necessary that Experiments to prove obvious truths should\nbe farr fetch'd, or to wonder that among so many mixt Bodies that are\ncompounded of the four Elements, some of them should upon a slight\n_Analysis_ manifestly exhibite the Ingredients they consist of.\nEspecially since it is very agreeable to the Goodness of Nature, to\ndisclose, even in some of the most obvious Experiments that Men make,\na Truth so important, and so requisite to be taken notice of by them.\nBesides that our _Analysis_ by how much the more obvious we make it,\nby so much the more suittable it will be to the Nature of that\nDoctrine which 'tis alledged to prove, which being as clear and\nintelligible to the Understanding as obvious to the sense, tis no\nmarvail the learned part of Mankind should so long and so generally\nimbrace it. For this Doctrine is very different from the whimseys of\n_Chymists_ and other Modern Innovators, of whose _Hypotheses_ we may\nobserve, as Naturalists do of less perfect Animals, that as they are\nhastily form'd, so they are commonly short liv'd. For so these, as\nthey are often fram'd in one week, are perhaps thought fit to be\nlaughed at the next; and being built perchance but upon two or three\nExperiments are destroyed by a third or fourth, whereas the doctrine\nof the four Elements was fram'd by _Aristotle_ after he had leasurely\nconsidered those Theories of former Philosophers, which are now with\ngreat applause revived, as discovered by these latter ages; And had so\njudiciously detected and supplyed the Errors and defects of former\n_Hypotheses_ concerning the Elements, that his Doctrine of them has\nbeen ever since deservedly embraced by the letter'd part of Mankind:\nAll the Philosophers that preceded him having in their several ages\ncontributed to the compleatness of this Doctrine, as those of\nsucceeding times have acquiesc'd in it. Nor has an _Hypothesis_ so\ndeliberately and maturely established been called in Question till in\nthe last Century _Paracelsus_ and some few other sooty Empiricks,\nrather then (as they are fain to call themselves) Philosophers, having\ntheir eyes darken'd, and their Brains troubl'd with the smoke of their\nown Furnaces, began to rail at the Peripatetick Doctrine, which they\nwere too illiterate to understand, and to tell the credulous World,\nthat they could see but three Ingredients in mixt Bodies; which to\ngain themselves the repute of Inventors, they endeavoured to disguise\nby calling them, instead of Earth, and Fire, and Vapour, Salt,\nSulphur, and Mercury; to which they gave the canting title of\nHypostatical Principles: but when they came to describe them, they\nshewed how little they understood what they meant by them, by\ndisagreeing as much from one another, as from the truth they agreed in\nopposing: For they deliver their _Hypotheses_ as darkly as their\nProcesses; and 'tis almost as impossible for any sober Man to find\ntheir meaning, as 'tis for them to find their Elixir. And indeed\nnothing has spread their Philosophy, but their great Brags and\nundertakings; notwithstanding all which, (sayes _Themistius_ smiling)\nI scarce know any thing they have performed worth wondering at, save\nthat they have been able to draw _Philoponus_ to their Party, and to\nengage him to the Defence of an unintelligible _Hypothesis_, who\nknowes so well as he does, that Principles ought to be like Diamonds,\nas well very clear, as perfectly solid.\n\n_Themistius_ having after these last words declared by his silence,\nthat he had finished his Discourse, _Carneades_ addressing himself, as\nhis Adversary had done, to _Eleutherius_, returned this Answer to it,\nI hop'd for [Errata: for a] Demonstration, but I perceive _Themistius_\nhopes to put me off with a Harangue, wherein he cannot have given me a\ngreater Opinion of his Parts, then he has given me Distrust for his\n_Hypothesis_, since for it even a Man of such Learning can bring no\nbetter Arguments. The Rhetorical part of his Discourse, though it make\nnot the least part of it, I shall say nothing to, designing to examine\nonly the Argumentative part, and leaving it to _Philoponus_ to answer\nthose passages wherein either _Paracelsus_ or _Chymists_ are\nconcern'd: I shall observe to You, that in what he has said besides,\nhe makes it his Business to do these two things. The one to propose\nand make out an Experiment to demonstrate the common Opinion about the\nfour Elements; And the other, to insinuate divers things which he\nthinks may repair the weakness of his Argument, from Experience, and\nupon other Accounts bring some credit to the otherwise defenceless\nDoctrine he maintains.\n\nTo begin then with his Experiment of the burning Wood, it seems to me\nto be obnoxious to not a few considerable Exceptions.\n\nAnd first, if I would now deal rigidly with my Adversary, I might here\nmake a great Question of the very way of Probation which he and others\nemploy, without the least scruple, to evince, that the Bodies commonly\ncall'd mixt, are made up of Earth, Air, Water, and Fire, which they\nare pleas'd also to call Elements; namely that upon the suppos'd\n_Analysis_ made by the fire, of the former sort of _Concretes_, there\nare wont to emerge Bodies resembling those which they take for the\nElements. For not to Anticipate here what I foresee I shall have\noccasion to insist on, when I come to discourse with _Philoponus_\nconcerning the right that fire has to pass for the proper and\nUniversal Instrument of Analysing mixt Bodies, not to Anticipate that,\nI say, if I were dispos'd to wrangle, I might alledge, that by\n_Themistius_ his Experiment it would appear rather that those he calls\nElements, are made of those he calls mixt Bodies, then mix'd Bodies of\nthe Elements. For in _Themistius's_ Analyz'd Wood, and in other Bodies\ndissipated and alter'd by the fire, it appears, and he confesses, that\nwhich he takes for Elementary Fire and Water, are made out of the\nConcrete; but it appears not that the Concrete was made up of Fire and\nWater. Nor has either He, or any Man, for ought I know, of his\nperswasion, yet prov'd that nothing can be obtained from a Body by the\nfire that was not _Pre-existent_ in it.\n\nAt this unexpected objection, not only _Themistius_, but the rest of\nthe company appear'd not a little surpriz'd; but after a while\n_Philoponus_ conceiving his opinion, as well as that of _Aristotle_,\nconcern'd in that Objection, You cannot sure (sayes he to\n_Carneades_) propose this Difficulty; not to call it Cavill, otherwise\nthen as an Exercise of wit, and not as laying any weight upon it. For\nhow can that be separated from a thing that was not existent in it.\nWhen, for instance, a Refiner mingles Gold and Lead, and exposing this\nMixture upon a Cuppell to the violence of the fire, thereby separates\nit into pure and refulgent Gold and Lead (which driven off together\nwith the Dross of the Gold is thence call'd _Lithargyrium Auri_) can\nany man doubt that sees these two so differing substances separated\nfrom the Mass, that they were existent in it before it was committed\nto the fire.\n\nI should (replies _Carneades_) allow your Argument to prove something,\nif, as Men see the Refiners commonly take before hand both Lead and\nGold to make the Mass you speak of, so we did see Nature pull down a\nparcell of the Element of Fire, that is fancy'd to be plac'd I know\nnot how many thousand Leagues off, contiguous to the Orb of the Moon,\nand to blend it with a quantity of each of the three other Elements,\nto compose every mixt Body, upon whose Resolution the Fire presents\nus with Fire, and Earth, and the rest. And let me add, _Philoponus_,\nthat to make your Reasoning cogent, it must be first prov'd, that the\nfire do's only take the Elementary Ingredients asunder, without\notherwise altering them. For else 'tis obvious, that Bodies may afford\nsubstances which were not pre-existent in them; as Flesh too long kept\nproduces Magots, and old Cheese Mites, which I suppose you will not\naffirm to be Ingredients of those Bodies. Now that fire do's not\nalwayes barely separate the Elementary parts, but sometimes at least\nalter also the Ingredients of Bodies, if I did not expect ere long a\nbetter occasion to prove it, I might make probable out of your very\nInstance, wherein there is nothing Elementary separated by the great\nviolence of the Refiners fire: the Gold and Lead which are the two\nIngredients separated upon the _Analysis_ being confessedly yet\nperfectly mixt Bodies, and the Litharge being Lead indeed; but such\nLead as is differing in consistence and other Qualities from what it\nwas before. To which I must add that I have sometimes seen, and so\nquestionlesse have you much oftener, some parcells of Glasse adhering\nto the Test or Cuppel, and this Glass though Emergent as well as the\nGold or Litharge upon your Analysis, you will not I hope allow to have\nbeen a third Ingredient of the Mass out of which the fire produc'd it.\n\nBoth _Philoponus_ and _Themistius_ were about to reply, when\n_Eleutherius_ apprehending that the Prosecution of this Dispute would\ntake up time, which might be better employ'd, thought fit to prevent\nthem by saying to _Carneades_: You made at least half a Promise, when\nyou first propos'd this Objection, that you would not (now at least)\ninsist on it, nor indeed does it seem to be of absolute necessity to\nyour cause, that you should. For though you should grant that there\nare Elements, it would not follow that there must be precisely four.\nAnd therefore I hope you will proceed to acquaint us with your other\nand more considerable Objections against _Themistius's_ Opinion,\nespecially since there is so great a Disproportion in Bulke betwixt\nthe Earth, Water and Air, on the one part, and those little parcells\nof resembling substances, that the fire separates from _Concretes_ on\nthe other part, that I can scarce think that you are serious, when to\nlose no advantage against your Adversary, you seem to deny it to be\nrational, to conclude these great simple Bodies to be the Elements,\nand not the Products of compounded ones.\n\nWhat you alledge (replies _Carneades_) of the Vastness of the Earth\nand Water, has long since made me willing to allow them to be the\ngreatest and chief Masses of Matter to be met with here below: But I\nthink I could shew You, if You would give me leave, that this will\nprove only that the Elements, as You call them, are the chief Bodies\nthat make up the neighbouring part of the World, but not that they are\nsuch Ingredients as every mixt Body must consist of. But since You\nchallenge me of something of a Promise, though it be not an entire\none, Yet I shall willingly perform it. And indeed I intended not when\nI first mention'd this Objection, to insist on it at present against\n_Themistius_, (as I plainly intimated in my way of proposing it:)\nbeing only desirous to let you see, that though I discern'd my\nAdvantages, yet I was willing to forego some of them, rather then\nappear a rigid Adversary of a Cause so weak, that it may with safety\nbe favourably dealt with. But I must here profess, and desire You to\ntake Notice of it, that though I pass on to another Argument, it is\nnot because I think this first invalid. For You will find in the\nProgress of our Dispute, that I had some reason to question the very\nway of Probation imploy'd both by Peripateticks and Chymists, to\nevince the being and number of the Elements. For that there are such,\nand that they are wont to be separated by the Analysis made by Fire,\nis indeed taken for granted by both Parties, but has not (for ought I\nknow) been so much as plausibly attempted to be proved by either.\nHoping then that when we come to that part of our Debate, wherein\nConsiderations relating to this Matter are to be treated of, you will\nremember what I have now said, and that I do rather for a while\nsuppose, then absolutely grant the truth of what I have question'd, I\nwill proceed to another Objection.\n\nAnd hereupon _Eleutherius_ having promis'd him not to be unmindfull,\nwhen time should serve, of what he had declar'd.\n\nI consider then (sayes _Carneades_) in the next place, that there are\ndivers Bodies out of which _Themistius_ will not prove in haste, that\nthere can be so many Elements as four extracted by the Fire. And I\nshould perchance trouble him if I should ask him what Peripatetick can\nshew us, (I say not, all the four Elements, for that would be too\nrigid a Question, but) any one of them extracted out of Gold by any\ndegree of Fire whatsoever. Nor is Gold the only Bodie in Nature that\nwould puzzle an _Aristotelian_, that is no more [Errata: (that is no\nmore)] to analyze by the Fire into Elementary Bodies, since, for ought\nI have yet observ'd, both Silver and calcin'd _Venetian_ Talck, and\nsome other Concretes, not necessary here to be nam'd, are so fixt,\nthat to reduce any of them into four Heterogeneous Substances has\nhitherto prov'd a Task much too hard, not only for the Disciples of\n_Aristotle_, but those of _Vulcan_, at least, whilst the latter have\nemploy'd only Fire to make the _Analysis_.\n\nThe next Argument (continues _Carneades_) that I shall urge against\n_Themistius's_ Opinion shall be this, That as there are divers Bodies\nwhose _Analysis_ by Fire cannot reduce them into so many Heterogeneous\nSubstances or Ingregredients [Transcriber's Note: Ingredients] as\nfour, so there are others which may be reduc'd into more, as the Blood\n(and divers other parts) of Men and other Animals, which yield when\nanalyz'd five distinct Substances, Phlegme, Spirit, Oyle, Salt and\nEarth, as Experience has shewn us in distilling Mans Blood,\nHarts-Horns, and divers other Bodies that belonging to the\nAnimal-Kingdom abound with not uneasily sequestrable Salt.\n\n\n\n\nTHE\n\nSCEPTICAL CHYMIST:\n\nOR\n\nCHYMICO-PHYSICAL\n\nDoubts & Paradoxes,\n\nTouching the\n\nEXPERIMENTS\n\nWHEREBY\n\nVULGAR SPAGYRISTS\n\nAre wont to Endeavour to Evince their\n\nSALT, SULPHUR\n\nAND\n\nMERCURY,\n\nTO BE\n\nThe True Principles of Things.\n\n\n_Utinam jam tenerentur omnia, & inoperta ac confessa Veritas esset!\nNihil ex Decretis mutaremus. Nunc Veritatem cum eis qui docent,\nquaerimus._ Sen.\n\n\n_LONDON,_\n\nPrinted for _J. Crooke_, and are to be sold at the Ship in St. _Pauls_\nChurch-Yard. 1661.\n\n\n\n\nTHE\n\nSCEPTICAL CHYMIST.\n\n_The First Part._\n\n\nI am (sayes _Carneades_) so unwilling to deny _Eleutherius_ any thing,\nthat though, before the rest of the Company I am resolv'd to make good\nthe part I have undertaken of a Sceptick; yet I shall readily, since\nyou will have it so, lay aside for a while the Person of an Adversary\nto the Peripateticks and Chymists; and before I acquaint you with my\nObjections against their Opinions, acknowledge to you what may be\n(whether truly or not) tollerably enough added, in favour of a certain\nnumber of Principles of mixt Bodies, to that grand and known Argument\nfrom the _Analysis_ of compound Bodies, which I may possibly\nhereafter be able to confute.\n\nAnd that you may the more easily Examine, and the better Judge of what\nI have to say, I shall cast it into a pretty number of distinct\nPropositions, to which I shall not premise any thing; because I take\nit for granted, that you need not be advertis'd, that much of what I\nam to deliver, whether for or against a determinate number of\nIngredients of mix'd Bodies, may be indifferently apply'd to the four\nPeripatetick Elements, and the three Chymical Principles, though\ndivers of my Objections will more peculiarly belong to these last\nnam'd, because the Chymical _Hypothesis_ seeming to be much more\ncountenanc'd by Experience then the other, it will be expedient to\ninsist chiefly upon the disproving of that; especially since most of\nthe Arguments that are imploy'd against it, may, by a little\nvariation, be made to conclude, at least as strongly against the less\nplausible, _Aristotelian_ Doctrine.\n\nTo proceed then to my Propositions, I shall begin with this. That\n\n[Sidenote: Propos. I.]\n\n_It seems not absurd to conceive that at the first Production of mixt\nBodies, the Universal Matter whereof they among other Parts of the\nUniverse consisted, was actually divided into little Particles of\nseveral sizes and shapes variously mov'd._\n\nThis (sayes _Carneades_) I suppose you will easily enough allow. For\nbesides that which happens in the Generation, Corruption, Nutrition,\nand wasting of Bodies, that which we discover partly by our\n_Microscopes_ of the extream littlenesse of even the scarce sensible\nparts of Concretes; and partly by the Chymical Resolutions of mixt\nBodies, and by divers other Operations of Spagyrical Fires upon them,\nseems sufficiently to manifest their consisting of parts very minute\nand of differing Figures. And that there does also intervene a various\nlocal Motion of such small Bodies, will scarce be denied; whether we\nchuse to grant the Origine of Concretions assign'd by _Epicurus_, or\nthat related by _Moses_. For the first, as you well know, supposes not\nonly all mixt Bodies, but all others to be produc'd by the various\nand casual occursions of Atomes, moving themselves to and fro by an\ninternal Principle in the Immense or rather Infinite _Vacuum_. And as\nfor the inspir'd Historian, He, informing us that the great and Wise\nAuthor of Things did not immediately create Plants, Beasts, Birds, &c.\nbut produc'd them out of those portions of the pre-existent, though\ncreated, Matter, that he calls Water and Earth, allows us to conceive,\nthat the constituent Particles whereof these new Concretes were to\nconsist, were variously moved in order to their being connected into\nthe Bodies they were, by their various Coalitions and Textures, to\ncompose.\n\nBut (continues _Carneades_) presuming that the first Proposition needs\nnot be longer insisted on, I will pass on to the second, and tell you\nthat\n\n[Sidenote: Propos. II.]\n\n_Neither is it impossible that of these minute Particles divers of the\nsmallest and neighbouring ones were here and there associated into\nminute Masses or Clusters, and did by their Coalitions constitute\ngreat store of such little primary Concretions or Masses as were not\neasily dissipable into such Particles as compos'd them._\n\nTo what may be deduc'd, in favour of this Assertion, from the Nature\nof the Thing it self, I will add something out of Experience, which\nthough I have not known it used to such a purpose, seems to me more\nfairly to make out that there May be Elementary Bodies, then the more\nquestionable Experiments of Peripateticks and Chymists prove that\nthere Are such. I consider then that Gold will mix and be colliquated\nnot only with Silver, Copper, Tin and Lead, but with Antimony,\n_Regulus Martis_ and many other Minerals, with which it will compose\nBodies very differing both from Gold, and the other Ingredients of the\nresulting Concretes. And the same Gold will also by common _Aqua\nRegis_, and (I speak it knowingly) by divers other _Menstruums_ be\nreduc'd into a seeming Liquor, in so much that the Corpuscles of Gold\nwill, with those of the _Menstruum_, pass through Cap-Paper, and with\nthem also coagulate into a Crystalline Salt. And I have further try'd,\nthat with a small quantity of a certain Saline Substance I prepar'd,\nI can easily enough sublime Gold into the form of red Crystalls of a\nconsiderable length; and many other wayes may Gold be disguis'd, and\nhelp to constitute Bodies of very differing Natures both from It and\nfrom one another, and neverthelesse be afterward reduc'd to the\nself-same Numerical, Yellow, Fixt, Ponderous and Malleable Gold it was\nbefore its commixture. Nor is it only the fixedst of Metals, but the\nmost fugitive, that I may employ in favour of our Proposition: for\nQuicksilver will with divers Metals compose an _Amalgam_, with divers\n_Menstruums_ it seems to be turn'd into a Liquor, with _Aqua fortis_\nwill be brought into either a red or white Powder or precipitate, with\nOyl of Vitriol into a pale Yellow one, with Sulphur it will compose a\nblood-red and volatile Cinaber, with some Saline Bodies it will ascend\nin form of a Salt which will be dissoluble in water; with _Regulus_ of\nAntimony and Silver I have seen it sublim'd into a kinde of Crystals,\nwith another Mixture I reduc'd it into a malleable Body, into a hard\nand brittle Substance by another: And some there are who affirm, that\nby proper Additaments they can reduce Quicksilver into Oyl, nay into\nGlass, to mention no more. And yet out of all these exotick Compounds,\nwe may recover the very same running Mercury that was the main\nIngredient of them, and was so disguis'd in them. Now the Reason\n(proceeds _Carneades_) that I have represented these things concerning\nGold and Quicksilver, is, That it may not appear absurd to conceive,\nthat such little primary Masses or Clusters, as our Proposition\nmentions, may remain undissipated, notwithstanding their entring into\nthe composition of various Concretions, since the Corpuscle of Gold\nand Mercury, though they be not primary Concretions of the most minute\nParticles or matter, but confessedly mixt Bodies, are able to concurre\nplentifully to the composition of several very differing Bodies,\nwithout losing their own Nature or Texture, or having their cohaesion\nviolated by the divorce of their associated parts or Ingredients.\n\nGive me leave to add (sayes _Eleutherius_) on this occasion, to what\nyou now observ'd, that as confidently as some Chymists, and other\nmodern Innovators in Philosophy are wont to object against the\nPeripateticks, That from the mixture of their four Elements there\ncould arise but an inconsiderable variety of compound Bodies; yet if\nthe _Aristotelians_ were but half as well vers'd in the works of\nNature as they are in the Writings of their Master, the propos'd\nObjection would not so calmly triumph, as for want of Experiments they\nare fain to suffer it to do. For if we assigne to the Corpuscles,\nwhereof each Element consists, a peculiar size and shape, it may\neasily enough be manifested, That such differingly figur'd Corpuscles\nmay be mingled in such various Proportions, and may be connected so\nmany several wayes, that an almost incredible number of variously\nqualified Concretes may be compos'd of them. Especially since the\nCorpuscles of one Element may barely, by being associated among\nthemselves, make up little Masses of differing size and figure from\ntheir constituent parts: and since also to the strict union of such\nminute Bodies there seems oftentimes nothing requisite, besides the\nbare Contact of a great part of their Surfaces. And how great a\nvariety of _Phaenomena_ the same matter, without the addition of any\nother, and only several ways dispos'd or contexed, is able to exhibit,\nmay partly appear by the multitude of differing Engins which by the\ncontrivances of skilful Mechanitians, and the dexterity of expert\nWorkmen, may be made of Iron alone. But in our present case being\nallow'd to deduce compound Bodies from four very differently qualified\nsorts of matter, he who shall but consider what you freshly took\nnotice of concerning the new Concretes resulting from the mixture of\nincorporated Minerals, will scarce doubt but that the four Elements\nmannag'd by Natures Skill may afford a multitude of differing\nCompounds.\n\nI am thus far of your minde (sayes _Carneades_) that the\n_Aristotelians_ might with probability deduce a much greater number of\ncompound Bodies from the mixture of their four Elements, than\naccording to their present _Hypothesis_ they can, if instead of vainly\nattempting to deduce the variety and properties of all mixt Bodies\nfrom the Combinations and Temperaments of the four Elements, as they\nare (among them) endowd with the four first Qualities, they had\nendeavoured to do it by the Bulk and Figure of the smallest parts of\nthose supposed Elements. For from these more Catholick and Fruitfull\nAccidents of the Elementary matter may spring a great variety of\nTextures, upon whose Account a multitude of compound Bodies may very\nmuch differ from one another. And what I now observe touching the four\nPeripatetick Elements, may be also applyed, _mutatis mutandis_, (as\nthey speak) to the Chymical Principles. But (to take notice of that by\nthe by) both the one and the other, must, I fear, call in to their\nassistance something that is not Elementary, to excite or regulate the\nmotion of the parts of the matter, and dispose them after the manner\nrequisite to the Constitution of particular Concretes. For that\notherwise they are like to give us but a very imperfect account of the\nOrigine of very many mixt Bodies, It would, I think, be no hard matter\nto perswade you, if it would not spend time, and were no Digression,\nto examine, what they are wont to alledge of the Origine of the\nTextures and Qualities of mixt Bodies, from a certain substantial\nForm, whose Origination they leave more obscure than what it is\nassum'd to explicate.\n\nBut to proceed to a new Proposition.\n\n[Sidenote: Propos. III.]\n\n_I shall not peremptorily deny, that from most of such mixt Bodies as\npartake either of Animal or Vegetable Nature, there may by the Help of\nthe Fire, be actually obtain'd a determinate number (whether Three,\nFour or Five, or fewer or more) of Substances, worthy of differing\nDenominations._\n\nOf the Experiments that induce me to make this Concession, I am like\nto have occasion enough to mention several in the prosecution of my\nDiscourse. And therefore, that I may not hereafter be oblig'd to\ntrouble You and my self with needless Repetitions, I shall now only\ndesire you to take notice of such Experiments, when they shall be\nmention'd, and in your thoughts referre them hither.\n\nTo these three Concessions I have but this Fourth to add, That\n\n[Sidenote: Propos. IV.]\n\n_It may likewise be granted, that those distinct Substances, which\nConcretes generally either afford or are made up of, may without very\nmuch Inconvenience be call'd the Elements or Principles of them._\n\nWhen I said, _without very much Inconvenience_, I had in my Thoughts\nthat sober Admonition of _Galen_, _Cum de re constat, de verbis non\nest Litigandum_. And therefore also I scruple not to say _Elements_ or\n_Principles_, partly because the Chymists are wont to call the\nIngredients of mixt Bodies, _Principles_, as the _Aristotelians_ name\nthem _Elements_; I would here exclude neither. And, partly, because it\nseems doubtfull whether the same Ingredients may not be call'd\n_Principles_? as not being compounded of any more primary Bodies: and\n_Elements_, in regard that all mix'd Bodies are compounded of them.\nBut I thought it requisite to limit my Concession by premising the\nwords, _very much_, to the word _Inconvenience_, because that though\nthe Inconvenience of calling the distinct Substances, mention'd in the\nProposition _Elements_ or _Principles_, be not very great, yet that\nit is an Impropriety of Speech, and consequently in a matter of this\nmoment not to be altogether overlook'd, You will perhaps think, as\nwell as I, by that time you shall have heard the following part of my\nDiscourse, by which you will best discern what Construction to put\nupon the former Propositions, and how far they may be look'd upon, as\nthings that I concede as true, and how far as things I only represent\nas specious enough to be fit to be consider'd.\n\nAnd now _Eleutherius_ (continues _Carneades_) I must resume the person\nof a Sceptick, and as such, propose some part of what may be either\ndislik't, or at least doubted of in the common _Hypothesis_ of the\nChymists: which if I examine with a little the more freedom, I hope I\nneed not desire you (a Person to whom I have the Happinesse of being\nso well known) to look upon it as something more suitable to the\nEmployment whereto the Company has, for this Meeting, doom'd me; then\neither to my Humour or my Custom.\n\nNow though I might present you many things against the Vulgar Chymical\nOpinion of the three Principles, and the Experiments wont to be\nalledg'd as Demonstrations of it, yet those I shall at present offer\nyou may be conveniently enough comprehended in four Capital\nConsiderations; touching all which I shall only premise this in\ngeneral, That since it is not my present Task so much to assert an\n_Hypothesis_ of my own, as to give an Account wherefore I suspect the\nTruth of that of the Chymists, it ought not to be expected that all my\nObjections should be of the most cogent sort, since it is reason\nenough to Doubt of a propos'd Opinion, that there appears no cogent\nReason for it.\n\nTo come then to the Objections themselves; I consider in the first\nplace, That notwithstanding what common Chymists have prov'd or\ntaught, it may reasonably enough be Doubted, how far, and in what\nsence, Fire ought to be esteem'd the genuine and universal Instrument\nof analyzing mixt Bodies.\n\nThis Doubt, you may remember, was formerly mention'd, but so\ntransiently discours'd of, that it will now be fit to insist upon it;\nAnd manifest that it was not so inconsiderately propos'd as our\nAdversaries then imagin'd.\n\nBut, before I enter any farther into this Disquisition, I cannot but\nhere take notice, that it were to be wish'd, our Chymists had clearly\ninform'd us what kinde of Division of Bodies by Fire must determine\nthe number of the Elements: For it is nothing near so easy as many\nseem to think, to determine distinctly the Effects of Heat, as I could\neasily manifest, if I had leasure to shew you how much the Operations\nof Fire may be diversify'd by Circumstances. But not wholly to pass by\na matter of this Importance, I will first take notice to you, that\n_Guajacum_ (for Instance) burnt with an open Fire in a Chimney, is\nsequestred into Ashes and Soot, whereas the same Wood distill'd in a\nRetort does yield far other Heterogeneities, (to use the _Helmontian_\nexpression) and is resolv'd into Oyl, Spirit, Vinager, Water and\nCharcoal; the last of which to be reduc'd into Ashes, requires the\nbeing farther calcin'd then it can be in a close Vessel: Besides\nhaving kindled Amber, and held a clean Silver Spoon, or some other\nConcave and smooth Vessel over the Smoak of its Flame, I observ'd the\nSoot into which that Fume condens'd, to be very differing from any\nthing that I had observ'd to proceed from the steam of Amber purposely\n(for that is not usual) distilled _per se_ in close Vessels. Thus\nhaving, for Tryals sake, kindled Camphire, and catcht the Smoak that\ncopiously ascended out of the Flame, it condens'd into a Black and\nunctuous Soot, which would not have been guess'd by the Smell or other\nProperties to have proceeded from Camphire: whereas having (as I shall\notherwhere more fully declare) expos'd a quantity of that Fugitive\nConcrete to a gentle heat in a close Glass-Vessel, it sublim'd up\nwithout seeming to have lost any thing of its whiteness, or its\nNature, both which it retain'd, though afterwards I so encreased the\nFire as to bring it to Fusion. And, besides Camphire, there are divers\nother Bodies (that I elsewhere name) in which the heat in close\nVessels is not wont to make any separation of Heterogeneities, but\nonly a comminution of Parts, those that rise first being Homogeneal\nwith the others, though subdivided into smaller Particles: whence\nSublimations have been stiled, _The Pestles of the Chymists_. But not\nhere to mention what I elsewhere take notice of, concerning common\nBrimstone once or twice sublim'd, that expos'd to a moderate Fire in\nSubliming-Pots, it rises all into dry, and almost tastless, Flowers;\nWhereas being expos'd to a naked Fire it affords store of a Saline and\nFretting Liquor: Not to mention this, I say, I will further observe to\nyou, that as it is considerable in the _Analysis_ of mixt Bodies,\nwhether the Fire act on them when they are expos'd to the open Air, or\nshut up in close Vessels, so is the degree of Fire by which the\n_Analysis_ is attempted of no small moment. For a milde _Balneum_ will\nsever unfermented Blood (for Instance) but into Phlegme and _Caput\nmortuum_, the later whereof (which I have sometimes had) hard,\nbrittle, and of divers Colours, (transparent almost like\nTortoise-shell) press'd by a good Fire in a Retort yields a Spirit, an\nOyl or two, and a volatile Salt, besides a [Errata: another] _Caput\nmortuum_. It may be also pertinent to our present Designe, to take\nnotice of what happens in the making and distilling of Sope; for by\none degree of Fire the Salt, the Water and the Oyl or Grease, whereof\nthat factitious Concrete is made up, being boyl'd up together are\neasily brought to mingle and incorporate into one Mass; but by another\nand further degree of Heat the same Mass may be again divided into an\noleagenous, an aqueous, a Saline, and an Earthy part. And so we may\nobserve that impure Silver and Lead being expos'd together to a\nmoderate Fire, will thereby be colliquated into one Mass, and mingle\n_per minima_, as they speak, whereas a much vehementer Fire will drive\nor carry off the baser Metals (I mean the Lead, and the Copper or\nother Alloy) from the Silver, though not, for ought appears, separate\nthem from one another. Besides, when a Vegetable abounding in fixt\nSalt is analyz'd by a naked Fire, as one degree of Heat will reduce it\ninto Ashes, (as the Chymists themselves teach us) so, by only a\nfurther degree of Fire, those Ashes may be vitrified and turn'd into\nGlass. I will not stay to examine how far a meere Chymist might on\nthis occasion demand, If it be lawful for an _Aristotelian_ to make\nAshes, (which he mistakes for meere Earth) pass for an Element,\nbecause by one degree of Fire it may be produc'd, why a Chymist may\nnot upon the like Principle argue, that Glass is one of the Elements\nof many Bodies, because that also may be obtain'd from them, barely by\nthe Fire? I will not, I say, lose time to examine this, but observe,\nthat by a Method of applying the Fire, such similar Bodies may be\nobtain'd from a Concrete, as Chymists have not been able to separate;\neither by barely burning it in an open Fire, or by barely distilling\nit in close Vessels. For to me it seems very considerable, and I\nwonder that men have taken so little notice of it, that I have not by\nany of the common wayes of Distillation in close Vessels, seen any\nseparation made of such a volatile Salt as is afforded us by Wood,\nwhen that is first by an open Fire divided into Ashes and Soot, and\nthat Soot is afterwards plac'd in a strong Retort, and compell'd by an\nurgent Fire to part with its Spirit, Oyl and Salt; for though I dare\nnot peremptorily deny, that in the Liquors of _Guajacum_ and other\nWoods distill'd in Retorts after the common manner, there may be\nSaline parts, which by reason of the Analogy may pretend to the name\nof some kinde of volatile Salts; yet questionless there is a great\ndisparity betwixt such Salts and that which we have sometimes obtain'd\nupon the first Distillation of Soot (though for the most part it has\nnot been separated from the first or second Rectification, and\nsometimes not till the third) For we could never yet see separated\nfrom Woods analyz'd only the vulgar way in close vessels any volatile\nSalt in a dry and Saline form, as that of Soot, which we have often\nhad very Crystalline and Geometrically figur'd. And then, whereas the\nSaline parts of the Spirits of _Guajacum_, &c. appear upon\ndistillation sluggish enough, the Salt of Soot seems to be one of the\nmost volatile Bodies in all Nature; and if it be well made will\nreadily ascend with the milde heat of a Furnace, warm'd only by the\nsingle Wieck of a Lamp, to the top of the highest Glass Vessels that\nare commonly made use of for Distillation: and besides all this, the\ntaste and smell of the Salt of Soot are exceeding differing from those\nof the Spirits of _Guajacum_, &c. and the former not only smells and\ntastes much less like a vegetable Salt, than like that of Harts-horn,\nand other Animal Concretes; but in divers other Properties seems more\nof Kinne to the Family of Animals, than to that of vegetable Salts, as\nI may elsewhere (God permitting) have an occasion more particularly to\ndeclare. I might likewise by some other Examples manifest, That the\nChymists, to have dealt clearly, ought to have more explicitly and\nparticularly declar'd by what Degree of Fire, and in what manner of\nApplication of it, they would have us Judge a Division made by the\nFire to be a true _Analysis_ into their Principles, and the\nProductions of it to deserve the name of Elementary Bodies. But it is\ntime that I proceed to mention the particular Reasons that incline me\nto Doubt, whether the Fire be the true and universal Analyzer of mixt\nBodies; of which Reasons what has been already objected may pass for\none.\n\nIn the next place I observe, That there are some mixt Bodies from\nwhich it has not been yet made appear, that any degree of Fire can\nseparate either Salt or Sulphur or Mercury, much less all the Three.\nThe most obvious Instance of this Truth is Gold, which is a Body so\nfix'd, and wherein the Elementary Ingredients (if it have any) are so\nfirmly united to each other, that we finde not in the operations\nwherein Gold is expos'd to the Fire, how violent soever, that it does\ndiscernably so much as lose of its fixednesse or weight, so far is it\nfrom being dissipated into those Principles, whereof one at least is\nacknowledged to be Fugitive enough; and so justly did the Spagyricall\nPoet somewhere exclaim,\n\n     _Cuncta adeo miris illic compagibus harent._\n\nAnd I must not omit on this occasion to mention to you, _Eleutherius_,\nthe memorable Experiment that I remember I met with in _Gasto\nClaveus_,[2] who, though a Lawyer by Profession, seems to have had no\nsmall Curiosity and Experience in Chymical affairs: He relates then,\nthat having put into one small Earthen Vessel an Ounce of the most\npure Gold, and into another the like weight of pure Silver, he plac'd\nthem both in that part of a Glass-house Furnace wherein the Workmen\nkeep their Metal, (as our English Artificers call their Liquid Glass)\ncontinually melted, and that having there kept both the Gold and the\nSilver in constant Fusion for two Moneths together, he afterwards took\nthem out of the Furnace and the Vessels, and weighing both of them\nagain, found that the Silver had not lost above a 12th part of its\nweight, but the Gold had not of his lost any thing at all. And though\nour Author endeavours to give us of this a Scholastick Reason, which I\nsuppose you would be as little satisfied with, as I was when I read\nit; yet for the matter of Fact, which will serve our present turne, he\nassures us, that though it be strange, yet Experience it self taught\nit him to be most true.\n\n[Footnote 2: _Gasto Claveus_ Apolog. Argur. & Chrysopera.]\n\nAnd though there be not perhaps any other Body to be found so\nperfectly fix'd as Gold, yet there are divers others so fix'd or\ncompos'd, at least of so strictly united parts, that I have not yet\nobserv'd the Fire to separate from them any one of the Chymists\nPrinciples. I need not tell you what Complaints the more Candid and\nJudicious of the Chymists themselves are wont to make of those\nBoasters that confidently pretend, that they have extracted the Salt\nor Sulphur of Quicksilver, when they have disguis'd it by Additaments,\nwherewith it resembles the Concretes whose Names are given it;\nwhereas by a skilful and rigid _Examen_, it may be easily enough\nstript of its Disguises, and made to appear again in the pristine form\nof running Mercury. The pretended Salts and Sulphurs being so far from\nbeing Elementary parts extracted out of the Bodie of Mercurie, that\nthey are rather (to borrow a terme of the Grammarians) De-compound\nBodies, made up of the whole Metal and the _Menstruum_ or other\nAdditaments imploy'd to disguise it. And as for Silver, I never could\nsee any degree of Fire make it part with any of its three Principles.\nAnd though the Experiment lately mentioned from _Claveus_ may beget a\nSuspition that Silver may be dissipated by Fire, provided it be\nextreamly violent and very lasting: yet it will not necessarily\nfollow, that because the Fire was able at length to make the Silver\nlose a little of its weight, it was therefore able to dissipate it\ninto its Principles. For first I might alledge that I have observ'd\nlittle Grains of Silver to lie hid in the small Cavities (perhaps\nglas'd over by a vitrifying heat) in Crucibles, wherein Silver has\nbeen long kept in Fusion, whence some Goldsmiths of my Acquaintance\nmake a Benefit by grinding such Crucibles to powder, to recover out of\nthem the latent particles of Silver. And hence I might argue, that\nperhaps _Claveus_ was mistaken, and imagin'd that Silver to have been\ndriven away by the Fire, that indeed lay in minute parts hid in his\nCrucible, in whose pores so small a quantity as he mist of so\nponderous a Bodie might very well lie conceal'd.\n\nBut Secondly, admitting that some parts of the Silver were driven away\nby the violence of the Fire, what proof is there that it was either\nthe Salt, the Sulphur, or the Mercury of the Metal, and not rather a\npart of it homogeneous to what remain'd? For besides, that the Silver\nthat was left seem'd not sensibly alter'd, which probably would have\nappear'd, had so much of any one of its Principles been separated from\nit: We finde in other Mineral Bodies of a less permanent nature than\nSilver, that the Fire may divide them into such minute parts, as to be\nable to carry them away with its self, without at all destroying their\nNature. Thus we see that in the refining of Silver, the Lead that is\nmix'd with it (to carry away the Copper or other ignoble Mineral that\nembases the Silver) will, if it be let alone, in time evaporate away\nupon the Test; but if (as is most usual amongst those that refine\ngreat quantities of Metals together) the Lead be blown off from the\nSilver by Bellowes, that which would else have gone away in the Form\nof unheeded steams, will in great part be collected not far from the\nSilver, in the Form of a darkish Powder or Calx, which, because it is\nblown off from Silver, they call Litharge of Silver. And thus\n_Agricola_[3] in divers places informs us, when Copper, or the Oare of\nit is colliquated by the violence of the Fire with _Cadmia_, the\nSparks that in great multitudes do fly upwards do, some of them, stick\nto the vaulted Roofs of the Furnaces, in the form of little and (for\nthe most part) White Bubbles, which therefore the Greeks, and, in\nImitation of them, our Drugsters call _Pompholix_: and others more\nheavy partly adhere to the sides of the Furnace, and partly\n(especially if the Covers be not kept upon the Pots) fall to the\nGround, and by reason of their Ashy Colour as well as Weight were\ncalled by the same Greeks [Greek: spodos], which, I need not tell you,\nin their Language signifies Ashes. I might add, that I have not found\nthat from Venetian Talck (I say Venetian, because I have found other\nkinds of that Mineral more open) from the _Lapis Ossifragus_, (which\nthe Shops call _Ostiocolla_) from _Muscovia_ Glass, from pure and\nFusible Sand, to mention now no other Concretes; those of my\nAcquaintance that have try'd have been able by the Fire to separate\nany one of the Hypostatical Principles, which you will the less\nscruple to believe, if you consider that Glass may be made by the bare\nColliquation of the Salt and Earth remaining in the Ashes of a burnt\nPlant, and that yet common Glass, once made, does so far resist the\nviolence of the Fire, that most Chymists think it a Body more\nundestroyable then Gold it self. For if the Artificer can so firmly\nunite such comparative gross Particles as those of Earth and Salt that\nmake up common Ashes, into a Body indissoluble by Fire; why may not\nNature associate in divers Bodies the more minute Elementary\nCorpuscles she has at hand too firmly to let them be separable by the\nFire? And on this Occasion, _Eleutherius_, give me leave to mention to\nyou two or three sleight Experiments, which will, I hope, be found\nmore pertinent to our present Discourse, than at first perhaps they\nwill appear. The first is, that, having (for Tryals sake) put a\nquantity of that Fugitive Concrete, Camphire, into a Glass Vessel, and\nplac'd it in a gentle Heat, I found it (not leaving behinde, according\nto my Estimate, not so much as one Grain) to sublime to the Top of the\nVessel into Flowers: which in Whiteness, Smell, &c. seem'd not to\ndiffer from the Camphire it self. Another Experiment is that of\n_Helmont_, who in several places affirms, That a Coal kept in a Glass\nexactly clos'd will never be calcin'd to Ashes, though kept never so\nlong in a strong Fire. To countenance which I shall tell you this\nTryal of my own, That having sometimes distilled some Woods, as\nparticularly Box, whilst our _Caput mortuum_ remain'd in the Retort,\nit continued black like Charcoal, though the Retort were Earthen, and\nkept red-hot in a vehement Fire; but as soon as ever it was brought\nout of the candent Vessel into the open Air, the burning Coals did\nhastily degenerate or fall asunder, without the Assistance of any new\nCalcination, into pure white Ashes. And to these two I shall add but\nthis obvious and known Observation, that common Sulphur (if it be pure\nand freed from its Vinager) being leasurely sublim'd in close Vessels,\nrises into dry Flowers, which may be presently melted into a Bodie of\nthe same Nature with that which afforded them. Though if Brimstone be\nburnt in the open Air it gives, you know, a penetrating Fume, which\nbeing caught in a Glass-Bell condenses into that acid Liquor called\nOyl of Sulphur _per Campanam_. The use I would make of these\nExperiments collated with what I lately told you out of _Agricola_ is\nthis, That even among the Bodies that are not fixt, there are divers\nof such a Texture, that it will be hard to make it appear, how the\nFire, as Chymists are wont to imploy it, can resolve them into\nElementary Substances. For some Bodies being of such a Texture that\nthe Fire can drive them into the cooler and less hot part of the\nVessels wherein they are included, and if need be, remove them from\nplace to place to fly the greatest heat, more easily than it can\ndivorce their Elements (especially without the Assistance of the Air)\nwe see that our Chymists cannot Analyze them in close Vessels, and of\nother compound Bodies the open Fire can as little separate the\nElements. For what can a naked Fire do to Analyze a mixt Bodie, if its\ncomponent Principles be so minute, and so strictly united, that the\nCorpuscles of it need less heat to carry them up, than is requisite to\ndivide them into their Principles. So that of some Bodies the Fire\ncannot in close Vessels make any _Analysis_ at all, and others will in\nthe open Air fly away in the Forms of Flowers or Liquors, before the\nHeat can prove able to divide them into their Principles. And this may\nhold, whether the various similar parts of a Concrete be combin'd by\nNature or by Art; For in factitious _Sal Armoniack_ we finde the\ncommon and the Urinous Salts so well mingled, that both in the open\nFire, and in subliming Vessels they rise together as one Salt, which\nseems in such Vessels irresoluble by Fire alone. For I can shew you\n_Sal Armoniack_ which after the ninth Sublimation does still retain\nits compounded Nature. And indeed I scarce know any one Mineral, from\nwhich by Fire alone Chymists are wont to sever any Substance simple\nenough to deserve the name of an Element or Principle. For though out\nof native Cinnaber they distill Quicksilver, and though from many of\nthose Stones that the Ancients called _Pyrites_ they sublime\nBrimstone, yet both that Quicksilver and this Sulphur being very often\nthe same with the common Minerals that are sold in the Shops under\nthose names, are themselves too much compounded Bodies to pass for the\nElements of such. And thus much, _Eleutherius_, for the Second\nArgument that belongs to my First Consideration; the others I shall\nthe lesse insist on, because I have dwelt so long upon this.\n\n[Footnote 3: _Agricola_ de Natura Fossil. Lib. 9. Cap. 11. & 12.]\n\nProceed we then in the next place to consider, That there are divers\nSeparations to be made by other means, which either cannot at all, or\nelse cannot so well be made by the Fire alone. When Gold and Silver\nare melted into one Mass, it would lay a great Obligation upon\nRefiners and Goldsmiths to teach them the Art of separating them by\nthe Fire, without the trouble and charge they are fain to be at to\nsever them. Whereas they may be very easily parted by the Affusion of\nSpirit of Nitre or _Aqua fortis_ (which the French therefore call _Eau\nde Depart_:) so likewise the Metalline part of Vitriol will not be so\neasily and conveniently separated from the Saline part even by a\nviolent Fire, as by the Affusion of certain Alkalizate Salts in a\nliquid Form upon the Solution of Vitriol made in common water. For\nthereby the acid Salt of the Vitriol, leaving the Copper it had\ncorroded to joyn with the added Salts, the Metalline part will be\nprecipitated to the bottom almost like Mud. And that I may not give\nInstances only in De-compound Bodies, I will add a not useless one of\nanother kinde. Not only Chymists have not been able (for ought is\nvulgarly known) by Fire alone to separate true Sulphur from Antimony;\nbut though you may finde in their Books many plausible Processes of\nExtracting it, yet he that shall make as many fruitlesse Tryals as I\nhave done to obtain it by, most of them will, I suppose, be easily\nperswaded, that the Productions of such Processes are Antimonial\nSulphurs rather in Name than Nature. But though Antimony sublim'd by\nits self is reduc'd but to a volatile Powder, or Antimonial Flowers,\nof a compounded Nature like the Mineral that affords them: yet I\nremember that some years ago I sublim'd out of Antimony a Sulphur, and\nthat in greater plenty then ever I saw obtain'd from that Mineral, by\na Method which I shall therefore acquaint you with, because Chymists\nseem not to have taken notice of what Importance such Experiments may\nbe in the Indagation of the Nature, and especially of the Number of\nthe Elements. Having then purposely for Tryals sake digested eight\nOunces of good and well powder'd Antimony with twelve Ounces of Oyl of\nVitriol in a well stopt Glas-Vessel for about six or seven Weeks; and\nhaving caus'd the Mass (grown hard and brittle) to be distill'd in a\nRetort plac'd in Sand, with a strong Fire; we found the Antimony to be\nso opened, or alter'd by the _Menstruum_ wherewith it had been\ndigested, That whereas crude Antimony, forc'd up by the Fire, arises\nonly in Flowers, our Antimony thus handled afforded us partly in the\nReceiver, and partly in the Neck and at the Top of the Retort, about\nan Ounce of Sulphur, yellow and brittle like common Brimstone, and of\nso Sulphureous a smell, that upon the unluting the Vessels it infected\nthe Room with a scarce supportable stink. And this Sulphur, besides\nthe Colour and Smell, had the perfect Inflamability of common\nBrimstone, and would immediately kindle (at the Flame of a Candle) and\nburn blew like it. And though it seem'd that the long digestion\nwherein our Antimony and _Menstruum_ were detain'd, did conduce to the\nbetter unlocking of the Mineral, yet if you have not the leasure to\nmake so long a Digestion, you may by incorporating with powder'd\nAntimony a convenient Quantity of Oyl of Vitriol, and committing them\nimmediately to Distillation, obtain a little Sulphur like unto the\ncommon one, and more combustible than perhaps you will at first take\nnotice of. For I have observ'd, that though (after its being first\nkindled) the Flame would sometimes go out too soon of its self, if the\nsame Lump of Sulphur were held again to the Flame of a Candle, it\nwould be rekindled and burn a pretty while, not only after the\nsecond, but after the third or fourth accension. You, to whom I think\nI shewed my way of discovering something of Sulphureous in Oyl of\nVitriol, may perchance suspect, _Eleutherius_, either that this\nSubstance was some Venereal Sulphur that lay hid in that Liquor, and\nwas by this operation only reduc'd into a manifest Body; or else that\nit was a compound of the unctuous parts of the Antimony, and the\nSaline ones of the Vitriol, in regard that (as _Gunther_[4] informs\nus) divers learned men would have Sulphur to be nothing but a mixture\nmade in the Bowels of the Earth of Vitriolate Spirits and a certain\ncombustible Substance. But the Quantity of Sulphur we obtain'd by\nDigestion was much too great to have been latent in the Oyl of\nVitriol. And that Vitriolate Spirits are not necessary to the\nConstitution of such a Sulphur as ours, I could easily manifest, if I\nwould acquaint you with the several wayes by which I have obtain'd,\nthough not in such plenty, a Sulphur of Antimony, colour'd and\ncombustible like common Brimstone. And though I am not now minded to\ndiscover them, yet I shall tell you, that to satisfie some Ingenious\nMen, that distill'd Vitriolate Spirits are not necessary to the\nobtaining of such a Sulphur as we have been considering, I did by the\nbare distillation of only Spirit of Nitre, from its weight of crude\nAntimony separate, in a short time, a yellow and very inflamable\nSulphur, which, for ought I know, deserves as much the name of an\nElement, as any thing that Chymists are wont to separate from any\nMineral by the Fire. I could perhaps tell you of other Operations upon\nAntimony, whereby That may be extracted from it, which cannot be\nforc'd out of it by the Fire; but I shall reserve them for a fitter\nOpportunity, and only annex at present this sleight, but not\nimpertinent Experiment. That whereas I lately observed to you, that\nthe Urinous and common Salts whereof _Sal Armoniack_ consists,\nremain'd unsever'd by the Fire in many successive Sublimations, they\nmay be easily separated, and partly without any Fire at all, by\npouring upon the Concrete finely powder'd, a Solution of Salt of\nTartar, or of the Salt of Wood-Ashes; for upon your diligently mixing\nof these you will finde your Nose invaded with a very strong smell of\nUrine, and perhaps too your Eyes forc'd to water by the same subtle\nand piercing Body that produces the stink; both these effects\nproceeding from hence, that by the Alcalizate Salt, the Sea Salt that\nenter'd the composition of the _Sal Armoniack_ is mortify'd and made\nmore fixt, and thereby a divorce is made between it and the volatile\nUrinous Salt, which being at once set at liberty, and put into motion,\nbegins presently to fly away, and to offend the Nostrils and Eyes it\nmeets with by the way. And if the operation of these Salts be in\nconvenient Glasses promoted by warmth, though but by that of a Bath,\nthe ascending Steams may easily be caught and reduc'd into a penetrant\nSpirit, abounding with a Salt, which I have sometimes found to be\nseparable in a Crystalline Form. I might add to these Instances, that\nwhereas Sublimate, consisting, as you know, of Salts & Quicksilver\ncombin'd and carried up together by Heat, may be Sublim'd, I know not\nhow often, by a like degree of Fire, without suffering any divorce of\nthe component Bodies, the Mercury may be easily sever'd from the\nadhering Salts, if the Sublimate be distill'd from Salt of Tartar,\nQuick Lime, or such Alcalizate Bodies. But I will rather observe to\nyou, _Eleutherius_, what divers ingenious men have thought somewhat\nstrange; that by such an Additament that seems but only to promote the\nSeparation, there may be easily obtain'd from a Concrete that by the\nFire alone is easily divisible into all the Elements that Vegetables\nare suppos'd to consist of, such a similar Substance as differs in\nmany respects from them all, and consequently has by many of the most\nIntelligent Chymists been denied to be contain'd in the mixt Body. For\nI know a way, and have practis'd it, whereby common Tartar, without\nthe addition of any thing that is not perfectly a Mineral except\nSalt-petre, may by one Distillation in an Earthen Retort be made to\nafford good store of real Salt, readily dissoluble in water, which I\nfound to be neither acid, nor of the smell of Tartar, and to be almost\nas volatile as Spirit of Wine it self, and to be indeed of so\ndiffering a Nature from all that is wont to be separated by Fire from\nTartar, that divers Learned Men, with whom I discours'd of it, could\nhardly be brought to beleeve, that so fugitive a Salt could be\nafforded by Tartar, till I assur'd it them upon my own Knowledge. And\nif I did not think you apt to suspect me to be rather too backward\nthan too forward to credit or affirm unlikely things, I could convince\nyou by what I have yet lying by me of that anomalous Salt.\n\n[Footnote 4: Lib. 1. Observat. Cap. 6.]\n\nThe Fourth thing that I shall alledge to countenance my first\nConsideration is, That the Fire even when it divides a Body into\nSubstances of divers Consistences, does not most commonly analyze it\ninto Hypostatical Principles, but only disposes its parts into new\nTextures, and thereby produces Concretes of a new indeed, but yet of a\ncompound Nature. This Argument it will be requisite for me to\nprosecute so fully hereafter, that I hope you will then confess that\n'tis not for want of good Proofs that I desire leave to suspend my\nProofs till the _Series_ of my Discourse shall make it more proper and\nseasonable to propose them.\n\nIt may be further alledg'd on the behalf of my First Consideration,\nThat some such distinct Substances may be obtain'd from some\nConcretes without Fire, as deserve no less the name of Elementary,\nthan many that Chymists extort by the Violence of the Fire.\n\nWe see that the Inflamable Spirit, or as the Chymists esteem it, the\nSulphur of Wine, may not only be separated from it by the gentle heat\nof a Bath, but may be distill'd either by the help of the Sun-Beams,\nor even of a Dunghill, being indeed of so Fugitive a Nature, that it\nis not easy to keep it from flying away, even without the Application\nof external heat. I have likewise observ'd that a Vessel full of Urine\nbeing plac'd in a Dunghill, the Putrefaction is wont after some weeks\nso to open the Body, that the parts disbanding the Saline Spirit, will\nwithin no very long time, if the Vessel be not stopt, fly away of it\nself; Insomuch that from such Urine I have been able to distill little\nor nothing else than a nauseous Phlegme, instead of the active and\npiercing Salt and Spirit that it would have afforded, when first\nexpos'd to the Fire, if the Vessel had been carefully stopt.\n\nAnd this leads me to consider in the Fifth place, That it will be very\nhard to prove, that there can no other Body or way be given which\nwill as well as the Fire divide Concretes into several homogeneous\nSubstances, which may consequently be call'd their Elements or\nPrinciples, as well as those separated or produc'd by the Fire. For\nsince we have lately seen, that Nature can successefully employ other\nInstruments than the Fire to separate distinct Substances from mixt\nBodies, how know we, but that Nature has made, or Art may make, some\nsuch Substance as may be a fit Instrument to Analyze mixt Bodies, or\nthat some such Method may be found by Humane Industry or Luck, by\nwhose means compound Bodies may be resolv'd into other Substances,\nthan such as they are wont to be divided into by the Fire. And why the\nProducts of such an _Analysis_ may not as justly be call'd the\ncomponent Principles of the Bodies that afford them, it will not be\neasy to shew, especially since I shall hereafter make it evident, that\nthe Substances which Chymists are wont to call the Salts, and\nSulphurs, and Mercuries of Bodies, are not so pure and Elementary as\nthey presume, and as their _Hypothesis_ requires. And this may\ntherefore be the more freely press'd upon the Chymists, because\nneither the _Paracelsians_, nor the _Helmontians_ can reject it\nwithout apparent Injury to their respective Masters. For _Helmont_\ndo's more than once Inform his Readers, that both _Paracelsus_ and\nHimself were Possessors of the famous Liquor, _Alkahest_, which for\nits great power in resolving Bodies irresoluble by Vulgar Fires, he\nsomewhere seems to call _Ignis Gehennae_. To this Liquor he ascribes,\n(and that in great part upon his own Experience) such wonders, that if\nwe suppose them all true, I am so much the more a Friend to Knowledge\nthan to Wealth, that I should think the _Alkahest_ a nobler and more\ndesireable Secret than the Philosophers Stone it self. Of this\nUniversal Dissolvent he relates, That having digested with it for a\ncompetent time a piece of Oaken Charcoal, it was thereby reduc'd into\na couple of new and distinct Liquors, discriminated from each other by\ntheir Colour and Situation, and that the whole body of the Coal was\nreduc'd into those Liquors, both of them separable from his Immortal\n_Menstruum_, which remain'd as fit for such Operations as before. And\nhe moreover tells us in divers places of his Writings, that by this\npowerful, and unwearied Agent, he could dissolve Metals, Marchasites,\nStones, Vegetable and Animal Bodies of what kinde soever, and even\nGlass it self (first reduc'd to powder,) and in a word, all kinds of\nmixt Bodies in the World into their several similar Substances,\nwithout any Residence or _Caput mortuum_. And lastly, we may gather\nthis further from his Informations, That the homogeneous Substances\nobtainable from compound Bodies by his piercing Liquor, were\noftentimes different enough both as to Number and as to Nature, from\nthose into which the same Bodies are wont to be divided by common\nFire. Of which I shall need in this place to mention no other proof,\nthen that whereas we know that in our common _Analysis_ of a mixt\nBody, there remains a terrestrial and very fixt Substance, oftentimes\nassociated with a Salt as fixt; Our Author tells us, that by his way\nhe could Distill over all Concretes without any _Caput mortuum_, and\nconsequently could make those parts of the Concrete volatile, which in\nthe Vulgar _Analysis_ would have been fixt. So that if our Chymists\nwill not reject the solemn and repeated Testimony of a Person, who\ncannot but be acknowledg'd for one of the greatest Spagyrists that\nthey can boast of, they must not deny that there is to be found in\nNature another Agent able to Analyze compound Bodies less violently,\nand both more genuinely and more universally than the Fire. And for my\nown part, though I cannot but say on this Occasion what (you know) our\nFriend Mr. _Boyle_ is wont to say, when he is askt his Opinion of any\nstrange Experiment; _That He that hath seen it hath more Reason to\nbeleeve it, than He that hath not_; yet I have found _Helmont_ so\nfaithful a Writer, even in divers of his improbable Experiments (I\nalwayes except that Extravagant Treatise _De Magnetica Vulnerum\nCuratione_, which some of his Friends affirm to have been first\npublish'd by his Enemies) that I think it somewhat harsh to give him\nthe Lye, especially to what he delivers upon his own proper Tryal. And\nI have heard from very credible Eye-witnesses some things, and seen\nsome others my self, which argue so strongly, that a circulated Salt,\nor a _Menstruum_ (such as it may be) may by being abstracted from\ncompound Bodies, whether Mineral, Animal, or Vegetable, leave them\nmore unlockt than a wary Naturalist would easily beleeve, that I dare\nnot confidently measure the Power of Nature and Art by that of the\n_Menstruums_, and other Instruments that eminent Chymists themselves\nare as yet wont to Empoly [Errata: employ] about the Analyzing of\nBodies; nor Deny that a _Menstruum_ may at least from this or that\nparticular Concrete obtain some apparently similar Substance,\ndiffering from any obtainable from the same Body by any degree or\nmanner of Application of the Fire. And I am the more backward to deny\nperemptorily, that there may be such Openers of compound Bodies,\nbecause among the Experiments that make me speak thus warily, there\nwanted not some in which it appear'd not, that one of the Substances\nnot separable by common Fires and _Menstruums_ could retain any thing\nof the Salt by which the separation was made.\n\nAnd here, _Eleutherius_, (sayes _Carneades_) I should conclude as much\nof my Discourse as belongs to the first Consideration I propos'd, but\nthat I foresee, that what I have delivered will appear liable to two\nsuch specious Objections, that I cannot safely proceed any further\ntill I have examin'd them.\n\nAnd first, one sort of Opposers will be forward to tell me, That they\ndo not pretend by Fire alone to separate out of all compound Bodies\ntheir _Hypostatical_ Principles; it being sufficient that the Fire\ndivides them into such, though afterwards they employ other Bodies to\ncollect the similar parts of the Compound; as 'tis known, that though\nthey make use of water to collect the Saline parts of Ashes from the\nTerrestrial wherewith they are blended, yet it is the Fire only that\nIncinerates Bodies, and reduces the fix'd part of them into the Salt\nand Earth, whereof Ashes are made up. This Objection is not, I\nconfess, inconsiderable, and I might in great part allow of it,\nwithout granting it to make against me, if I would content my self to\nanswer, that it is not against those that make it that I have been\ndisputing, but against those Vulgar Chymists, who themselves believe,\nand would fain make others do so, That the Fire is not only an\nuniversal, but an adaequate [Transcriber's Note: adequate] and\nsufficient Instrument to analyze mixt Bodies with. For as to their\nPractice of Extracting the fix'd Salt out of Ashes by the Affusion of\nWater, 'tis obvious to alleadge, that the Water does only assemble\ntogether the Salt the Fire had before divided from the Earth: as a\nSieve does not further break the Corn, but only bring together into\ntwo distinct heaps the Flour and the Bran, whose Corpuscles before lay\npromiscuously blended together in the Meal. This I say I might\nalleadge, and thereby exempt my self from the need of taking any\nfarther notice of the propos'd Objection. But not to lose the Rise it\nmay afford me of Illustrating the matter under Consideration, I am\ncontent briefly to consider it, as far forth as my present\nDisquisition may be concern'd in it.\n\nNot to repeat then what has been already answer'd, I say farther, that\nthough I am so civil an Adversary, that I will allow the Chymists,\nafter the Fire has done all its work, the use of fair Water to make\ntheir Extractions with, in such cases wherein the Water does not\ncooperate with the Fire to make the _Analysis_; yet since I Grant\nthis but upon Supposition that the Water does only wash off the Saline\nParticles, which the Fire Alone has Before Extricated in the Analyz'd\nBody, it will not be Reasonable, that this Concession should Extend to\nother Liquors that may Add to what they Dissolve, nor so much as to\nother Cases than those Newly Mentioned: Which Limitation I Desire You\nwould be Pleas'd to Bear in Mind till I shall Anon have Occasion to\nmake Use of it. And This being thus Premis'd, I shall Proceed to\nObserve,\n\nFirst, That Many of the Instances I Propos'd in the Preceding\nDiscourse are Such, that the Objection we are Considering will not at\nall Reach Them. For Fire can no more with the Assistance of Water than\nwithout it Separate any of the Three Principles, either from Gold,\nSilver, Mercury, or some Others of the Concretes named Above.\n\nHence We may Inferre, That Fire is not an Universal Analyzer of all\nMixt Bodies, since of Metals and Minerals, wherein Chymists have most\nExercis'd Themselves, there Appear scarce Any which they are able to\nAnalyze by Fire, Nay, from which they can Unquestionably Separate so\nmuch as any One of their Hypostatical Principles; Which may well\nAppear no small Disparagement as well to their _Hypothesis_ as to\ntheir Pretensions.\n\nIt will also remain True, notwithstanding the Objection, That there\nmay be Other Wayes than the wonted _Analysis_ by Fire, to Separate\nfrom a Compound Body Substances as Homogeneneous [Transcriber's Note:\nHomogeneous] as those that Chymists Scruple not to Reckon among their\n_Tria Prima_ (as some of them, for Brevity Sake, call their Three\nPrinciples.)\n\nAnd it Appears, That by Convenient Additaments such Substances may be\nSeparated by the Help of the Fire, as could not be so by the Fire\nalone: Witness the Sulphur of Antimony.\n\nAnd Lastly, I must Represent, That since it appears too that the Fire\nis but One of the Instruments that must be Employ'd in the Resolution\nof Bodies, We may Reasonably Challenge the Liberty of doing Two\nThings. For when ever any _Menstruum_ or other Additament is Employ'd,\ntogether with the Fire to Obtain a Sulphur or a Salt from a Body, We\nmay well take the Freedom to Examine, whether or no That _Menstruum_\ndo barely Help to Separate the Principle Obtain'd by It, or whether\nthere Intervene not a Coalition of the Parts of the Body Wrought upon\nwith Those of the _Menstruum_, whereby the Produc'd Concrete may be\nJudg'd to Result from the Union of Both. And it will be farther\nAllowable for Us to Consider, how far any Substance, Separated by the\nHelp of such Additaments, Ought to pass for one of the _Tria Prima_;\nsince by One Way of Handling the same Mixt Body it may according to\nthe Nature of the Additaments, and the Method of Working upon it, be\nmade to Afford differing Substances from those Obtainable from it by\nother Additaments, and another Method, nay and (as may appear by what\nI Formerly told You about Tartar) Differing from any of the Substances\ninto which a Concrete is Divisible by the Fire without Additaments,\nthough perhaps those Additaments do not, as Ingredients, enter the\nComposition of the Obtained Body, but only Diversify the Operation of\nthe Fire upon the Concrete; and though that Concrete by the Fire\nalone may be Divided into a Number of Differing Substances, as Great\nas any of the Chymists that I have met with teach us that of the\nElements to be. And having said thus much (sayes _Carneades_) to the\nObjection likely to be Propos'd by some Chymists, I am now to Examine\nthat which I Foresee will be Confidently press'd by Divers\nPeripateticks, who, to Prove Fire to be the true Analyzer of Bodies,\nwill Plead, That it is the very Definition of Heat given by\n_Aristotle_, and Generally Received, _Congregare Homogenea, &\nHeterogenea Segregare_, to Assemble Things of a Resembling, and\nDisjoyn those of a Differing Nature. To this I answer, That this\nEffect is far from being so Essential to Heat, as 'tis Generally\nImagin'd; for it rather Seems, that the True and Genuine Property of\nHeat is, to set a Moving, and thereby to Dissociate the parts of\nBodies, and Subdivide them into Minute Particles, without regard to\ntheir being Homogeneous or Heterogeneous, as is apparent in the\nBoyling of Water, the Distillation of Quicksilver, or the Exposing of\nBodies to the action of the Fire, whose Parts either Are not (at\nleast in that Degree of Heat Appear not) Dissimilar, where all that\nthe Fire can do, is to Divide the Body into very Minute Parts which\nare of the same Nature with one another, and with their _Totum_, as\ntheir Reduction by Condensation Evinces. And even when the Fire seems\nmost so _Congregare Homogenea, & Segregare Heterogenea_, it Produces\nthat Effect but by Accident; For the Fire does but Dissolve the\nCement, or rather Shatter the Frame, or [tructure [Errata: structure]\nthat kept the Heterogeneous Parts of Bodies together, under one Common\nForm; upon which Dissolution the Component Particles of the Mixt,\nbeing Freed and set at Liberty, do Naturally, and oftentimes without\nany Operation of the Fire, Associate themselves each with its Like, or\nrather do take those places which their Several Degrees of Gravity and\nLevity, Fixedness or Volatility (either Natural, or Adventitious from\nthe Impression of the Fire) Assigne them. Thus in the Distillation\n(for Instance) of Man's Blood, the Fire do's First begin to Dissolve\nthe _Nexus_ or Cement of the Body; and then the Water, being the most\nVolatile, and Easy to be Extracted, is either by the Igneous Atomes,\nor the Agitation they are put into by the Fire, first carried up, till\nForsaken by what carried it up, its Weight sinks it down into the\nReceiver: but all this while the other Principles of the Concrete\nRemain Unsever'd, and Require a stronger Degree of Heat to make a\nSeparation of its more Fixt Elements; and therefore the Fire must be\nIncreas'd which Carries over the Volatile Salt and the Spirit, they\nbeing, though Beleev'd to be Differing Principles, and though Really\nof Different Consistency, yet of an almost Equal Volatility. After\nthem, as less Fugitive, comes over the Oyl, and leaves behinde the\nEarth and the _Alcali_, which being of an Equal Fixednesse, the Fire\nSevers them not, for all the Definition of the Schools. And if into a\nRed-hot Earthen or Iron Retort you cast the Matter to be Distill'd,\nYou may Observe, as I have often done, that the Predominant Fire will\nCarry up all the Volatile Elements Confusedly in one Fume, which will\nafterwards take their Places in the Receiver, either according to the\nDegree of their Gravity, or according to the Exigency of their\nrespective Textures; the Salt Adhering, for the most part, to the\nSides and Top, and the Phlegme Fastening it self there too in great\nDrops, the Oyle and Spirit placing themselves Under, or Above one\nanother, according as their Ponderousness makes them Swim or Sink. For\n'tis Observable, that though Oyl or Liquid Sulphur be one of the\nElements Separated by this Fiery _Analysis_, yet the Heat which\nAccidentally Unites the Particles of the other Volatile Principles,\nhas not alwayes the same Operation on this, there being divers Bodies\nwhich Yield Two Oyls, whereof the One sinks to the Bottom of that\nSpirit on which the other Swims; as I can shew You in some Oyls of the\nsame Deers Blood, which are yet by Me: Nay I can shew you Two Oyls\ncarefully made of the same Parcel of Humane Blood, which not only\nDiffer extreamly in Colour, but Swim upon one another without Mixture,\nand if by Agitation Confounded will of themselves Divorce again.\n\nAnd that the Fire doth oftentimes divide Bodies, upon the account that\nsome of their Parts are more Fixt, and some more Volatile, how far\nsoever either of these Two may be from a pure Elementary Nature is\nObvious enough, if Men would but heed it in the Burning of Wood, which\nthe Fire Dissipates into Smoake and Ashes: For not only the latter of\nthese is Confessedly made up of two such Differing Bodies as Earth and\nSalt; but the Former being condens'd into that Soot which adheres to\nour Chimneys, Discovers it self to Contain both Salt and Oyl, and\nSpirit and Earth, (and some Portion of Phlegme too) which being, all\nalmost, Equally Volatile to that Degree of Fire which Forces them up,\n(the more Volatile Parts Helping perhaps, as well as the Urgency of\nthe Fire, to carry up the more Fixt ones, as I have often Try'd in\nDulcify'd _Colcothar_, Sublim'd by _Sal Armoniack_ Blended with it)\nare carried Up together, but may afterwards be Separated by other\nDegrees of Fire, whose orderly Gradation allowes the Disparity of\ntheir Volatileness to Discover it self. Besides, if Differing Bodies\nUnited into one Mass be both sufficiently Fixt, the Fire finding no\nParts Volatile enough to be Expell'd or carried up, makes no\nSeparation at all; as may appear by a Mixture of Colliquated Silver\nand Gold, whose Component Metals may be easily Sever'd by _Aqua\nFortis_, or _Aqua Regis_ (according to the Predominancy of the Silver\nor the Gold) but in the Fire alone, though vehement, the Metals remain\nunsever'd, the Fire only dividing the Body into smaller Particles\n(whose Littlenesse may be argu'd from their Fluidity) in which either\nthe little nimble Atoms of Fire, or its brisk and numberless strokes\nupon the Vessels, hinder Rest and Continuity, without any\nSequestration of Elementary Principles. Moreover, the Fire sometimes\ndoes not Separate, so much as Unite, Bodies of a differing Nature;\nprovided they be of an almost resembling Fixedness, and have in the\nFigure of their Parts an Aptness to Coalition, as we see in the making\nof many Plaisters, Oyntments, &c. And in such Metalline Mixtures as\nthat made by Melting together two parts of clean Brass with one of\npure Copper, of which some Ingenious Trades-men cast such curious\nPatterns (for Gold and Silver Works) as I have sometimes taken great\nPleasure to Look upon. Sometimes the Bodies mingled by the Fire are\nDiffering enough as to Fixidity and Volatility, and yet are so\ncombin'd by the first Operation of the Fire, that it self does scarce\nafterwards Separate them, but only Pulverize them; whereof an Instance\nis afforded us by the Common Preparation of _Mercurius Dulcis_, where\nthe Saline Particles of the Vitriol, Sea Salt, and sometimes Nitre,\nEmploy'd to make the Sublimate, do so unite themselves with the\nMercurial Particles made use of, first to Make Sublimate, and then to\nDulcifie it, that the Saline and Metalline Parts arise together in\nmany successive Sublimations, as if they all made but one Body. And\nsometimes too the Fire does not only not Sever the Differing Elements\nof a Body, but Combine them so firmly, that Nature her self does very\nseldom, if ever, make Unions less Dissoluble. For the Fire meeting\nwith some Bodies exceedingly and almost equally Fixt, instead of\nmaking a Separation, makes an Union so strict, that it self, alone, is\nunable to Dissolve it; As we see, when an Alcalizate Salt and the\nTerrestrial Residue of the Ashes are Incorporated with pure Sand, and\nby Vitrification made one permanent Body, (I mean the course or\ngreenish sort of Glass) that mocks the greatest Violence of the Fire,\nwhich though able to Marry the Ingredients of it, yet is not able to\nDivorce them. I can shew you some pieces of Glass which I saw flow\ndown from an Earthen Crucible purposely Expos'd for a good while, with\nSilver in it, to a very vehement Fire. And some that deal much in the\nFusion of Metals Informe me, that the melting of a great part of a\nCrucible into Glass is no great Wonder in their Furnaces. I remember,\nI have Observ'd too in the Melting of great Quantities of Iron out of\nthe Oar, by the Help of store of Charcoal (for they Affirm that\nSea-Coal will not yield a Flame strong enough) that by the prodigious\nVehemence of the Fire, Excited by vast Bellows (made to play by great\nWheels turn'd about by Water) part of the Materials Expos'd to it was,\ninstead of being Analyz'd, Colliquated, and turn'd into a Dark, Solid\nand very Ponderous Glass, and that in such Quantity, that in some\nplaces I have seen the very High-wayes, neer such Iron-works, mended\nwith Heaps of such Lumps of Glasse, instead of Stones and Gravel. And\nI have also Observ'd, that some kind of Fire-stone it Self, having\nbeen employ'd in Furnaces wherein it was expos'd to very strong and\nlasting Fires, has had all its Fixt Parts so Wrought on by the Fire,\nas to be Perfectly Vitrifi'd, which I have try'd by Forcing from it\nPretty large Pieces of Perfect and Transparent Glass. And lest You\nmight think, _Eleutherius_, that the Question'd Definition of Heat may\nbe Demonstrated, by the Definition which is wont to be given and\nAcquiesc'd in, of its contrary Quality, Cold, whose property is taught\nto be _tam Homogenea, quam Heterogenea congregare_; Give me leave to\nrepresent to You, that neither is this Definition unquestionable; for\nnot to Mention the Exceptions, which a _Logician_, as such, may Take\nat it, I Consider that the Union of Heterogeneous Bodies which is\nSuppos'd to be the Genuine Production of Cold, is not Perform'd by\nevery Degree of Cold. For we see for Instance that in the Urine of\nHealthy Men, when the Liquor has been Suffer'd a while to stand, the\nCold makes a Separation of the Thinner Part from the Grosser, which\nSubsides to the Bottom, and Growes Opacous there; whereas if the\nUrinal be Warme, these Parts readily Mingle again, and the whole\nLiquor becomes Transparent as before. And when, by Glaciation, Wood,\nStraw, Dust, Water, &c. are Suppos'd to be United into one Lump of\nIce, the Cold does not Cause any Real Union or Adunation, (if I may so\nSpeak) of these Bodies, but only Hardening the Aqueous Parts of the\nLiquor into Ice, the other Bodies being Accidentally Present in that\nLiquor are frozen up in it, but not Really United. And accordingly if\nwe Expose a Heap of Mony Consisting of Gold, Silver and Copper Coynes,\nor any other Bodies of Differing Natures, which are Destitute of\nAqueous Moisture, Capable of Congelation, to never so intense a Cold,\nwe find not that these Differing Bodies are at all thereby so much as\nCompacted, much less United together; and even in Liquors Themselves\nwe find _Phaenomena_ which Induce us to Question the Definition which\nwe are examining. If _Paracelsus_ his Authority were to be look't upon\nas a Sufficient Proof in matters of this Nature, I might here insist\non that Process of his, whereby he Teaches that the Essence of Wine\nmay be Sever'd from the Phlegme and Ignoble Part by the Assistance of\nCongelation: and because much Weight has been laid upon this Process,\nnot only by _Paracelsians_, but other Writers, some of whom seem not\nto have perus'd it themselves, I shall give You the entire Passage in\nthe Authors own Words, as I lately found them in the sixth Book of his\n_Archidoxis_, an Extract whereof I have yet about me; and it sounds\nthus. _De Vino sciendum est, faecem phlegmaque ejus esse Mineram, &\nVini substantiam esse corpus in quo conservatur Essentia, prout auri\nin auro latet Essentia. Juxta quod Practicam nobis ad Memoriam\nponimus, ut non obliviscamur, ad hunc modum: Recipe Vinum\nvetustissimum & optimum quod habere poteris, calore saporeque ad\nplacitum, hoc in vas vitreum infundas ut tertiam ejus partem impleat,\n& sigillo Hermetis occlusum in equino ventre mensibus quatuor, & in\ncontinuato calore teneatur qui non deficiat. Quo peracto, Hyeme cum\nfrigus & gelu maxime saeviunt, his per mensem exponatur ut congeletur.\nAd hunc modum frigus vini spiritum una cum ejus substantia protrudit\nin vini centrum, ac separat a phlegmate: Congelatum abjice, quod vero\ncongelatum non est, id Spiritum cum substantia esse judicato. Hunc in\nPelicanum positum in arenae digestione non adeo calida per aliquod\ntempus manere finito; Postmodum eximito vini Magisterium, de quo\nlocuti sumus._\n\nBut I dare not _Eleu._ lay much Weight upon this Process, because I\nhave found that if it were True, it would be but seldom Practicable in\nthis Country upon the best Wine: for Though this present Winter hath\nbeen Extraordinary Cold, yet in very Keen Frosts accompanied with\nlasting Snowes, I have not been able in any Measure to Freeze a thin\nVial full of Sack; and even with Snow and Salt I could Freeze little\nmore then the Surface of it; and I suppose _Eleu._ that tis not every\nDegree of Cold that is Capable of Congealing Liquors, which is able to\nmake such an _Analysis_ (if I may so call it) of them by Separating\ntheir Aqueous and Spirituous Parts; for I have sometimes, though not\noften, frozen severally, Red-wine, Urine and Milk, but could not\nObserve the expected Separation. And the Dutch-Men that were forc'd to\nWinter in that Icie Region neer the Artick Circle, call'd _Nova\nZembla_, although they relate, as we shall see below, that there was a\nSeparation of Parts made in their frozen Beer about the middle of\n_November_, yet of the Freezing of their Back [Errata: Sack] in\n_December_ following they give but this Account: _Yea and our Sack,\nwhich is so hot, was Frozen very hard, so that when we were every Man\nto have his part, we were forc'd to melt it in the Fire; which we\nshar'd every second Day, about half a Pinte for a Man, wherewith we\nwere forc'd to sustain our selves._ In which words they imply not,\nthat their Back [Errata: Sack] was divided by the Frost into differing\nSubstances, after such manner as their Beer had been. All which\nnotwithstanding, _Eleu._ suppose that it may be made to appear, that\neven Cold sometimes may _Congregare Homogenea, & Heterogenea\nSegregare_: and to Manifest this I may tell you, that I did once,\npurposely cause to be Decocted in fair Water a Plant abounding with\nSulphureous and Spirituous Parts, and having expos'd the Decoction to\na keen North-Wind in a very Frosty Night, I observ'd, that the more\nAqueous Parts of it were turn'd by the next Morning into Ice, towards\nthe innermost part of which, the more Agile and Spirituous parts, as I\nthen conjectur'd, having Retreated, to shun as much as might be their\nEnvironing Enemy, they had there preserv'd themselves unfrozen in the\nForm of a high colour'd Liquor, the Aqueous and Spirituous parts\nhaving been so sleightly (Blended rather than) United in the\nDecoction, that they were easily Separable by such a Degree of Cold as\nwould not have been able to have Divorc'd the Parts of Urine or Wine,\nwhich by Fermentation or Digestion are wont, as Tryal has inform'd me,\nto be more intimately associated each with other. But I have already\nintimated, _Eleutherius_, that I shall not Insist on this Experiment,\nnot only because, having made it but once I may possibly have been\nmistaken in it; but also (and that principally) because of that much\nmore full and eminent Experiment of the Separative Virtue of extream\nCold, that was made, against their Wills, by the foremention'd Dutch\nmen that Winter'd in _Nova Zembla_; the Relation of whose Voyage being\na very scarce Book, it will not be amiss to give you that Memorable\npart of it which concerns our present Theme, as I caus'd the Passage\nto be extracted out of the Englished Voyage it self.\n\n\"_Gerard de Veer_, _John Cornelyson_ and Others, sent out of\n_Amsterdam_, _Anno Dom._ 1596. being forc'd by unseasonable Weather to\nWinter in _Nova Zembla_, neer Ice-Haven; on the thirteenth of\n_October_, Three of us (sayes the Relation) went aboard the Ship, and\nladed a Sled with Beer; but when we had laden it, thinking to go to\nour House with it, suddenly there arose such a Winde, and so great a\nStorm and Cold, that we were forc'd to go into the Ship again, because\nwe were not able to stay without; and we could not get the Beer into\nthe Ship again, but were forc'd to let it stand without upon the Sled:\nthe Fourteenth, as we came out of the Ship, we found the Barrel of\nBeer standing upon the Sled, but it was fast frozen at the Heads; yet\nby reason of the great Cold, the Beer that purg'd out froze as hard\nupon the Side of the Barrel, as if it had been glu'd thereon: and in\nthat sort we drew it to our House, and set the Barrel an end, and\ndrank it up; but first we were forc'd to melt the Beer, for there was\nscarce any unfrozen Beer in the barrel; but in that thick Yiest that\nwas unfrozen lay the Strength of the Beer, so that it was too strong\nto drink alone, and that which was frozen tasted like Water; and being\nmelted we Mix'd one with the other, and so drank it; but it had\nneither Strength nor Taste.\"\n\nAnd on this Occasion I remember, that having the last very Sharp\nWinter purposely try'd to Freeze, among other Liquors, some Beer\nmoderately strong, in Glass Vessels, with Snow and Salt, I observ'd,\nthat there came out of the Neck a certain thick Substance, which, it\nseems, was much better able then the rest of the Liquor (that I found\nturn'd into Ice) to resist a Frost, and which, by its Colour and\nconsistence seem'd mafestly [Transcriber's Note: manifestly] enough\nto be Yiest, whereat, I confess, I somewhat marvail'd, because I did\nnot either discerne by the Taste, or find by Enquiry, that the Beer\nwas at all too New to be very fit to be Drank. I might confirm the\nDutchmens Relation, by what happen'd a while since to a neere Friend\nof mine, who complained to me, that having Brew'd some Beer or Ale for\nhis own drinking in _Holland_ (where he then dwelt) the Keenness of\nthe late bitter Winter froze the Drink so as to reduce it into Ice,\nand a small Proportion of a very Strong and Spirituous Liquor. But I\nmust not entertain you any longer concerning Cold, not onely because\nyou may think I have but lost my way into a Theme which does not\ndirectly belong to my present Undertaking; but because I have already\nenlarg'd my self too much upon the first Consideration I propos'd,\nthough it appears so much a Paradox, that it seem'd to Require that I\nshould say much to keep it from being thought a meere Extravagance;\nyet since I Undertook but to make the common Assumption of our\nChymists and _Aristotelians_ appear Questionable, I hope I have so\nPerform'd that Task, that I may now Proceed to my Following\nConsiderations, and Insist lesse on them than I have done on the\nFirst.\n\n\n\n\nTHE\n\nSCEPTICAL CHYMIST.\n\n_The Second Part._\n\n\nThe Second Consideration I Desire to have Notice Taken of, is This,\nThat it is not so Sure, as Both Chymists and _Aristotelians_ are wont\nto Think it, that every Seemingly Similar or Distinct Substance that\nis Separated from a Body by the Help of the Fire, was Pre existent in\nit as a Principle or Element of it.\n\nThat I may not make this Paradox a Greater then I needs must, I will\nFirst Briefly Explain what the Proposition means, before I proceed to\nArgue for it.\n\nAnd I suppose You will easily Believe That I do not mean that any\nthing is separable from a Body by Fire, that was not Materially\npre-existent in it; for it Far Exceeds the power of Meerly Naturall\nAgents, and Consequently of the Fire, to produce anew, so Much as one\nAtome of Matter, which they can but Modifie and Alter, not Create;\nwhich is so Obvious a Truth, that almost all Sects of Philosophers\nhave Deny'd the Power of producing Matter to Second Causes; and the\n_Epicureans_ and some Others have Done the Like, in Reference to their\nGods themselves.\n\nNor does the Proposition peremptorily Deny but that some Things\nObtain'd by the Fire from a Mixt Body, may have been more then barely\nMaterially pre-existent in it, since there are Concretes, which before\nthey be Expos'd to the Fire afford us several Documents of their\nabounding, some with Salt, and Others with Sulphur. For it will serve\nthe present Turn, if it appear that diverse things Obtain'd from a\nMixt Body expos'd to the Fire, were not its Ingredients Before: for if\nthis be made to appear it, will [Errata: appear, it will] be Rationall\nenough to suspect that Chymists may Decieve themselves, and Others,\nin concluding Resolutely and Universally, those Substances to be the\nElementary Ingredients of Bodies barely separated by the Fire, of\nwhich it yet may be Doubted Whether there be such or No; at least till\nsome other Argument then that drawn from the _Analysis_ be Brought to\nresolve the Doubt.\n\nThat then which I Mean by the Proposition I am Explaining, is, That it\nmay without Absurdity be Doubted whether or no the Differing\nSubstances Obtainable from a Concrete Dissipated by the Fire were so\nExsistent in it in that Forme (at least as to their minute Parts)\nwherein we find them when the _Analysis_ is over, that the Fire did\nonly Dis-joyne and Extricate the Corpuscles of one Principle from\nthose of the other wherewith before they were Blended.\n\nHaving thus Explain'd my Proposition, I shall endeavour to do two\nthings, to prove it; The first of which is to shew that such\nSubstances as Chymists call Principles May be produc'd _De novo_ (as\nthey speak.) And the other is to make it probable that by the Fire we\nmay Actually obtain from some Mixt Bodies such Substances as were not\nin the Newly Expounded sence, pre-existent in them.\n\nTo begin then with the First of these, I Consider that if it be as\ntrue as 'tis probable, that Compounded Bodies Differ from One Another\nbut in the Various Textures Resulting from the Bigness, Shape, Motion,\nand contrivance of their smal parts, It will not be Irrationall to\nconceive that one and the same parcel of the Universal Matter may by\nVarious Alterations and Contextures be brought to Deserve the Name,\nsomtimes of a Sulphureous, and sometimes of a Terrene, or Aqueous\nBody. And this I could more largely Explicate, but that our Friend Mr.\n_Boyle_ has promis'd us something about Qualities, wherein the Theme I\nnow willingly Resign him, Will I Question not be Studiously Enquired\ninto. Wherefore what I shall now advance in favour of what I have\nlately Deliver'd shall be Deduc'd from Experiments made Divers Years\nsince. The first of which would have been much more considerable, but\nthat by some intervening Accidents I was Necessitated to lose the best\ntime of the year, for a trial of the Nature of that I design'd; it\nbeing about he [Transcriber's Note: the] middle of _May_ before I was\nable to begin an Experiment which should have then been two moneths\nold; but such as it was, it will not perhaps be impertinent to Give\nYou this Narrative of it. At the time newly Mention'd, I caus'd My\nGardiner (being by Urgent Occasions Hinder'd from being present\nmyself) to dig out a convenient quantity of good Earth, and dry it\nwell in an Oven, to weigh it, to put it in an Earthen pot almost level\nwith the Surface of the ground, and to set in it a selected seed he\nhad before received from me, for that purpose, of Squash, which is an\nIndian kind of Pompion, that Growes apace; this seed I Ordered Him to\nWater only with Rain or Spring Water. I did not (when my Occasions\npermitted me to visit it) without delight behold how fast it Grew,\nthough unseasonably sown; but the Hastning Winter Hinder'd it from\nattaining any thing neer its due and Wonted magnitude; (for I found\nthe same Autumn, in my Garden, some of those plants, by Measure, as\nbig about as my Middle) and made me order the having it taken Up;\nWhich about the Middle of _October_ was carefully Done by the same\nGardiner, who a while after sent me this account of it; _I have\nWeighed the Pompion with the Stalk and Leaves, all which Weighed three\npound wanting a quarter; Then I took the Earth, baked it as formerly,\nand found it just as much as I did at First, which made me think I had\nnot dry'd it Sufficiently: then I put it into the Oven twice More,\nafter the Bread was Drawn, and Weighed it the Second time, but found\nit Shrink little or nothing._\n\nBut to deal Candidly with You, _Eleutherius_, I must not conceal from\nYou the Event of another Experiment of this Kind made this present\nSummer, wherein the Earth seems to have been much more Wasted; as may\nappear by the following account, Lately sent me by the same Gardiner,\nin these Words. _To give You an Account of your Cucumbers, I have\nGain'd two Indifferent Fair Ones, the Weight of them is ten Pound and\na Halfe, the Branches with the Roots Weighed four Pounds wanting two\nOunces; and when I had weighed them I took the Earth, and bak'd it in\nseveral small Earthen Dishes in an Oven; and when I had so done, I\nfound the Earth wanted a Pound and a halfe of what it was formerly;\nyet I was not satisfi'd, doubting the Earth was not dry: I put it into\nan Oven the Second Time, (after the Bread was drawn) and after I had\ntaken it out and weighed it, I found it to be the Same Weight: So I\nSuppose there was no Moisture left in the Earth. Neither do I think\nthat the Pound and Halfe that was wanting was Drawn away by the\nCucumber but a great Part of it in the Ordering was in Dust (and the\nlike) wasted: (the Cucumbers are kept by themselves, lest You should\nsend for them.)_ But yet in this Tryal, _Eleutherius_, it appears that\nthough some of the Earth, or rather the dissoluble Salt harbour'd in\nit, were wasted, the main Body of the Plant consisted of Transmuted\nWater. And I might add, that a year after I caus'd the formerly\nmentioned Experiment, touching large Pompions, to be reiterated, with\nso good success, that if my memory does not much mis-inform me, it did\nnot only much surpass any that I made before, but seem'd strangely to\nconclude what I am pleading for; though (by reason I have unhappily\nlost the particular Account my Gardiner writ me up of the\nCircumstances) I dare not insist upon them. The like Experiment may be\nas conveniently try'd with the seeds of any Plant, whose growth is\nhasty, and its size Bulky. If Tobacco will in These Cold Climates Grow\nwell in Earth undung'd, it would not be amiss to make a Tryal with it;\nfor 'tis an annual Plant, that arises where it prospers, sometimes as\nhigh as a Tall Man; and I have had leaves of it in my Garden neer a\nFoot and a Halfe broad. But the next time I Try this Experiment, it\nshall be with several seeds of the same sort, in the same pot of\nEarth, that so the event may be the more Conspicuous. But because\nevery Body has not Conveniency of time and place for this Experiment\nneither, I made in my Chamber, some shorter and more Expeditions\n[Transcriber's Note: Expeditious] Tryals. I took a Top of Spearmint,\nabout an Inch Long, and put it into a good Vial full of Spring water,\nso as the upper part of the Mint was above the neck of the Glass, and\nthe lower part Immers'd in the Water; within a few Dayes this Mint\nbegan to shoot forth Roots into the Water, and to display its Leaves,\nand aspire upwards; and in a short time it had numerous Roots and\nLeaves, and these very strong and fragrant of the Odour of the Mint:\nbut the Heat of my Chamber, as I suppose, kill'd the Plant when it was\ngrown to have a pretty thick Stalk, which with the various and\nramified Roots, which it shot into the Water as if it had been Earth,\npresented in its Transparent Flower-pot a Spectacle not unpleasant to\nbehold. The like I try'd with sweet Marjoram, and I found the\nExperiment succeed also, though somewhat more slowly, with Balme and\nPeniroyal, to name now no other Plants. And one of these Vegetables,\ncherish'd only by Water, having obtain'd a competent Growth, I did,\nfor Tryals sake, cause to be Distill'd in a small Retort, and thereby\nobtain'd some Phlegme, a little Empyreumaticall Spirit, a small\nQuantity of adust Oyl, and a _Caput mortuum_; which appearing to be a\nCoal concluded it to consist of Salt and Earth: but the Quantity of\nit was so small that I forbore to Calcine it. The Water I us'd to\nnourish this Plant was not shifted nor renewed; and I chose\nSpring-water rather than Rain-water, because the latter is more\ndiscernably a kinde of [Greek: panspermia], which, though it be\ngranted to be freed from grosser Mixtures, seems yet to Contain in it,\nbesides the Steams of several Bodies wandering in the Air, which may\nbe suppos'd to impregnate it, a certain Spirituous Substance, which\nmay be Extracted out of it, and is by some mistaken for the Spirit of\nthe World Corporify'd, upon what Grounds, and with what Probability, I\nmay elsewhere perchance, but must not now, Discourse to you.\n\nBut perhaps I might have sav'd a great part of my Labour. For I finde\nthat _Helmont_ (an Author more considerable for his Experiments than\nmany Learned men are pleas'd to think him) having had an Opportunity\nto prosecute an Experiment much of the same nature with those I have\nbeen now speaking of, for five Years together, obtain'd at the end of\nthat time so notable a Quantity of Transmuted Water, that I should\nscarce Think it fit to have his Experiment, and Mine Mention'd\ntogether, were it not that the Length of Time Requisite to this may\ndeterr the Curiosity of some, and exceed the leasure of Others; and\npartly, that so Paradoxical a Truth as that which these Experiments\nseem to hold forth, needs to be Confirm'd by more Witnesses then one,\nespecially since the Extravagancies and Untruths to be met with in\n_Helmonts_ Treatise of the Magnetick Cure of Wounds, have made his\nTestimonies suspected in his other Writings, though as to some of the\nUnlikely matters of Fact he delivers in them, I might safely undertake\nto be his Compurgator. But that Experiment of his which I was\nmentioning to You, he sayes, was this. He took 200 pound of Earth\ndry'd in an Oven, and having put it into an Earthen Vessel and\nmoisten'd it with Raine water he planted in it the Trunk of a Willow\ntree of five pound Weight; this he Water'd, as need required, with\nRain or with Distill'd Water; and to keep the Neighbouring Earth from\ngetting into the Vessell, he employ'd a plate of Iron tinn'd over and\nperforated with many holes. Five years being efflux'd, he took out\nthe Tree and weighed it, and (with computing the leaves that fell\nduring four Autumnes) he found it to weigh 169 pound, and about three\nOunces. And Having again Dry'd the Earth it grew in, he found it want\nof its Former Weight of 200 Pound, about a couple only of Ounces; so\nthat 164 pound of the Roots, Wood, and Bark, which Constituted the\nTree, seem to have Sprung from the Water. And though it appears not\nthat _Helmont_ had the Curiosity to make any _Analysis_ of this Plant,\nyet what I lately told You I did to One of the Vegetables I nourish'd\nwith Water only, will I suppose keep You from Doubting that if he had\nDistill'd this Tree, it would have afforded him the like Distinct\nSubstances as another Vegetable of the same kind. I need not Subjoyne\nthat I had it also in my thoughts to try how Experiments to the same\npurpose with those I related to You would succeed in other Bodies then\nVegetables, because importunate Avocations having hitherto hinder'd me\nfrom putting my Design in Practise, I can yet speak but Confecturally\n[Transcriber's Note: Conjecturally] of the Success: but the best is,\nthat the Experiments already made and mention'd to you need not the\nAssistance of new Ones, to Verifie as much as my present task makes it\nconcern me to prove by Experiments of this Nature.\n\nOne would suspect (sayes _Eleutherius_ after his long silence) by what\nYou have been discoursing, that You are not far from _Helmonts_\nOpinion about the Origination of Compound Bodies, and perhaps too\ndislike not the Arguments which he imployes to prove it.\n\nWhat _Helmontian_ Opinion, and what Arguments do you mean (askes\n_Carneades_.)\n\nWhat You have been Newly Discoursing (replies _Eleutherius_) tells us,\nthat You cannot but know that this bold and Acute Spagyrist scruples\nnot to Assert that all mixt Bodies spring from one Element; and that\nVegetables, Animals, Marchasites, Stones, Metalls, &c. are Materially\nbut simple Water disguis'd into these Various Formes, by the plastick\nor Formative Virtue of their seeds. And as for his Reasons you may\nfind divers of them scatter'd up and down his writings; the\nconsiderabl'st of which seem to be these three; The Ultimate Reduction\nof mixt Bodies into Insipid Water, the Vicissitude of the supposed\nElements, and the production of perfectly mixt Bodies out of simple\nWater. And first he affirmes that the _Sal circulatus Paracelsi_, or\nhis Liquor _Alkahest_, does adequately resolve Plants, Animals, and\nMineralls into one Liquor or more, according to their several\ninternall Disparities of Parts (without _Caput Mortuum_, or the\nDestruction of their seminal Virtues;) and that the _Alkahest_ being\nabstracted from these Liquors in the same weight and Virtue wherewith\nit Dissolv'd them, the Liquors may by frequent Cohobations from chalke\nor some other idoneous matter, be Totally depriv'd of their seminal\nEndowments, and return at last to their first matter, Insipid Water;\nsome other wayes he proposes here and there, to divest some particular\nBodies of their borrow'd shapes, and make them remigrate to their\nfirst Simplicity. The second Topick whence _Helmont_ drawes his\nArguments, to prove Water to be the Material cause of Mixt Bodies, I\ntold You was this, that the other suppos'd Elements may be transmuted\ninto one another. But the Experiments by him here and there produc'd\non this Occasion, are so uneasie to be made and to be judg'd of, that\nI shall not insist on them; not to mention, that if they were granted\nto be true, his Inference from them is somewhat disputable; and\ntherefore I shall pass on to tell You, That as, in his First Argument,\nour Paradoxical Author endeavours to prove Water the Sole Element of\nMixt Bodies, by their Ultimate Resolution, when by his _Alkahest_, or\nsome other conquering Agent, the Seeds have been Destroy'd, which\nDisguis'd them, or when by time those seeds are Weari'd or Exantlated\nor unable to Act their Parts upon the Stage of the Universe any\nLonger: So in His Third Argument he Endeavours to evince the same\nConclusion, by the constitution of Bodies which he asserts to be\nnothing but Water Subdu'd by Seminal Virtues. Of this he gives here\nand there in his Writings several Instances, as to Plants and Animals;\nbut divers of them being Difficult either to be try'd or to be\nUnderstood, and others of them being not altogether Unobnoxious to\nExceptions, I think you have singl'd out the Principal and less\nQuestionable Experiment when you lately mention'd that of the Willow\nTree. And having thus, Continues _Eleutherius_, to Answer your\nQuestion, given you a Summary Account of what I am Confident You know\nbetter then I do, I shall be very glad to receive Your Sence of it, if\nthe giving it me will not too much Divert You from the Prosecution of\nyour Discourse.\n\nThat _If_ (replies _Carneades_) was not needlessly annex'd: for\nthorowly to examine such an Hypothesis and such Arguments would\nrequire so many Considerations, and Consequently so much time, that I\nshould not now have the Liesure [Errata: leasure] to perfect such a\nDigression, and much less to finish my Principle [Errata: principal]\nDiscourse. Yet thus much I shall tell You at present, that you need\nnot fear my rejecting this Opinion for its Novelty; since, however the\n_Helmontians_ may in complement to their Master pretend it to be a new\nDiscovery, Yet though the Arguments be for the most part his, the\nOpinion it self is very Antient: For _Diogenes Laertius_ and divers\nother Authors speak of _Thales_, as the first among the _Graecians_\nthat made disquisitions upon nature. And of this _Thales_, I Remember,\n_Tully_[5] informes us, that he taught all things were at first made\nof Water. And it seems by _Plutarch_ and _Justin Martyr_, that the\nOpinion was Ancienter then he: For they tell us that he us'd to defend\nhis Tenet by the Testimony of _Homer_. And a Greek Author, (the\n_Scholiast_ of _Apollonius_) upon these Words\n\n     [Greek: Ex iliou [Transcriber's Note: iluos] eblastese chthon\n     aute],[6]\n\n     _The Earth of Slime was made,_\n\nAffirms (out of _Zeno_) that the _Chaos_, whereof all things were\nmade, was, according to _Hesiod_, Water; which, settling first, became\nSlime, and then condens'd into solid Earth. And the same Opinion about\nthe Generation of Slime seems to have been entertain'd by _Orpheus_,\nout of whom one of the Antients[7] cites this Testimony,\n\n     [Greek: Ek tou hydatos ilui katiste.]\n\n     _Of Water Slime was made._\n\n[Footnote 5: De Natura Deorum.]\n\n[Footnote 6: Argonaut. 4.]\n\n[Footnote 7: Athenagoras.]\n\nIt seems also by what is delivered in _Strabo_[8] out of another\nAuthor, concerning the _Indians_, That they likewise held that all\nthings had differing Beginnings, but that of which the World was made,\nwas Water. And the like Opinion has been by some of the Antients\nascrib'd to the _Phoenicians_, from whom _Thales_ himself is\nconceiv'd to have borrow'd it; as probably the Greeks did much of\ntheir Theologie, and, as I am apt to think, of their Philosophy too;\nsince the Devising of the Atomical _Hypothesis_ commonly ascrib'd to\n_Lucippus_ and his Disciple _Democritus_, is by Learned Men attributed\nto one _Moschus_ a _Phoenician_. And possibly the Opinion is yet\nantienter than so; For 'tis known that the _Phoenicians_ borrow'd\nmost of their Learning from the _Hebrews_. And among those that\nacknowledge the Books of _Moses_, many have been inclin'd to think\nWater to have been the Primitive and Universal Matter, by perusing the\nBeginning of _Genesis_, where the Waters seem to be mention'd as the\nMaterial Cause, not only of Sublunary Compounded Bodies, but of all\nthose that make up the Universe; whose Component Parts did orderly,\nas it were, emerge out of that vast Abysse, by the Operation of the\nSpirit of God, who is said to have been moving Himself as hatching\nFemales do (as the Original [Hebrew: merachephet], _Meracephet_[9] is\nsaid to Import, and as it seems to signifie in one of the two other\nplaces, wherein alone I have met with it in the Hebrew Bible)[10] upon\nthe Face of the Waters; which being, as may be suppos'd, Divinely\nImpregnated with the seeds of all things, were by that productive\nIncubation qualify'd to produce them. But you, I presume, Expect that\nI should Discourse of this Matter like a Naturalist, not a Philologer.\nWherefore I shall add, to Countenance _Helmont's_ Opinion, That\nwhereas he gives not, that I remember, any Instance of any Mineral\nBody, nor scarce of any Animal, generated of Water, a French Chymist,\n_Monsieur de Rochas_, has presented his Readers an Experiment, which\nif it were punctually such as he has deliver'd it, is very Notable. He\nthen, Discoursing of the Generation of things according to certain\nChymical and Metaphorical Notions (which I confess are not to me\nIntelligible) sets down, among divers Speculations not pertinent to\nour Subject, the following Narrative, which I shall repeat to you the\nsence of in English, with as little variation from the Literal sence\nof the French words, as my memory will enable me. _Having_ (sayes he)\n_discern'd such great Wonders by the Natural Operation of Water, I\nwould know what may be done with it by Art Imitating Nature. Wherefore\nI took Water which I well knew not to be compounded, nor to be mix'd\nwith any other thing than that Spirit of Life_ (whereof he had spoken\nbefore;) _and with a Heat Artificial, Continual and Proportionate, I\nprepar'd and dispos'd it by the above mention'd Graduations of\nCoagulation, Congelation, and Fixation, untill it was turn'd into\nEarth, which Earth produc'd Animals, Vegetables and Minerals. I tell\nnot what Animals, Vegetables and Minerals, for that is reserv'd for\nanother Occasion: but the Animals did Move of themselves, Eat,\n&c.--and by the true Anatomie I made of them, I found that they were\ncompos'd of much Sulphur, little Mercury, and less Salt.--The Minerals\nbegan to grow and encrease by converting into their own Nature one\npart of the Earth thereunto dispos'd; they were solid and heavy. And\nby this truly Demonstrative Science, namely Chymistry, I found that\nthey were compos'd of much Salt, little Sulphur, and less Mercury._\n\n[Footnote 8: Universarum rerum primordia diverta esse, faciendi autem\nmundi initium aquam. Strabo. Geograp. lib. 15. circa medium.]\n\n[Footnote 9: Deuter. 32. 11.]\n\n[Footnote 10: Jerem. 23. 9.]\n\nBut (sayes _Carneades_) I have some Suspitions concerning this strange\nRelation, which make me unwilling to Declare an Opinion of it, unless\nI were satisfied concerning divers Material Circumstances that our\nAuthor has left unmentioned; though as for the Generation of Living\nCreatures, both Vegetable and Sensitive, it needs not seem Incredible,\nsince we finde that our common water (which indeed is often\nImpregnated with Variety of Seminal Principles and Rudiments) being\nlong kept in a quiet place will putrifie and stink, and then perhaps\ntoo produce Moss and little Worms, or other Insects, according to the\nnature of the Seeds that were lurking in it. I must likewise desire\nyou to take Notice, that as _Helmont_ gives us no Instance of the\nProduction of Minerals out of Water, so the main Argument that he\nemploy's to prove that they and other Bodies may be resolv'd into\nwater, is drawn from the Operations of his _Alkahest_, and\nconsequently cannot be satisfactorily Examin'd by You and Me.\n\nYet certainly (sayes _Eleutherius_) You cannot but have somewhat\nwonder'd as well as I, to observe how great a share of Water goes to\nthe making up of Divers Bodies, whose Disguises promise nothing neere\nso much. The Distillation of Eeles, though it yielded me some Oyle,\nand Spirit, and Volatile Salt, besides the _Caput mortuum_, yet were\nall these so disproportionate to the Phlegm that came from them (and\nin which at first they boyl'd as in a Pot of Water) that they seem'd\nto have bin nothing but coagulated Phlegm, which does likewise\nstrangely abound in Vipers, though they are esteem'd very hot in\nOperation, and will in a Convenient Aire survive some dayes the loss\nof their Heads and Hearts, so vigorous is their Vivacity. Mans Bloud\nit self as Spirituous, and as Elaborate a Liquor as 'tis reputed, does\nso abound in Phlegm, that, the other Day, Distilling some of it on\npurpose to try the Experiment (as I had formerly done in Deers Bloud)\nout of about seven Ounces and a half of pure Bloud we drew neere six\nOunces of Phlegm, before any of the more operative Principles began\nto arise, and Invite us to change the Receiver. And to satisfie my\nself that some of these Animall Phlegms were void enough of Spirit to\ndeserve that Name, I would not content my self to taste them only, but\nfruitlesly pour'd on them acid Liquors, to try if they contain'd any\nVolatile Salt or Spirit, which (had there been any there) would\nprobably have discover'd it self by making an Ebullition with the\naffused Liquor. And now I mention Corrosive Spirits, I am minded to\nInforme you, That though they seem to be nothing else but Fluid Salts,\nyet they abound in Water, as you may Observe, if either you Entangle,\nand so Fix their Saline Part, by making them Corrode some idoneous\nBody, or else if you mortifie it with a contrary Salt; as I have very\nmanifestly Observ'd in the making a Medecine somewhat like _Helmont's\nBalsamus Samech_, with Distill'd Vinager instead of Spirit of Wine,\nwherewith he prepares it: For you would scarce Beleeve (what I have\nlately Observ'd) that of that acid Spirit, the Salt of Tartar, from\nwhich it is Distill'd, will by mortifying and retaining the acid Salt\nturn into worthless Phlegm neere twenty times its weight, before it be\nso fully Impregnated as to rob no more Distill'd Vinager of its Salt.\nAnd though Spirit of Wine Exquisitely rectify'd seem of all Liquors to\nbe the most free from Water, it being so Igneous that it will Flame\nall away without leaving the least Drop behinde it, yet even this\nFiery Liquor is by _Helmont_ not improbably affirm'd, in case what he\nrelates be True, to be Materially Water, under a Sulphureous Disguise:\nFor, according to him, in the making that excellent Medecine,\n_Paracelsus_ his _Balsamus Samech_, (which is nothing but _Sal\nTartari_ dulcify'd by Distilling from it Spirit of Wine till the Salt\nbe sufficiently glutted with its Sulphur, and suffer [Errata: and till\nit suffer] the Liquor to be drawn off, as strong as it was pour'd on)\nwhen the Salt of Tartar from which it is Distill'd hath retain'd, or\ndepriv'd it of the Sulphureous parts of the Spirit of Wine, the rest,\nwhich is incomparably the greater part of the Liquor, will remigrate\ninto Phlegm. I added that Clause [_In case what he Relates be True_]\nbecause I have not as yet sufficiently try'd it my self. But not only\nsomething of Experiment keeps me from thinking it, as many Chymists\ndo, absurd, (though I have, as well as they, in vain try'd it with\nordinary Salt of Tartar;) but besides that _Helmont_ often Relates it,\nand draws Consequences from it; A Person noted for his Sobernesse and\nSkill in Spagyrical Preparations, having been askt by me, Whether the\nExperiment might not be made to succeed, if the Salt and Spirit were\nprepar'd according to a way suitable to my Principles, he affirm'd to\nme, that he had that way I propos'd made _Helmont's_ Experiment\nsucceed very well, without adding any thing to the Salt and Spirit.\nBut our way is neither short nor Easie.\n\nI have indeed (sayes _Carneades_) sometimes wonder'd to see how much\nPhlegme may be obtain'd from Bodies by the Fire. But concerning that\nPhlegme I may anon have Occasion to note something, which I therefore\nshall not now anticipate. But to return to the Opinion of _Thales_,\nand of _Helmont_, I consider, that supposing the _Alkahest_ could\nreduce all Bodies into water, yet whether that water, because insipid,\nmust be Elementary, may not groundlesly be doubted; For I remember\nthe Candid and Eloquent _Petrus Laurembergius_ in his Notes upon\n_Sala's_ Aphorismes affirmes, that he saw an insipid _Menstruum_ that\nwas a powerfull Dissolvent, and (if my Memory do not much mis-informe\nme) could dissolve Gold. And the water which may be Drawn from\nQuicksilver without Addition, though it be almost Tastless, You will I\nbelieve think of a differing Nature from simple Water, especially if\nyou Digest in it Appropriated Mineralls. To which I shall add but\nthis, that this Consideration may be further extended. For I see no\nNecessity to conceive that the Water mention'd in the Beginning of\n_Genesis_, as the Universal Matter, was simple and Elementary Water;\nsince though we should Suppose it to have been an Agitated Congeries\nor Heap consisting of a great Variety of Seminal Principles and\nRudiments, and of other Corpuscles fit to be subdu'd and Fashion'd by\nthem, it might yet be a Body Fluid like Water, in case the Corpuscles\nit was made up of, were by their Creator made small enough, and put\ninto such an actuall Motion as might make them Glide along one\nanother. And as we now say, the Sea consists of Water, notwithstanding\n[Errata: (notwithstanding] the Saline, Terrestrial, and other Bodies\nmingl'd with it,) such a Liquor may well enough be called Water,\nbecause that was the greatest of the known Bodies whereunto it was\nlike; Though, that a Body may be Fluid enough to appear a Liquor, and\nyet contain Corpuscles of a very differing Nature, You will easily\nbelieve, if You but expose a good Quantity of Vitriol in a strong\nVessel to a Competent Fire. For although it contains both Aqueous,\nEarthy, Saline, Sulphureous, and Metalline Corpuscles, yet the whole\nMass will at first be Fluid like water, and boyle like a seething pot.\n\nI might easily (Continues _Carneades_) enlarge my self on such\nConsiderations, if I were Now Oblig'd to give You my Judgment of the\n_Thalesian_, and _Helmontian_, _Hypothesis_. But Whether or no we\nconclude that all things were at first Generated of Water, I may\nDeduce from what I have try'd Concerning the Growth of Vegetables,\nnourish'd with water, all that I now propos'd to my Self or need at\npresent to prove, namely that Salt, Spirit, Earth, and ev'n Oyl\n(though that be thought of all Bodies the most opposite to Water) may\nbe produc'd out of Water; and consequently that a Chymical Principle\nas well as a Peripatetick Element, may (in some cases) be Generated\nanew, or obtain'd from such a parcel of Matter as was not endow'd with\nthe form of such a principle or Element before.\n\nAnd having thus, _Eleutherius_, Evinc'd that 'tis possible that such\nSubstances as those that Chymists are wont to call their _Tria Prima_,\nmay be Generated, anew: I must next Endeavour to make it Probable,\nthat the Operation of the Fire does Actually (sometimes) not only\ndivide Compounded Bodies into smal Parts, but Compound those Parts\nafter a new Manner; whence Consequently, for ought we Know, there may\nEmerge as well Saline and Sulphureous Substances, as Bodies of other\nTextures. And perhaps it will assist us in our Enquiry after the\nEffects of the Operations of the Fire upon other Bodies, to Consider a\nlittle, what it does to those Mixtures which being Productions of the\nArt of Man, We best know the Composition of. You may then be pleas'd\nto take Notice that though Sope is made up by the Sope-Boylers of Oyle\nor Grease, and Salt, and Water Diligently Incorporated together, yet\nif You expose the Mass they Constitute to a Graduall Fire in a Retort,\nYou shall then indeed make a Separation, but not of the same\nSubstances that were United into Sope, but of others of a Distant and\nyet not an Elementary Nature, and especially of an Oyle very sharp and\nFaetid, and of a very Differing Quality from that which was Employ'd to\nmake the Sope: fo [Errata: so] if you Mingle in a due Proportion, _Sal\nArmoniack_ with Quick-Lime, and Distill them by Degrees of Fire, You\nshall not Divide the _Sal Armoniack_ from the Quick-Lime, though the\none be a Volatile, and the other a Fix'd Substance, but that which\nwill ascend will be a Spirit much more Fugitive, Penetrant, and\nstinking, then _Sal Armoniack_; and there will remain with the\nQuick-Lime all or very near all the Sea Salt that concurr'd to make up\nthe _Sal Armoniack_; concerning which Sea Salt I shall, to satisfie\nYou how well it was United to the Lime, informe You, that I have by\nmaking the Fire at length very Vehement, caus'd both the Ingredients\nto melt in the Retort it self into one Mass and such Masses are apt to\nRelent in the Moist Air. If it be here Objected, that these Instances\nare taken from factitious Concretes which are more Compounded then\nthose which Nature produces; I shall reply, that besides that I have\nMention'd them as much to Illustrate what I propos'd, as to prove it,\nit will be Difficult to Evince that Nature her self does not make\nDecompound Bodies, I mean mingle together such mixt Bodies as are\nalready Compounded of Elementary, or rather of more simple ones. For\nVitriol (for Instance) though I have sometimes taken it out of\nMinerall Earths, where Nature had without any assistance of Art\nprepar'd it to my Hand, is really, though Chymists are pleas'd to\nreckon it among Salts, a De-compounded Body Consisting (as I shall\nhave occasion to declare anon) of a Terrestriall Substance, of a\nMetal, and also of at least one Saline Body, of a peculiar and not\nElementary Nature. And we see also in Animals, that their blood may\nbe compos'd of Divers very Differing Mixt Bodies, since we find it\nobserv'd that divers Sea-Fowle tast rank of the Fish on which they\nordinarily feed; and _Hipocrates_ himself Observes, that a Child may\nbe purg'd by the Milke of the Nurse, if she have taken _Elaterium_;\nwhich argues that the purging Corpuscles of the Medicament Concurr to\nmake up the Milke of the Nurse; and that white Liquor is generally by\nPhysitians suppos'd to be but blanch'd and alter'd Blood. And I\nremember I have observ'd, not farr from the _Alps_, that at a certain\ntime of the Year the Butter of that Country was very Offensive to\nstrangers, by reason of the rank tast of a certain Herb, whereon the\nCows were then wont plentifully to feed. But (proceeds _Carneades_) to\ngive you Instances of another kind, to shew that things may be\nobtain'd by the Fire from a Mixt Body that were not Pre-existent in\nit, let Me Remind You, that from many Vegetables there may without any\nAddition be Obtain'd Glass, a Body, which I presume You will not say\nwas Pre-existent in it, but produc'd by the Fire. To which I shall\nadd but this one Example more, namely that by a certain Artificial way\nof handling Quicksilver, You may without Addition separate from it at\nleast a 5th. or 4th. part of a clear Liquor, which with an Ordinary\nPeripatetick would pass for Water, and which a Vulgar Chymist would\nnot scruple to call Phlegme, and which, for ought I have yet seen or\nheard, is not reducible into Mercury again, and Consequently is more\nthen a Disguise of it. Now besides that divers Chymists will not allow\nMercury to have any or at least any Considerable Quantity of either of\nthe Ignoble Ingredients, Earth and Water; Besides this, I say, the\ngreat Ponderousness of Quicksilver makes it very unlikely that it can\nhave so much Water in it as may be thus obtain'd from it, since\nMercury weighs 12 or 14 times as much as water of the same Bulk. Nay\nfor a further Confirmation of this Argument, I will add this Strange\nRelation, that two Friends of mine, the one a Physitian, and the other\na Mathematician, and both of them Persons of unsuspected Credit, have\nSolemnly assured me, that after many Tryals they made, to reduce\nMercury into Water, in Order to a Philosophicall Work, upon Gold\n(which yet, by the way, I know prov'd Unsuccesfull) they did once by\ndivers Cohobations reduce a pound of Quicksilver into almost a pound\nof Water, and this without the Addition of any other Substance, but\nonly by pressing the Mercury by a Skillfully Manag'd Fire in purposely\ncontriv'd Vessels. But of these Experiments our Friend (sayes\n_Carneades_, pointing at the Register of this Dialogue) will perhaps\ngive You a more Particular Account then it is necessary for me to do:\nSince what I have now said may sufficiently evince, that the Fire may\nsometimes as well alter Bodies as divide them, and by it we may obtain\nfrom a Mixt Body what was not Pre-existent in it. And how are we sure\nthat in no other Body what we call Phlegme is barely separated, not\nProduc'd by the Action of the Fire: Since so many other Mixt Bodies\nare of a much less Constant, and more alterable Nature, then Mercury,\nby many Tricks it is wont to put upon Chymists, and by the Experiments\nI told You of, about an hour since, Appears to be. But because I\nshall ere long have Occasion to resume into Consideration the Power of\nthe Fire to produce new Concretes, I shall no longer insist on this\nArgument at present; only I must mind You, that if You will not\ndis-believe _Helmonts_ Relations, You must confess that the _Tria\nPrima_ are neither ingenerable nor incorruptible Substances; since by\nhis _Alkahest_ some of them may be produc'd of Bodies that were before\nof another Denomination; and by the same powerfull _Menstruum_ all of\nthem may be reduc'd into insipid Water.\n\nHere _Carneades_ was about to pass on to his Third Consideration, when\n_Eleutherius_ being desirous to hear what he could say to clear his\nsecond General Consideration from being repugnant to what he seem'd to\nthink the true Theory of Mistion, prevented him by telling him, I\nsomewhat wonder, _Carneades_, that You, who are in so many Points\nunsatisfied with the Peripatetick Opinion touching the Elements and\nMixt Bodies, should also seem averse to that Notion touching the\nmanner of Mistion, wherein the Chymists (though perhaps without\nknowing that they do so) agree with most of the Antient Philosophers\nthat preceded _Aristotle_, and that for Reasons so considerable, that\ndivers Modern Naturalists and Physitians, in other things unfavourable\nenough to the Spagyrists, do in this case side with them against the\ncommon Opinion of the Schools. If you should ask me (continues\n_Eleutherius_) what Reasons I mean? I should partly by the Writings of\n_Sennertus_ and other learned Men, and partly by my own Thoughts, be\nsupply'd with more, then 'twere at present proper for me to Insist\nlargely on. And therefore I shall mention only, and that briefly,\nthree or four. Of these, I shall take the First from the state of the\nControversie itself, and the genuine Notion of Mistion, which though\nmuch intricated by the Schoolmen, I take in short to be this,\n_Aristotle_, at least as many of his Interpreters expound him, and as\nindeed he Teaches in some places, where he professedly Dissents from\nthe Antients, declares Mistion to be such a mutual Penetration, and\nperfect Union of the mingl'd Elements, that there is no Portion of the\nmixt Body, how Minute soever, which does not contain All, and Every\nof the Four Elements, or in which, if you please, all the Elements are\nnot. And I remember, that he reprehends the Mistion taught by the\nAncients, as too sleight or gross, for this Reason, that Bodies mixt\naccording to their _Hypothesis_, though they appear so to humane Eyes,\nwould not appear such to the acute Eyes of a _Lynx_, whose perfecter\nSight would discerne the Elements, if they were no otherwise mingled,\nthan as his Predecessors would have it, to be but Blended, not United;\nwhereas the Antients, though they did not all Agree about what kind of\nBodies were Mixt, yet they did almost unanimously hold, that in a\ncompounded Bodie, though the _Miscibilia_, whether Elements,\nPrinciples, or whatever they pleas'd to call them, were associated in\nsuch small Parts, and with so much Exactness, that there was no\nsensible Part of the Mass but seem'd to be of the same Nature with the\nrest, and with the whole; Yet as to the Atomes, or other Insensible\nParcels of Matter, whereof each of the _Miscibilia_ consisted, they\nretain'd each of them its own Nature, being but by Apposition or\n_Juxta_-Position united with the rest into one Bodie. So that\nalthough by virtue of this composition the mixt Body did perhaps\nobtain Divers new Qualities, yet still the Ingredients that Compounded\nit, retaining their own Nature, were by the Destruction of the\n_Compositum_ separable from each other, the minute Parts disingag'd\nfrom those of a differing Nature, and associated with those of their\nown sort returning to be again, Fire, Earth, or Water, as they were\nbefore they chanc'd to be Ingredients of that _Compositum_. This may\nbe explain'd (Continues _Eleutherius_,) by a piece of Cloath made of\nwhite and black threds interwoven, wherein though the whole piece\nappear neither white nor black, but of a resulting Colour, that is\ngray, yet each of the white and black threds that compose it, remains\nwhat it was before, as would appear if the threds were pull'd asunder,\nand sorted each Colour by it self. This (pursues _Eleutherius_) being,\nas I understand it, the State of the Controversie, and the\n_Aristotelians_ after their Master Commonly Defining, that Mistion is\n_Miscibilium alteratorum Unio_, that seems to comport much better\nwith the Opinion of the Chymists, then with that of their Adversaries,\nsince according to that as the newly mention'd Example declares, there\nis but a _Juxta_-position of separable Corpuscles, retaining each its\nown Nature, whereas according to the _Aristotelians_, when what they\nare pleas'd to call a mixt Body results from the Concourse of the\nElements, the _Miscibilia_ cannot so properly be said to be Alter'd,\nas Destroy'd, since there is no Part in the mixt Body, how small\nsoever, that can be call'd either Fir [Transcriber's Note: Fire], or\nAir, or Water, or Earth.\n\nNor indeed can I well understand, how Bodies can be mingl'd other\nwayes then as I have declar'd, or at least how they can be mingl'd, as\nour Peripateticks would have it. For whereas _Aristotle_ tells us,\nthat if a Drop of Wine be put into ten thousand Measures of Water, the\nWine being Overpower'd by so Vast a Quantity of Water will be turn'd\ninto it, he speaks to my Apprehension, very improbably; For though One\nshould add to that Quantity of Water as many Drops of Wine as would a\nThousand times exceed it all, yet by his Rule the whole Liquor should\nnot be a _Crama_, a Mixture of Wine and Water, wherein the Wine would\nbe Predominant, but Water only; Since the Wine being added but by a\nDrop at a time would still Fall into nothing but Water, and\nConsequently would be turn'd into it. And if this would hold in Metals\ntoo, 'twere a rare secret for Goldsmiths, and Refiners; For by melting\na Mass of Gold, or Silver, and by but casting into it Lead or\nAntimony, Grain after Grain, they might at pleasure, within a\nreasonable Compass of time, turn what Quantity they desire, of the\nIgnoble into the Noble Metalls. And indeed since a Pint of wine, and a\npint of water, amount to about a Quart of Liquor, it seems manifest to\nsense, that these Bodies doe not Totally Penetrate one another, as one\nwould have it; but that each retains its own Dimensions; and\nConsequently, that they are by being Mingl'd only divided into minute\nBodies, that do but touch one another with their Surfaces, as do the\nGrains, of Wheat, Rye, Barley, &c. in a heap of severall sorts of\nCorn: And unless we say, that as when one measure of wheat, for\nInstance, is Blended with a hundred measures of Barley, there happens\nonly a _Juxta_-position and Superficial Contact betwixt the Grains of\nwheat, and as many or thereabouts of the Grains of Barley. So when a\nDrop of wine is mingl'd with a great deal of water, there is but an\nApposition of so many Vinous Corpuscles to a Correspondent Number of\nAqueous ones; Unless I say this be said, I see not how that Absurdity\nwill be avoyded, whereunto the Stoical Notion of mistion (namely by\n[Greek: synchysis] [Errata: [Greek: Synchysis]], or Confusion) was\nLiable, according to which the least Body may be co-extended with the\ngreatest: Since in a mixt Body wherein before the Elements were\nMingl'd there was, for Instance, but one pound of water to ten\nthousand of Earth, yet according to them there must not be the least\npart of that Compound, that Consisted not as well of Earth, as water.\nBut I insist, Perhaps, too long (sayes _Eleutherius_) upon the proofs\nafforded me by the Nature of Mistion: Wherefore I will but name Two or\nThree other Arguments; whereof the first shall be, that according to\n_Aristotle_ himself, the motion of a mixt Body followes the Nature of\nthe Predominant Element, as those wherein the Earth prevails, tend\ntowards the Centre of heavy Bodies. And since many things make it\nEvident, that in divers Mixt Bodies the Elementary Qualities are as\nwell Active, though not altogether so much so as in the Elements\nthemselves, it seems not reasonable to deny the actual Existence of\nthe Elements in those Bodies wherein they Operate.\n\nTo which I shall add this Convincing Argument, that Experience\nmanifests, and _Aristotle_ Confesses it, that the _Miscibilia_ may be\nagain separated from a mixt Body, as is Obvious in the Chymical\nResolutions of Plants and Animalls, which could not be unless they did\nactually retain their formes in it: For since, according to\n_Aristotle_, and I think according to truth, there is but one common\nMass of all things, which he has been pleas'd to call _Materia Prima_;\nAnd since tis not therefore the Matter but the Forme that Constitutes\nand Discriminates Things, to say that the Elements remain not in a\nMixt Body, according to their Formes, but according to their Matter,\nis not to say that they remain there at all; Since although those\nPortions of Matter were Earth and water, &c. before they concurr'd,\nyet the resulting Body being once Constituted, may as well be said to\nbe simple as any of the Elements, the Matter being confessedly of the\nsame Nature in all Bodies, and the Elementary Formes being according\nto this _Hypothesis_ perish'd and abolish'd.\n\nAnd lastly, and if we will Consult Chymical Experiments, we shall find\nthe Advantages of the Chymical Doctrine above the Peripatetick Title\nlittle less then Palpable. For in that Operation that Refiners call\nQuartation, which they employ to purifie Gold, although three parts of\nSilver be so exquisitely mingl'd by Fusion with a fourth Part of Gold\n(whence the Operation is Denominated) that the resulting Mass acquires\nseverall new Qualities, by virtue of the Composition, and that there\nis scarce any sensible part of it that is not Compos'd of both the\nmetalls; Yet if You cast this mixture into _Aqua Fortis_, the Silver\nwill be dissolv'd in the _Menstruum_, and the Gold like a dark or\nblack Powder will fall to the Bottom of it, and either Body may be\nagain reduc'd into such a Metal as it was before, which shews: that it\nretain'd its Nature, notwithstanding its being mixt _per Minima_ with\nthe other: We likewise see, that though one part of pure Silver be\nmingled with eight or ten Parts, or more, of Lead, yet the Fire will\nupon the Cuppel easily and perfectly separate them again. And that\nwhich I would have you peculiarly Consider on this Occasion is, that\nnot only in Chymicall Anatomies there is a Separation made of the\nElementary Ingredients, but that some Mixt Bodies afford a very much\ngreater Quantity of this or that Element or Principle than of another;\nas we see, that Turpentine and Amber yield much more Oyl and Sulphur\nthan they do Water, whereas Wine, which is confess'd to be a perfectly\nmixt Bodie, yields but a little Inflamable Spirit, or Sulphur, and not\nmuch more Earth; but affords a vast proportion of Phlegm or water:\nwhich could not be, if as the Peripateticks suppose, every, even of\nthe minutest Particles, were of the same nature with the whole, and\nconsequently did contain both Earth and Water, and Aire, and Fire;\nWherefore as to what _Aristotle_ principally, and almost only Objects,\nthat unless his Opinion be admitted, there would be no true and\nperfect Mistion, but onely Aggregates or Heaps of contiguous\nCorpuscles, which, though the Eye of Man cannot discerne, yet the Eye\nof a _Lynx_ might perceive not to be of the same Nature with one\nanother and with their _Totum_, as the Nature of Mistion requires, if\nhe do not beg the Question, and make Mistion to consist in what other\nNaturalists deny to be requisite to it, yet He at least objects That\nas a great Inconvenience which I cannot take for such, till he have\nbrought as Considerable Arguments as I have propos'd to prove the\ncontrary, to evince that Nature makes other Mistions than such as I\nhave allowed, wherein the _Miscibilia_ are reduc'd into minute Parts,\nand United as farr as sense can discerne: which if You will not grant\nto be sufficient for a true Mistion, he must have the same Quarrel\nwith Nature her self, as with his Adversaries.\n\nWherefore (Continues _Eleutherius_) I cannot but somewhat marvail that\n_Carneades_ should oppose the Doctrine of the Chymist in a Particular,\nwherein they do as well agree with his old Mistress, Nature, as\ndissent from his old Adversary, _Aristotle_.\n\nI must not (replies _Carneades_) engage my self at present to examine\nthorowly the Controversies concerning Mistion: And if there were no\nthird thing, but that I were reduc'd to embrace absolutely and\nunreservedly either the Opinion of _Aristotle_, or that of the\nPhilosophers that went before him, I should look upon the latter,\nwhich the Chymists have adopted, as the more defensible Opinion: But\nbecause differing in the Opinions about the Elements from both\nParties, I think I can take a middle Course, and Discourse to you of\nMistion after a way that does neither perfectly agree, nor perfectly\ndisagree with either, as I will not peremptorily define, whether there\nbe not Cases wherein some _Phaenomena_ of Mistion seem to favour the\nOpinion that the Chymists Patrons borrow'd of the Antients, I shall\nonly endeavour to shew You that there are some cases which may keep\nthe Doubt, which makes up my second General Consideration from being\nunreasonable.\n\nI shall then freely acknowledge to You (sayes _Carneades_) that I am\nnot over well satisfi'd with the Doctrine that is ascribed to\n_Aristotle_, concerning Mistion, especially since it teaches that the\nfour Elements may again be separated from the mixt Body; whereas if\nthey continu'd not in it, it would not be so much a Separation as a\nProduction. And I think the Ancient Philosophers that Preceded\n_Aristotle_, and Chymists who have since receiv'd the same Opinion, do\nspeak of this matter more intelligibly, if not more probably, then the\nPeripateticks: but though they speak Congruously enough, to their\nbelieving, that there are a certain Number of Primogeneal Bodies, by\nwhose Concourse all those we call Mixts are Generated, and which in\nthe Destruction of mixt Bodies do barely part company, and recede from\none another, just such as they were when they came together; yet I,\nwho meet with very few Opinions that I can entirely Acquiesce in,\nmust confess to You that I am inclin'd to differ not only from the\n_Aristotelians_, but from the old Philosophers and the Chymists, about\nthe Nature of Mistion: And if You will give me leave, I shall Briefly\npropose to you my present Notion of it, provided you will look upon\nit, not so much as an Assertion as an _Hypothesis_; in talking of\nwhich I do not now pretend to propose and debate the whole Doctrine of\nMistion, but to shew that 'tis not Improbable, that sometimes mingl'd\nsubstances may be so strictly united, that it doth not by the usuall\nOperations of the Fire, by which Chymists are wont to suppose\nthemselves to have made the _Analyses_ of mixt Bodies, sufficiently\nappear, that in such Bodies the _Miscibilia_ that concurr'd to make\nthem up do each of them retain its own peculiar Nature: and by the\n_Spagyrists_ Fires may be more easily extricated and Recover'd, than\nAlter'd, either by a Change of Texture in the Parts of the same\nIngredient, or by an Association with some parts of another Ingredient\nmore strict than was that of the parts of this or that _Miscibile_\namong themselves. At these words _Eleu._ having press'd him to do\nwhat he propos'd, and promis'd to do what he desir'd;\n\nI consider then (resumes _Carneades_) that, not to mention those\nimproper Kinds of mistion, wherein _Homogeneous_ Bodies are Joyn'd, as\nwhen Water is mingl'd with water, or two Vessels full of the same kind\nof Wine with one another, the mistion I am now to Discourse of seems,\nGenerally speaking, to be but an Union _per Minima_ of any two or more\nBodies of differing Denominations; as when Ashes and Sand are\nColliquated into Glass or Antimony, and Iron into _Regulus Martis_, or\nWine and Water are mingl'd, and Sugar is dissolv'd in the Mixture. Now\nin this general notion of Mistion it does not appear clearly\ncomprehended, that the _Miscibilia_ or Ingredients do in their small\nParts so retain their Nature and remain distinct in the Compound, that\nthey may thence by the Fire be again taken asunder: For though I deny\nnot that in some Mistions of certain permanent Bodies this Recovery of\nthe same Ingredients may be made, yet I am not convinc'd that it will\nhold in all or even in most, or that it is necessarily deducible from\nChymicall Experiments, and the true Notion of Mistion. To explain\nthis a little, I assume, that Bodies may be mingl'd, and that very\ndurably, that are not Elementary or resolv'd [Errata: nor have been\nresolved] into Elements or Principles that they may be mingl'd; as is\nevident in the _Regulus_ of Colliquated Antimony, and Iron newly\nmention'd; and in Gold Coyne, which lasts so many ages; wherein\ngenerally the Gold is alloy'd by the mixture of a quantity, greater or\nlesser, (in our Mints they use about a 12th. part) of either silver,\nor Copper, or both. Next, I consider, that there being but one\nUniversal matter of things, as 'tis known that the _Aristotelians_\nthemselves acknowledge, who call it _Materia Prima_ (about which\nnevertheless I like not all their Opinions,) the Portions of this\nmatter seem to differ from One Another, but in certain Qualities or\nAccidents, fewer or more; upon whose Account the Corporeal Substance\nthey belong to receives its Denomination, and is referr'd to this or\nthat particular sort of Bodies; so that if it come to lose, or be\ndepriv'd of those Qualities, though it ceases not to be a body, yet it\nceases from being that kind of Body as a Plant, or Animal; or Red,\nGreen, Sweet, Sowre, or the like. I consider that it very often\nhappens that the small parts of Bodies cohere together but by\nimmediate Contact and Rest; and that however, there are few Bodies\nwhose minute Parts stick so close together, to what cause soever their\nCombination be ascrib'd, but that it is possible to meet with some\nother Body, whose small Parts may get between them, and so dis-joyn\nthem; or may be fitted to cohere more strongly with some of them, then\nthose some do with the rest; or at least may be combin'd so closely\nwith them, as that neither the Fire, nor the other usual Instruments\nof Chymical Anatomies will separate them. These things being promis'd,\nI will not peremptorily deny, but that there may be some Clusters of\nParticles, wherein the Particles are so minute, and the Coherence so\nstrict, or both, that when Bodies of Differing Denominations, and\nconsisting of such durable Clusters, happen to be mingl'd, though the\nCompound Body made up of them may be very Differing from either of\nthe Ingredients, yet each of the little Masses or Clusters may so\nretain its own Nature, as to be again separable, such as it was\nbefore. As when Gold and Silver being melted together in a Due\nProportion (for in every Proportion, the Refiners will tell You that\nthe Experiment will not succeed) _Aqua Fortis_ will dissolve the\nSilver, and leave the Gold untoucht; by which means, as you lately\nnoted, both the Metalls may be recover'd from the mixed Mass. But\n(Continues _Carneades_) there are other Clusters wherein the Particles\nstick not so close together, but that they may meet with Corpuscles of\nanother Denomination, which are dispos'd to be more closely United\nwith some of them, then they were among themselves. And in such case,\ntwo thus combining Corpuscles losing that Shape, or Size, or Motion,\nor other Accident, upon whose Account they were endow'd with such a\nDeterminate Quality or Nature, each of them really ceases to be a\nCorpuscle of the same Denomination it was before; and from the\nCoalition of these there may emerge a new Body, as really one, as\neither of the Corpuscles was before they were mingl'd, or, if you\nplease, Confounded: Since this Concretion is really endow'd with its\nown Distinct qualities, and can no more by the Fire, or any other\nknown way of _Analysis_, be divided again into the Corpuscles that at\nfirst concurr'd to make it, than either of them could by the same\nmeans be subdivided into other Particles. But (sayes _Eleutherius_) to\nmake this more intelligible by particular examples; If you dissolve\nCopper in _Aqua Fortis_, or Spirit of Nitre, (for I remember not which\nI us'd, nor do I think it much Material) You may by Crystalizing the\nSolution Obtain a goodly Vitriol; which though by Virtue of the\nComposition it have manifestly diverse Qualities, not to be met with\nin either of the Ingredients, yet it seems that the Nitrous Spirits,\nor at least many of them, may in this Compounded Mass retain their\nformer Nature; for having for tryal sake Distill'd this Vitrioll\nSpirit, there came over store of Red Fumes, which by that Colour, by\ntheir peculiar stinke, and by their Sourness, manifested themselves to\nbe, Nitrous Spirits; and that the remaining Calx continu'd Copper, I\nsuppose you'l easily beleeve. But if you dissolve _Minium_, which is\nbut Lead Powder'd by the Fire, in good Spirit of Vinager, and\nCrystalize the Solution, you shall not only have a Saccharine Salt\nexceedingly differing from both its Ingredients; but the Union of some\nParts of the _Menstruum_ with some of those of the Metal is so strict,\nthat the Spirit of Vinager seems to be, as such, destroy'd, since the\nSaline Corpuscles have quite lost that acidity, upon whose Account the\nLiquor was call'd Spirit of Vinager; nor can any such Acid Parts as\nwere put to the _Minium_ be Separated by any known way from the\n_Saccharum Saturni_ resulting from them both; for not only there is no\nSowrness at all, but an admirable Sweetness to be tasted in the\nConcretion; and not only I found not that Spirit of Wine, which\notherwise will immediately hiss when mingl'd with strong Spirit of\nVinager, would hiss being pour'd upon _Saccharum Saturni_, wherein yet\nthe Acid Salt of Vinager, did it Survive, may seem to be concentrated;\nbut upon the Distillation of _Saccharum Saturni_ by its Self I found\nindeed a Liquor very Penetrant, but not at all Acid, and differing as\nwell in smell and other Qualities, as in tast, from the Spirit of\nVinager; which likewise seem'd to have left some of its Parts very\nfirmly united to the _Caput Mortuum_, which though of a Leaden Nature\nwas in smell, Colour, &c. differing from _Minium_; which brings into\nmy mind, that though two Powders, the one Blew, and the other Yellow,\nmay appear a Green mixture, without either of them losing its own\nColour, as a good Microscope has sometimes inform'd me; yet having\nmingl'd _Minium_ and _Sal Armoniack_ in a requisite Proportion, and\nexpos'd them in a Glass Vessel to the Fire, the whole Mass became\nWhite, and the Red Corpuscles were destroy'd; for though the Calcin'd\nLead was separable from the Salt, yet you'l easily beleeve it did not\npart from it in the Forme of a Red Powder, such as was the _Minium_,\nwhen it was put to the _Sal Armoniack_. I leave it also to be\nconsider'd, whether in Blood, and divers other Bodies, it be probable,\nthat each of the Corpuscles that concurr to make a Compound Body doth,\nthough some of them in some Cases may, retain its own Nature in it,\nso that Chymsts [Transcriber's Note: Chymists] may Extricate each sort\nof them from all the others, wherewith it concurr'd to make a Body of\none Denomination.\n\nI know there may be a Distinction betwixt Matter _Immanent_, when the\nmaterial Parts remain and retain their own Nature in the things\nmateriated, as some of the Schoolmen speak, (in which sence Wood,\nStones and Lime are the matter of a House,) and _Transient_, which in\nthe materiated thing is so alter'd, as to receive a new Forme, without\nbeing capable of re-admitting again the Old. In which sence the\nFriends of this Distinction say, that _Chyle_ is the matter of Blood,\nand Blood that of a Humane Body, of all whose Parts 'tis presum'd to\nbe the Aliment. I know also that it may be said, that of material\nPrinciples, some are _common_ to all mixt Bodies, as _Aristotles_ four\nElements, or the Chymists _Tria Prima_; others _Peculiar_, which\nbelong to this or that sort of Bodies; as Butter and a kind of whey\nmay be said to be the Proper Principles of Cream: and I deny not, but\nthat these Distinctions may in some Cases be of Use; but partly by\nwhat I have said already, and partly by what I am to say, You may\neasily enough guess in what sence I admit them, and discerne that in\nsuch a sence they will either illustrate some of my Opinions, or at\nleast will not overthrow any of them.\n\nTo prosecute then what I was saying before, I will add to this\npurpose, That since the Major part of Chymists Credit, what those they\ncall Philosophers affirme of their Stone, I may represent to them,\nthat though when Common Gold and Lead are mingled Together, the Lead\nmay be sever'd almost un-alter'd from the Gold; yet if instead of Gold\na _Tantillum_ of the Red _Elixir_ be mingled with the Saturn, their\nUnion will be so indissoluble in the perfect Gold that will be\nproduc'd by it, that there is no known, nor perhaps no possible way of\nseparating the diffus'd _Elixir_ from the fixed Lead, but they both\nConstitute a most permanent Body, wherein the Saturne seems to have\nquite lost its Properties that made it be call'd Lead, and to have\nbeen rather transmuted by the _Elixir_, then barely associated to it.\nSo that it seems not alwayes necessary, that the Bodies that are put\ntogether _per minima_, should each retain its own Nature; So as when\nthe Mass it Self is dissipated by the Fire, to be more dispos'd to\nre-appear in its Pristine Forme, then in any new one, which by a\nstricter association of its Parts with those of some of the other\nIngredients of the _Compositum_, then with one another, it may have\nacquired.\n\nAnd if it be objected, that unless the _Hypothesis_ I oppose be\nadmitted, in such Cases as I have proposed there would not be an Union\nbut a Destruction of mingled Bodies, which seems all one as to say,\nthat of such Bodies there is no mistion at all; I answer, that\n_though_ the Substances that are mingl'd remain, only their Accidents\nare Destroy'd, and _though_ we may with tollerable Congruity call them\n_Miscibilia_, because they are Distinct Bodies before they are put\ntogether, however afterwards they are so Confounded that I should\nrather call them Concretions, or Resulting Bodies, than mixt ones; and\n_though_, perhaps, some other and better Account may be propos'd, upon\nwhich the name of mistion may remain; yet if what I have said be\nthought Reason, I shall not wrangle about Words, though I think it\nfitter to alter a Terme of Art, then reject a new Truth, because it\nsuits not with it. If it be also Objected that this Notion of mine,\nconcerning mixtion, though it may be allow'd, when Bodies already\nCompounded are put to be mingl'd, yet it is not applicable to those\nmixtions that are immediately made of the Elements, or Principles\nthemselves; I Answer in the first place, that I here Consider the\nNature of mixtion somewhat more Generally, then the Chymists, who yet\ncannot deny that there are oftentimes Mixtures, and those very durable\nones, made of Bodies that are not Elementary. And in the next place,\nthat though it may be probably pretended that in those Mixtures that\nare made immediately of the Bodies that are call'd Principles or\nElements, the mingl'd Ingredients may better retain their own Nature\nin the Compounded Mass, and be more easily separated from thence; yet,\nbesides that it may be doubted, whether there be any such Primary\nBodies, I see not why the reason I alleadg'd, of the destructibility\nof the Ingredients of Bodies in General, may not sometimes be\nApplicable to Salt Sulphur or Mercury; 'till it be shewn upon what\naccount we are to believe them Priviledged. And however, (if you\nplease but to recall to mind, to what purpose I told you at First, I\nmeant to speak of Mistion at this Time) you will perhaps allow that\nwhat I have hitherto Discoursed about it may not only give some Light\nto the Nature of it in general (especially when I shall have an\nOpportunity to Declare to you my thoughts on that subject more fully)\nbut may on some Occasions also be Serviceable to me in the Insuing\nPart of this Discourse.\n\nBut, to look back Now to that part of our Discourse, whence this\nExcursion concerning Mistion has so long diverted us, though we there\nDeduc'd, from the differing Substances obtained from a Plant nourished\nonly with Water, and from some other things, that it was not necessary\nthat nature should alwaies compound a Body at first of all such\ndiffering bodies as the fire could afterwards make it afford; yet this\nis not all that may be collected from those Experiments. For from\nthem there seems also Deducible something that Subverts an other\nFoundation of the Chymical Doctrine. For since that (as we have seen)\nout of fair Water alone, not only Spirit, but Oyle, and Salt, and\nEarth may be Produced; It will follow that Salt and Sulphur are not\nPrimogeneal Bodies, and principles, since they are every Day made out\nof plain Water by the Texture which the Seed or Seminal principle of\nplants puts it into. And this would not perhaps seem so strange, if\nthrough pride, or negligence, We were not Wont to Overlook the Obvious\nand Familiar Workings of Nature; For if We consider what slight\nQualities they are that serve to denominate one of the _Tria Prima_,\nWe shall find that Nature do's frequently enough work as great\nAlterations in divers parcells of matter: For to be readily dissoluble\nin water, is enough to make the body that is so, passe for a Salt. And\nyet I see not why from a new shufling and Disposition of the Component\nParticles of a body, it should be much harder for Nature to compose a\nbody dissoluble in Water, of a portion of Water that was not so\nbefore, then of the Liquid substance of an Egg, which will easily mix\nwith Water, to produce by the bare warmth of a hatching Hen, Membrans,\nFeathers, Tendons, and other parts, that are not dissoluble in Water\nas that Liquid Substance was: Nor is the Hardness and Brittleness of\nSalt more difficult for Nature to introduce into such a yielding body\nas Water, then it is for her to make the Bones of a Chick out of the\ntender Substance of the Liquors of an Egg. But instead of prosecuting\nthis consideration, as I easily might, I will proceed, as soon as I\nhave taken notice of an objection that lies in my Way. For I easily\nforesee it will be alledged, that the above mentioned Examples are all\ntaken from Plants, and Animals, in whom the Matter is Fashioned by the\nPlastick power of the seed, or something analogous thereunto. Whereas\nthe Fire do's not act like any of the Seminal Principles, but\ndestroyes them all, when they come within its Reach. But to this I\nshall need at present to make but this easy Answer, That whether it be\na Seminal Principle, or any other which fashions that Matter after\nthose various manners I have mentioned to You, yet 'tis Evident, that\neither by the Plastick principle Alone, or that and Heat Together, or\nby some Other cause capable to contex the matter, it is yet possible\nthat the matter may be Anew contriv'd into such Bodies. And 'tis only\nfor the Possibility of this that I am now contending.\n\n\n\n\nTHE\n\nSCEPTICAL CHYMIST.\n\n_The Third Part._\n\n\nWhat I have hitherto Discours'd, _Eleutherius_, (sayes his Friend to\nHim) has, I presume, shew'n You, that a Considering Man may very well\nquestion the Truth of those very Suppositions which Chymists as well\nas Peripateticks, without proving, take for granted; and upon which\nDepends the Validity of the Inferences they draw from their\nExperiments. Wherefore having dispach't that, which though a Chymist\nPerhaps will not, yet I do, look upon as the most Important, as well\nas Difficult, part of my Task, it will now be Seasonable for me to\nproceed to the Consideration of the Experiments themselves, wherein\nthey are wont so much to Triumph and Glory. And these will the rather\ndeserve a serious Examination, because those that Alledge them are\nwont to do it with so much Confidence and Ostentation, that they have\nhitherto impos'd upon almost all Persons, without excepting\nPhilosophers and Physitians themselves, who have read their Books, or\nheard them talk. For some learned Men have been content rather to\nbeleeve what they so boldly Affirm, then be at the trouble and charge,\nto try whether or no it be True. Others again, who have Curiosity\nenough to Examine the Truth of what is Averr'd, want Skill and\nOpportunity to do what they Desire. And the Generality even of Learned\nMen, seeing the Chymists (not contenting themselves with the Schools\nto amuse the World with empty words) Actually Perform'd divers strange\nthings, and, among those Resolve Compound Bodies into several\nSubstances not known by former Philosophers to be contain'd in them:\nMen I say, seeing these Things, and Hearing with what Confidence\nChymists Averr the Substances Obtain'd from Compound Bodies by the\nFire to be the True Elements, or, (as they speak) Hypostaticall\nPrinciples of them, are forward to think it but Just as well as\nModest, that according to the _Logicians_ Rule, the Skilfull _Artists_\nshould be Credited in their own Art; Especially when those things\nwhose Nature they so Confidently take upon them to teach others are\nnot only Productions of their own Skill, but such as others Know not\nelse what to make of.\n\nBut though (Continues _Carneades_) the Chymists have been able upon\nsome or other of the mention'd Acounts, not only to Delight but Amaze,\nand almost to bewitch even Learned Men; yet such as You and I, who are\nnot unpractis'd in the Trade, must not suffer our Selves to be impos'd\nupon by hard Names, or bold Assertions; nor to be dazl'd by that Light\nwhich should but assist us to discern things the more clearly. It is\none thing to be able to help Nature to produce things, and another\nthing to Understand well the Nature of the things produc'd. As we\nsee, that many Persons that can beget Children, are for all that as\nIgnorant of the Number and Nature of the parts, especially the\ninternal ones, that Constitute a Childs Body, as they that never were\nParents. Nor do I Doubt, but you'l excuse me, if as I thank the\nChymists for the things their _Analysis_ shews me, so I take the\nLiberty to consider how many, and what they are, without being\nastonish'd at them; as if, whosoever hath Skill enough to shew men\nsome new thing of his own making, had the Right to make them believe\nwhatsoever he pleases to tell them concerning it.\n\nWherefore I will now proceed to my Third General Consideration, which\nis, That it does not appear, that _Three_ is precisely and Universally\nthe Number of the Distinct Substances or Elements, whereinto mixt\nBodies are resoluble by the Fire; I mean that 'tis not prov'd by\nChymists, that all the Compound Bodies, which are granted to be\nperfectly mixt, are upon their Chymical _Analysis_ divisible each of\nthem into just Three Distinct Substances, neither more nor less,\nwhich are wont to be lookt upon as Elementary, or may as well be\nreputed so as those that are so reputed. Which last Clause I subjoyne,\nto prevent your Objecting, that some of the Substances I may have\noccasion to mention by and by, are not perfectly Homogeneous, nor\nConsequently worthy of the name of Principles. For that which I am now\nto consider, is, into how many Differing Substances, that may\nplausibly pass for the Elementary Ingredients of a mix'd Body, it may\nbe Analyz'd by the Fire; but whether each of these be un-compounded, I\nreserve to examine, when I shall come to the next General\nConsideration; where I hope to evince, that the Substances which the\nChymists not only allow, but assert to be the Component Principles of\nthe Body resolv'd into them, are not wont to be uncompounded.\n\nNow there are two Kind of Arguments (pursues _Carneades_) which may be\nbrought to make my Third Proposition seem probable; one sort of them\nbeing of a more Speculative Nature, and the other drawn from\nExperience. To begin then with the first of these.\n\nBut as _Carneades_ was going to do as he had said, _Eleutherius_\ninterrupted him, by saying with a somewhat smiling countenance;\n\nIf you have no mind I should think, that the Proverb, _That Good Wits\nhave bad Memories_, is Rational and Applicable to You, You must not\nForget now you are upon the Speculative Considerations, that may\nrelate to the Number of the Elements; that your Self did not long\nsince Deliver and Concede some Propositions in Favour of the Chymical\nDoctrine, which I may without disparagement to you think it uneasie,\neven for _Carneades_ to answer.\n\nI have not, replies he, Forgot the Concessions you mean; but I hope\ntoo, that you have not forgot neither with what Cautions they were\nmade, when I had not yet assumed the Person I am now sustaining. But\nhowever, I shall to content You, so discourse of my Third general\nconsideration, as to let You see, That I am not Unmindful of the\nthings you would have me remember.\n\nTo talk then again according to such principles as I then made use of,\nI shall represent, that if it be granted rational to suppose, as I\nthen did, that the Elements consisted at first of certain small and\nprimary Coalitions of the minute Particles of matter into Corpuscles\nvery numerous, and very like each other, It will not be absurd to\nconceive, that such primary Clusters may be of far more sorts then\nthree or five; and consequently, that we need not suppose, that in\neach of the compound Bodies we are treating of there should be found\njust three sorts of such primitive Coalitions, as we are speaking of.\n\nAnd if according to this Notion we allow a considerable number of\ndiffering Elements, I may add, that it seems very possible, that to\nthe constitution of one sort of mixt Bodies two kinds of Elementary\nones may suffice (as I lately Exemplify'd to you, in that most durable\nConcrete, Glass,) another sort of Mixts may be compos'd of three\nElements, another of four, another of five, and another perhaps of\nmany more. So that according to this Notion, there can be no\ndeterminate number assign'd, as that of the Elements; of all sorts of\ncompound Bodies whatsoever, it being very probable that some Concretes\nconsist of fewer, some of more Elements. Nay, it does not seem\nImpossible, according to these Principles, but that there may be two\nsorts of Mixts, whereof the one may not have any of all the same\nElements as the other consists of; as we oftentimes see two words,\nwhereof the one has not any one of the Letters to be met with in the\nother; or as we often meet with diverse Electuaries, in which no\nIngredient (except Sugar) is common to any two of them. I will not\nhere debate whether there may not be a multitude of these Corpuscles,\nwhich by reason of their being primary and simple, might be called\nElementary, if several sorts of them should convene to compose any\nBody, which are as yet free, and neither as yet contex'd and entangl'd\nwith primary Corpuscles of other kinds, but remains liable to be\nsubdu'd and fashion'd by Seminal Principles, or the like powerful and\nTransmuting Agent, by whom they may be so connected among themselves,\nor with the parts of one of the bodies, as to make the compound\nBodies, whose Ingredients they are, resoluble into more, or other\nElements then those that Chymists have hitherto taken notice of.\n\nTo all which I may add, that since it appears, by what I observ'd to\nyou of the permanency of Gold and Silver, that even Corpuscles that\nare not of an Elementary but compounded Nature, may be of so durable a\nTexture, as to remain indissoluble in the ordinary _Analysis_ that\nChymists make of Bodies by the Fire; 'Tis not impossible but that,\nthough there were but three Elements, yet there may be a greater\nnumber of Bodies, which the wonted wayes of Anatomy will not discover\nto be no Elementary Bodies.\n\nBut, sayes _Carneades_, having thus far, in compliance to you, talk't\nconjecturally of the number of the Elements, 'tis now time to\nconsider, not of how many Elements it is possible that Nature may\ncompound mix'd Bodies, but (at least as farr as the ordinary\nExperiments of Chymists will informe us) of how many she doth make\nthem up.\n\nI say then, that it does not by these sufficiently appear to me, that\nthere is any one determinate number of Elements to be uniformly met\nwith in all the several sorts of Bodies allow'd to be perfectly mixt.\n\nAnd for the more distinct proof of this Proposition, I shall in the\nfirst place Represent, That there are divers Bodies, which I could\nnever see by fire divided into so many as three Elementary substances.\nI would fain (as I said lately to _Philoponus_) see that fixt and\nnoble Metal we call Gold separated into Salt, Sulphur and Mercury: and\nif any man will submit to a competent forfeiture in case of failing, I\nshall willingly in case of prosperous successe pay both for the\nMaterials and the charges of such an Experiment. 'Tis not, that after\nwhat I have try'd my self I dare peremptorily deny, that there may out\nof Gold be extracted a certain substance, which I cannot hinder\nChymists from calling its Tincture or Sulphur; and which leaves the\nremaining Body depriv'd of its wonted colour. Nor am I sure, that\nthere cannot be drawn out of the same Metal a real quick and running\nMercury. But for the Salt of Gold, I never could either see it, or be\nsatisfied that there was ever such a thing separated, _in rerum\nnatura_, by the relation of any credible eye witnesse. And for the\nseveral Processes that Promise that effect, the materials that must be\nwrought upon are somewhat too pretious and costly to be wasted upon so\ngroundlesse adventures, of which not only the successe is doubtful,\nbut the very possibility is not yet demonstrated. Yet that which most\ndeterres me from such tryalls, is not their chargeablenesse, but their\nunsatisfactorinesse, though they should succeed. For the Extraction of\nthis golden Salt being in Chymists Processes prescribed to be effected\nby corrosive _Menstruums_, or the Intervention of other Saline Bodies,\nit will remain doubtful to a wary person, whether the Emergent Salt be\nthat of the Gold it self; or of the Saline Bodies or Spirits employ'd\nto prepare it; For that such disguises of Metals do often impose upon\nArtists, I am sure _Eleutherius_ is not so much a stranger to\nChymistry as to ignore. I would likewise willingly see the three\nprinciples separated from the pure sort of Virgin-Sand, from\n_Osteocolla_, from refined Silver, from Quicksilver, freed from its\nadventitious Sulphur, from _Venetian_ Talk [Transcriber's Note:\nTalck], which by long detention in an extreme _Reverberium_, I could\nbut divide into smaller Particles, (not the constituent principles,)\nNay, which, when I caused it to be kept, I know not how long, in a\nGlasse-house fire, came out in the Figure it's Lumps had when put in,\nthough alter'd to an almost _Amethystine_ colour; and from divers\nother Bodies, which it were now unnecessary to enumerate. For though I\ndare not absolutely affirme it to be impossible to Analyze these\nBodies into their _Tria Prima_; yet because, neither my own\nExperiments, nor any competent Testimony hath hitherto either taught\nme how such an _Analysis_ may be made, or satisfy'd me, that it hath\nbeen so, I must take the Liberty to refrain from believing it, till\nthe Chymists prove it, or give us intelligible and practicable\nProcesses to performe what they pretend. For whilst they affect that\n_AEnigmatical_ obscurity with which they are wont to puzzle the Readers\nof their divulg'd Processes concerning the Analyticall Preparation of\nGold or Mercury, they leave wary persons much unsatisfyed whether or\nno the differing Substances, they promise to produce, be truly the\nHypostatical Principles, or only some intermixtures of the divided\nBodies with those employ'd to work upon them, as is Evident in the\nseeming Crystalls of Silver, and those of Mercury; which though by\nsome inconsiderately supposed to be the Salts of those Metalls, are\nplainly but mixtures of the Metalline Bodies, with the Saline parts of\n_Aqua fortis_ or other corrosive Liquors; as is evident by their being\nreducible into Silver or Quicksilver, as they were before.\n\nI cannot but Confesse (saith _Eleutherius_) that though Chymists may\nupon probable grounds affirm themselves Able to obtain their _Tria\nPrima_, from Animals and Vegetables, yet I have often wondred that\nthey should so confidently pretend also to resolve all Metalline and\nother Mineral bodies into Salt, Sulphur, and Mercury. For 'tis a\nsaying almost Proverbial, among those Chymists themselves that are\naccounted Philosophers; and our famous Countryman _Roger Bacon_ has\nparticularly adopted it; that _Facilius est aurum facere quam\ndestruere_. And I fear, with You, that Gold is not the only Mineral\nfrom which Chymists are wont fruitlessly to attempt the separating of\ntheir three Principles. I know indeed (continues _Eleutherius_) that\nthe Learned _Sennertus_, even in that book where he takes not upon him\nto play the Advocate for the Chymists, but the Umpier betwixt them and\nthe Peripateticks, expresses himself roundly, thus;[11] _Salem omnibus\ninesse (mixtis scilicet) & ex iis fieri posse omnibus in\nresolutionibus Chymicis versatis notissimum est._ And in the next\nPage, _Quod de sale dixi_, saies he, _Idem de Sulphure dici potest_:\nbut by his favour I must see very good proofs, before I believe such\ngeneral Assertions, how boldly soever made; and he that would convince\nme of their truth, must first teach me some true and practicable way\nof separating Salt and Sulphur from Gold, Silver, and those many\ndifferent sort of Stones, that a violent Fire does not bring to Lime,\nbut to Fusion; and not only I, for my own part, never saw any of those\nnewly nam'd Bodies so resolved; but _Helmont_, who was much better\nvers'd in the Chymical Anatomizing of Bodies then either _Sennertus_\nor _I_, has somewhere this resolute passage;[12] _Scio_ (saies he) _ex\narena, silicibus & saxis, non Calcariis, nunquam Sulphur aut\nMercurium trahi posse_; Nay _Quercetanus_ himself, though the grand\nstickler for the _Tria Prima_, has this Confession of the\nIrresolubleness of Diamonds;[13] _Adamas_ (saith he) _omnium factus\nLapidum solidissimus ac durissimus ex arctissima videlicet trium\nprincipiorum unione ac Cohaerentia, quae nulla arte separationis in\nsolutionem principiorum suorum spiritualium disjungi potest._ And\nindeed, pursues _Eleutherius_, I was not only glad, but somewhat\nsurprized to find you inclined to Admit that there may be a Sulphur\nand a running Mercury drawn from Gold; for unlesse you do (as your\nexpression seem'd to intimate) take the word Sulphur in a very loose\nsence, I must doubt whether our Chymists can separate a Sulphur from\nGold: For when I saw you make the experiment that I suppose invited\nyou to speak as you did, I did not judge the golden Tincture to be the\ntrue principle of Sulphur extracted from the body, but an aggregate of\nsome such highly colour'd parts of the Gold, as a Chymist would have\ncalled a _Sulphur incombustible_, which in plain English seems to be\nlittle better than to call it a Sulphur and no Sulphur. And as for\nMetalline Mercuries, I had not _wondred_ at it, though you had\nexpressed much more severity in speaking of them: For I remember that\nhaving once met an old and famous Artist, who had long been (and still\nis) Chymist to a great Monarch, the repute he had of a very honest man\ninvited me to desire him to tell me ingenuously whether or no, among\nhis many labours, he had ever really extracted a true and running\nMercury out of Metalls; to which question he freely replyed, that he\nhad never separated a true Mercury from any Metal; nor had ever seen\nit really done by any man else. And though Gold is, of all Metalls,\nThat, whose Mercury Chymists have most endeavoured to extract, and\nwhich they do the most brag they have extracted; yet the Experienced\n_Angelus Sala_, in his _Spagyrical_ account of the seven _Terrestrial_\nPlanets (that is the seven metalls) affords us this memorable\nTestimony, to, our present purpose; _Quanquam_ (saies he) _&c.\nexperientia tamen (quam stultorum Magistrum [Errata: Magistram]\nvocamus) certe Comprobavit, Mercurium auri adeo fixum, maturum, &\narcte cum reliquis ejusdem corporis substantiis conjungi, ut nullo\nmodo retrogredi possit._ To which he sub-joynes, that he himself had\nseen much Labour spent upon that Design, but could never see any such\nMercury produc'd thereby. And I easily beleeve what he annexes; _that\nhe had often seen Detected many tricks and Impostures of Cheating_\nAlchymists. For, the most part of those that are fond of such\n_Charlatans_, being unskilfull or Credulous, or both, 'tis very easie\nfor such as have some Skill, much craft, more boldness, and no\nConscience, to impose upon them; and therefore, though many profess'd\n_Alchymists_, and divers Persons of Quality have told me that they\nhave made or seen the Mercury of Gold, or of this or that other Metal;\nyet I have been still apt to fear that either these persons have had a\nDesign to deceive others; or have not had Skill and circumspection\nenough to keep themselves from being deceived.\n\n[Footnote 11: Sennert. lib. de cons. & dissens. pag. 147.]\n\n[Footnote 12: Helmon. pag. 409.]\n\n[Footnote 13: Quercet. apud Billich. in Thessalo redivivo. pag. 99.]\n\nYou recall to my mind (sayes _Carneades_) a certain Experiment I once\ndevis'd, innocently to deceive some persons, and let them and others\nsee how little is to be built upon the affirmation of those that are\neither unskillfull or unwary, when they tell us they have seen\n_Alchymists_ make the Mercury of this or that Metal; and to make this\nthe more evident, I made my Experiment much more Slight, Short and\nSimple, than the Chymists usuall processes to Extract Metalline\nMercuries; which Operations being commonly more Elaborate and\nIntricate, and requiring a much more longer time, give the\n_Alchymists_ a greater opportunity to Cozen, and Consequently are more\nObnoxious to the Spectators suspicion. And that wherein I endeavour'd\nto make my Experiment look the more like a True _Analysis_, was, that\nI not only pretended as well as others to extract a Mercury from the\nMetal I wrought upon, but likewise to separate a large proportion of\nmanifest and inflamable Sulphur. I take then, of the filings of\nCopper, about a Drachme or two, of common sublimate, powder'd, the\nlike Weight, and _Sal Armoniack_ near about as much as of Sublimate;\nthese three being well mingl'd together I put into a small Vial with a\nlong neck, or, which I find better, into a Glass Urinall, which\n(having first stopped it with Cotton) to avoid the Noxious Fumes, I\napproach by degrees to a competent Fire of well kindled coals, or\n(which looks better, but more endangers the Glass) to the Flame of a\ncandle; and after a while the bottom of the Glass being held Just upon\nthe Kindled Coals, or in the flame, You may in about a quarter of an\nHour, or perchance in halfe that time, perceive in the Bottom of the\nGlass some running Mercury; and if then You take away the Glass and\nbreak it, You shall find a Parcel of Quicksilver, Perhaps altogether,\nand perhaps part of it in the pores of the Solid Mass; You shall find\ntoo, that the remaining Lump being held to the Flame of the Candle\nwill readily burn with a greenish Flame, and after a little while\n(perchance presently) will in the Air Acquire a Greenish Blew, which\nbeing the Colour that is ascrib'd to Copper, when its Body is\nunlocked, 'Tis easie to perswade Men that this is the True Sulphur of\n_Venus_, especially since not only the Salts may be Suppos'd partly to\nbe Flown away, and partly to be Sublim'd to the upper part of the\nGlass, whose inside (will Commonly appear Whitened by them) but the\nMetal seems to be quite Destroy'd, the Copper no longer appearing in a\nMetalline Forme, but almost in that of a Resinous Lump; whereas indeed\nthe Case is only this, That the Saline parts of the Sublimate,\ntogether with the _Sal Armoniack_, being excited and actuated by the\nVehement heat, fall upon the Copper, (which is a Metal they can more\neasily corrode, than silver) whereby the small parts of the Mercury\nbeing freed from the Salts that kept them asunder, and being by the\nheat tumbled up and down after many Occursions, they Convene into a\nConspicuous Mass of Liquor; and as for the Salts, some of the more\nVolatile of them Subliming to the upper part of the Glass, the others\nCorrode the Copper, and uniting themselves with it do strangely alter\nand Disguise its Metallick Form, and compose with it a new kind of\nConcrete inflamable like Sulphur; concerning which I shall not now say\nany thing, since I can Referr You to the Diligent Observations which I\nremember Mr. _Boyle_ has made concerning this Odde kind of\nVerdigrease. But Continues _Carneades_ smiling, you know I was not\ncut out for a Mountebank, and therefore I will hasten to resume the\nperson of a Sceptick, and take up my discourse where You diverted me\nfrom prosecuting it.\n\nIn the next place, then, I consider, that, as there are some Bodies\nwhich yield not so many as the three Principles; so there are many\nothers, that in their Resolution Exhibite more principles than three;\nand that therefore the Ternary Number is not that of the Universal and\nAdequate Principles of Bodies. If you allow of the Discourse I ately\n[Errata: lately] made You, touching the primary Associations of the\nsmall Particles of matter, You will scarce think it improbable, that\nof such Elementary Corpuscles there may be more sorts then either\nthree, or four, or five. And if you will grant, what will scarce be\ndeny'd, that Corpuscles of a compounded Nature may in all the wonted\nExamples of Chymists pass for Elementary, I see not, why you should\nthink it impossible, that as _Aqua Fortis_, or _Aqua Regis_ will make\na Separation of colliquated Silver and Gold, though the Fire cannot;\nso there may be some Agent found out so subtile and so powerfull, at\nleast in respect of those particular compounded Corpuscles, as to be\nable to resolve them into those more simple ones, whereof they\nconsist, and consequently encrease the number of the Distinct\nSubstances, whereinto the mixt Body has been hitherto thought\nresoluble. And if that be true, which I recited to you a while ago out\nof _Helmont_ concerning the Operations of the _Alkahest_, which\ndivides Bodies into other Distinct Substances, both as to number and\nNature, then the Fire does; it will not a little countenance my\nConjecture. But confining our selves to such wayes of Analyzing mix'd\nBodies, as are already not unknown to Chymists, it may without\nAbsurdity be Question'd, whether besides those grosser Elements of\nBodies, which they call Salt Sulphur and Mercury, there may not be\nIngredients of a more Subtile Nature, which being extreamly little,\nand not being in themselves Visible, may escape unheeded at the\nJunctures of the Destillatory Vessels, though never so carefully\nLuted. For let me observe to you one thing, which though not taken\nnotice of by Chymists, may be a notion of good Use in divers Cases to\na Naturalist, that we may well suspect, that there may be severall\nSorts of Bodies, which are not Immediate Objects of any one of our\nsenses; since we See, that not only those little Corpuscles that issue\nout of the Loadstone, and perform the Wonders for which it is justly\nadmired; But the _Effluviums_ of Amber, Jet, and other Electricall\nConcretes, though by their effects upon the particular Bodies dispos'd\nto receive their Action, they seem to fall under the Cognizance of our\nSight, yet do they not as Electrical immediately Affect any of our\nsenses, as do the bodies, whether minute or greater, that we See,\nFeel, Taste, &c. But, continues _Carneades_, because you may expect I\nshould, as the Chymists do, consider only the sensible Ingredients of\nMixt Bodies, let us now see, what Experience will, even as to these,\nsuggest to us.\n\nIt seems then questionable enough, whether from Grapes variously\norder'd there may not be drawn more distinct Substances by the help of\nthe Fire, then from most other mixt Bodies. For the Grapes themselves\nbeing dryed into Raysins and distill'd, will (besides _Alcali_,\nPhlegm, and Earth) yield a considerable quantity of an Empyreumatical\nOyle, and a Spirit of a very different nature from that of Wine. Also\nthe unfermented Juice of Grapes affords other distil'd Liquors then\nWine doth. The Juice of Grapes after fermentation will yield a\n_Spiritus Ardens_; which if competently rectifyed will all burn away\nwithout leaving any thing remaining. The same fermented Juice\ndegenerating into Vinager, yields an acid and corroding Spirit. The\nsame Juice turn'd [Errata: tunned] up, armes it self with Tartar; out\nof which may be separated, as out of other Bodies, Phlegme, Spirit,\nOyle, Salt and Earth: not to mention what Substances may be drawn from\nthe Vine it self, probably differing from those which are separated\nfrom Tartar, which is a body by it self, that has few resemblers in\nthe World. And I will further consider that what force soever you will\nallow this instance, to evince that there are some Bodies that yield\nmore Elements then others, it can scarce be deny'd but that the Major\npart of bodies that are divisible into Elements, yield more then\nthree. For, besides those which the Chymists are pleased to name\nHypostatical, most bodies contain two others, Phlegme and Earth, which\nconcurring as well as the rest to the constitution of Mixts, and being\nas generally, if not more, found in their _Analysis_, I see no\nsufficient cause why they should be excluded from the number of\nElements. Nor will it suffice to object, as the _Paracelsians_ are\nwont to do, that the _Tria prima_ are the most useful Elements, and\nthe Earth and Water but worthlesse and unactive; for Elements being\ncall'd so in relation to the constituting of mixt Bodies, it should be\nupon the account of its Ingrediency, not of its use, that any thing\nshould be affirmed or denyed to be an Element: and as for the\npretended uselessness of Earth and Water, it would be consider'd that\nusefulnesse, or the want of it, denotes only a Respect or Relation to\nus; and therefore the presence, or absence of it, alters not the\nIntrinsick nature of the thing. The hurtful Teeth of Vipers are for\nought I know useless to us, and yet are not to be deny'd to be parts\nof their Bodies; and it were hard to shew of what greater Use to Us,\nthen Phlegme and Earth, are those Undiscern'd Stars, which our New\n_Telescopes_ discover to Us, in many Blanched places of the Sky; and\nyet we cannot but acknowledge them Constituent and Considerably great\nparts of the Universe. Besides that whether or no the Phlegme and\nEarth be immediately Useful, but necessary to constitute the Body\nwhence they are separated; and consequently, if the mixt Body be not\nUseless to us, those constituent parts, without which it could not\nhave been That mixt Body, may be said not to be Unuseful to Us: and\nthough the Earth and Water be not so conspicuously Operative (after\nseparation) as the other three more active Principles, yet in this\ncase it will not be amiss to remember the lucky Fable of _Menemius\nAggrippa_, of the dangerous Sedition of the Hands and Legs, and other\nmore busie parts of the Body, against the seemingly unactive Stomack.\nAnd to this case also we may not unfitly apply that Reasoning of an\nApostle, to another purpose; _If the Ear shall say, because I Am not\nthe Eye, I am not of the Body; Is it therefore not of the Body? If the\nwhole Body were Eye, where were the Hearing? If the whole were for\nhearing, where the smelling?_ In a word, since Earth and water appear,\nas clearly and as generally as the other Principles upon the\nresolution of Bodies, to be the Ingredients whereof they are made up;\nand since they are useful, if not immediately to us, or rather to\nPhysitians, to the Bodies they constitute, and so though in somewhat a\nremoter way, are serviceable to us; to exclude them out of the number\nof Elements, is not to imitate Nature.\n\n[Transcriber's Note: See the printer's note (beginning \"The Authors\nconstant Absence\") at the end of the book for material that the\nprinter inadvertently omitted from this page.]\n\nBut, pursues _Carneades_, though I think it Evident, that Earth and\nPhlegme are to be reckon'd among the Elements of most Animal and\nVegetable Bodies, yet 'tis not upon that Account alone, that I think\ndivers Bodies resoluble into more Substances then three. For there are\ntwo Experiments, that I have sometimes made to shew, that at least\nsome Mixts are divisible into more Distinct Substances then five. The\none of these Experiments, though 'twill be more seasonable for me to\nmention it fully anon, yet in the mean time, I shall tell you thus\nmuch of it, That out of two Distill'd Liquors, which pass for\nElements of the Bodies whence they are drawn, I can without Addition\nmake a true Yellow and Inflamable Sulphur, notwithstanding that the\ntwo Liquors remain afterwards Distinct. Of the other Experiment, which\nperhaps will not be altogether unworthy your Notice, I must now give\nyou this particular Account. I had long observ'd, that by the\nDestillation of divers Woods, both in Ordinary, and some unusuall\nsorts of Vessels, the Copious Spirit that came over, had besides a\nstrong tast, to be met with in the Empyreumaticall Spirits of many\nother Bodies, an Acidity almost like that of Vinager: Wherefore I\nsuspected, that though the sowrish Liquor Distill'd, for Instance,\nfrom Box-Wood, be lookt upon by Chymists as barely the Spirit of it,\nand therefore as one single Element or Principle; yet it does really\nconsist of two Differing Substances, and may be divisible into them;\nand consequently, that such Woods and other Mixts as abound with such\na Vinager, may be said to consist of one Element or Principle, more\nthen the Chymists as yet are Aware of; Wherefore bethinking my self,\nhow the separation of these two Spirits might be made, I Quickly\nfound, that there were several wayes of Compassing it. But that of\nthem which I shall at present mention, was this, Having Destill'd a\nQuantity of Box-Wood _per se_, and slowly rectify'd the sowrish\nSpirit, the better to free it both from Oyle and Phlegme, I cast into\nthis Rectify'd Liquor a convenient Quantity of Powder'd Coral,\nexpecting that the Acid part of the Liquor would Corrode the Coral,\nand being associated with it would be so retain'd by it, that the\nother part of the Liquor, which was not of an acid Nature, nor fit to\nfasten upon the Corals, would be permitted to ascend alone. Nor was I\ndeceiv'd in my Expectation; For having gently abstracted the Liquor\nfrom the Coralls, there came over a Spirit of a Strong smell, and of a\ntast very piercing, but without any sourness; and which was in diverse\nqualities manifestly different, not only from a Spirit of Vinager, but\nfrom some Spirit of the same Wood, that I purposely kept by me without\ndepriving it of its acid Ingredient. And to satisfy you, that these\ntwo Substances were of a very differing Nature, I might informe you\nof several Tryals that I made, but must not name some of them, because\nI cannot do so without making some unseasonable discoveries. Yet this\nI shall tell you at present, that the sowre Spirit of _Box_, not only\nwould, as I just now related, dissolve Corals, which the other would\nnot fasten on, but being pour'd upon Salt of Tartar would immediately\nboile and hiss, whereas the other would lye quietly upon it. The acid\nSpirit pour'd upon _Minium_ made a Sugar of Lead, which I did not find\nthe other to do; some drops of this penetrant spirit being mingl'd\nwith some drops of the blew Syrup of Violets seem'd rather to dilute\nthen otherwise alter the colour; whereas the Acid Spirit turn'd the\nsyrup of a reddish colour, and would probably have made it of as pure\na red as Acid Salts are wont to do, had not its operation been\nhindered by the mixture of the other Spirit. A few drops of the\ncompound Spirit being Shaken into a pretty quantity of the infusion of\n_Lignum Nephriticum_, presently destroyed all the blewish colour,\nwhereas the other Spirit would not take it away. To all which it\nmight be added, that having for tryals sake pour'd fair water upon the\nCorals that remained in the bottom of the glass wherein I had\nrectifyed the double spirit (if I may so call it) that was first drawn\nfrom the Box, I found according to my expectation that the Acid Spirit\nhad really dissolved the Corals, and had coagulated with them. For by\nthe affusion of fair Water, I Obtain'd a Solution, which (to note that\nsingularity upon the bye) was red, whence the Water being evaporated,\nthere remained a soluble Substance much like the Ordinary Salt of\nCoral, as Chymists are pleas'd to call that Magistery of Corals, which\nthey make by dissolving them in common spirit of Vinager, and\nabstracting the _Menstruum ad Siccitatem_. I know not whether I should\nsubjoine, on this occasion, that the simple spirit of Box, if Chymists\nwill have it therefore Saline because it has a strong tast, will\nfurnish us with a new kind of Saline Bodies, differing from those\nhitherto taken notice of. For whereas of the three chief sorts of\nSalts, the Acid, the Alcalizate, and the Sulphureous, there is none\nthat seems to be friends with both the other two, as I may, e're it\nbe long, have occasion to shew; I did not find but that the simple\nspirit of Box did agree very well (at least as farr as I had occasion\nto try it) both with the Acid and the other Salts. For though it would\nlye very quiet with salt of Tartar, Spirit of Urine, or other bodies,\nwhose Salts were either of an Alcalizate or fugitive Nature; yet did\nnot the mingling of Oyle of Vitriol it self produce any hissing or\nEffervescence, which you know is wont to ensue upon the Affusion of\nthat highly Acid Liquor upon either of the Bodies newly mentioned.\n\nI think my self, sayes _Eleutherius_, beholden to you, for this\nExperiment; not only because I forsee you will make it helpful to you\nin the Enquiry you are now upon, but because it teaches us a Method,\nwhereby we may prepare a numerous sort of new spirits, which though\nmore simple then any that are thought Elementary, are manifestly\nendow'd with peculiar and powerfull qualities, some of which may\nprobably be of considerable use in Physick, as well alone, as\nassociated with other things; as one may hopefully guess by the\nredness of that Solution your sour Spirit made of Corals, and by some\nother circumstances of your Narrative. And suppose (pursues\n_Eleutherius_) that you are not so confin'd, for the separation of the\nAcid parts of these compound Spirits from the other, to employ Corals;\nbut that you may as well make use of any Alcalizate Salt, or of\nPearls, or Crabs eyes, or any other Body, upon which common Spirit of\nVinager will easily work, and, to speak in an _Helmontian_ Phrase,\nExantlate it self.\n\nI have not yet tryed, sayes _Carneades_, of what use the mention'd\nliquors may be in Physick, either as Medicines or as _Menstruums_: But\nI could mention now (and may another time) divers of the tryals that I\nmade to satisfy my self of the difference of these two Liquors. But\nthat, as I allow your thinking what you newly told me about Corals, I\npresume you will allow me, from what I have said already, to deduce\nthis Corollary; That there are divers compound bodies, which may be\nresolv'd into four such differing Substances, as may as well merit the\nname of Principles, as those to which the Chymists freely give it. For\nsince they scruple not to reckon that which I call the compound\nSpirit of Box, for the spirit, or as others would have it, the Mercury\nof that Wood, I see not, why the Acid liquor, and the other, should\nnot each of them, especially that last named, be lookt upon as more\nworthy to be called an Elementary Principle; since it must needs be of\na more simple nature then the Liquor, which was found to be divisible\ninto that, and the Acid Spirit. And this further use (continues\n_Carneades_) may be made of our experiment to my present purpose, that\nit may give us a rise to suspect, that since a Liquor reputed by the\nChymists to be, without dispute, Homogeneous, is by so slight a way\ndivisible into two distinct and more simple Ingredients, some more\nskilful or happier Experimenter then I may find a way either further\nto divide one of these Spirits, or to resolve some or other, if not\nall, of those other Ingredients of mixt Bodies, that have hitherto\npass'd among Chymists for their Elements or Principles.\n\n\n\n\nTHE\n\nSCEPTICAL CHYMIST.\n\n_The Fourth Part._\n\n\nAnd thus much (sayes _Carneades_) may suffice to be said of the\n_Number_ of the Distinct substances separable from mixt Bodies by the\nFire: Wherefore I now proceed to consider the _nature_ of them, and\nshew you, That though they seem _Homogeneous_ Bodies, yet have they\nnot the purity and simplicity that is requisite to Elements. And I\nshould immediately proceed to the proof of my Assertion, but that the\nConfidence wherewith Chymists are wont to call each of the Substances\nwe speak of by the name of Sulphur or Mercury, or the other of the\nHypostaticall Principles, and the intollerabln [Errata: intolerable]\nAmbiguity they allow themselves ie [Errata: in] their Writings and\nExpressions, makes it necessary for me in Order to the Keeping you\neither from mistaking me, or thinking I mistake the Controversie, to\ntake Notice to you and complain of the unreasonable Liberty they give\nthemselves of playing with Names at pleasure. And indeed if I were\noblig'd in this Dispute, to have such regard to the Phraseology of\neach particular Chymist, as not to Write any thing which this or that\nAuthor may not pretend, not to contradict this or that sence, which he\nmay give as Occasion serves to his Ambiguous Expressions, I should\nscarce know how to dispute, nor which way to turn myself. For I find\nthat even Eminent Writers, (such as _Raymund Lully_, _Paracelsus_ and\nothers) do so abuse the termes they employ, that as they will now and\nthen give divers things, one name; so they will oftentimes give one\nthing, many Names; and some of them (perhaps) such, as do much more\nproperly signifie some Distinct Body of another kind; nay even in\nTechnical Words or Termes of Art, they refrain not from this\nConfounding Liberty; but will, as I have Observ'd, call the same\nSubstance, sometimes the Sulphur, and Sometimes the Mercury of a Body.\nAnd now I speak of Mercury, I cannot but take Notice, that the\nDescriptions they give us of that Principle or Ingredient of mixt\nBodies, are so intricate, that even those that have Endeavour'd to\nPollish and Illustrate the Notions of the Chymists, are fain to\nconfess that they know not what to make of it, either by Ingenuous\nAcknowledgments, or Descriptions that are not Intelligible.\n\nI must confess (sayes _Eleutherius_) I have, in the reading of\n_Paracelsus_ and other Chymical Authors, been troubled to find, that\nsuch hard Words and Equivocal Expressions, as You justly complain of,\ndo even when they treat of Principles, seem to be studiously affected\nby those Writers; whether to make themselves to be admir'd by their\nReaders, and their Art appear more Venerable and Mysterious, or, (as\nthey would have us think) to conceal from them a Knowledge themselves\njudge inestimable.\n\nBut whatever (sayes _Carneades_) these Men may promise themselves from\na Canting way of delivering the Principles of Nature, they will find\nthe Major part of Knowing Men so vain, as when they understand not\nwhat they read, to conclude, that it is rather the Writers fault then\ntheir own. And those that are so ambitious to be admir'd by the\nVulgar, that rather then go without the Admiration of the Ignorant\nthey will expose themselves to the contempt of the Learned, those\nshall, by my consent, freely enjoy their Option. As for the Mystical\nWriters scrupling to Communicate their Knowledge, they might less to\ntheir own Disparagement, and to the trouble of their Readers, have\nconceal'd it by writing no Books, then by Writing bad ones. If\n_Themistius_ were here, he would not stick to say, that Chymists write\nthus darkly, not because they think their Notions too precious to be\nexplain'd, but because they fear that if they were explain'd, men\nwould discern, that they are farr from being precious. And indeed, I\nfear that the chief Reason why Chymists have written so obscurely of\ntheir three Principles, may be, That not having Clear and Distinct\nNotions of them themselves, they cannot write otherwise then\nConfusedly of what they but Confusedly Apprehend: Not to say that\ndivers of them, being Conscious to the Invalidity of their Doctrine,\nmight well enough discerne that they could scarce keep themselves from\nbeing confuted, but by keeping themselves from being clearly\nunderstood. But though much may be said to Excuse the Chymists when\nthey write Darkly, and AEnigmatically, about the Preparation of their\n_Elixir_, and Some few other grand _Arcana_, the divulging of which\nthey may upon Grounds Plausible enough esteem unfit; yet when they\npretend to teach the General Principles of Natural Philosophers, this\nEquivocall Way of Writing is not to be endur'd. For in such\nSpeculative Enquiries, where the naked Knowledge of the Truth is the\nthing Principally aim'd at, what does he teach me worth thanks that\ndoes not, if he can, make his Notion intelligible to me, but by\nMystical Termes, and Ambiguous Phrases darkens what he should clear\nup; and makes me add the Trouble of guessing at the sence of what he\nEquivocally expresses, to that of examining the Truth of what he seems\nto deliver. And if the matter of the Philosophers Stone, and the\nmanner of preparing it, be such Mysteries as they would have the World\nbelieve them, they may Write Intelligibly and Clearly of the\nPrinciples of mixt Bodies in General, without Discovering what they\ncall the Great Work. But for my part (Continues _Carneades_) what my\nIndignation at this Un-philosophical way of teaching Principles has\nnow extorted from me, is meant chiefly to excuse my self, if I shall\nhereafter oppose any Particular Opinion or assertion, that some\nFollower of _Paracelsus_ or any Eminent Artist may pretend not to be\nhis Masters. For, as I told you long since, I am not Oblig'd to\nexamine private mens writings, (which were a Labour as endless as\nunprofitable) being only engag'd to examine those Opinions about the\n_Tria Prima_, which I find those Chymists I have met with to agree in\nmost: And I Doubt not but my Arguments against their Doctrine will be\nin great part easily enough applicable ev'n to those private\nOpinions, which they do not so directly and expresly oppose. And\nindeed, that which I am now entering upon being the Consideration of\nthe things themselves whereinto _Spagyrists_ resolve mixt Bodies by\nthe Fire, If I can shew that these are not of an Elementary Nature, it\nwill be no great matter what names these or those Chymists have been\npleased to give them. And I question not that to a Wise man, and\nconsequently to _Eleutherius_, it will be lesse considerable to know,\nwhat Men Have thought of Things, then what they Should have thought.\n\nIn the fourth and last place, then, I consider, that as generally as\nChymists are wont to appeal to Experience, and as confidently as they\nuse to instance the several substances separated by the Fire from a\nMixt Body, as a sufficient proof of their being its component\nElements: Yet those differing Substances are many of them farr enough\nfrom Elementary simplicity, and may be yet look'd upon as mixt Bodies,\nmost of them also retaining, somewhat at least, if not very much, of\nthe Nature of those Concretes whence they were forc'd.\n\nI am glad (sayes _Eleutherius_) to see the Vanity or Envy of the\ncanting Chymists thus discover'd and chastis'd; and I could wish, that\nLearned Men would conspire together to make these deluding Writers\nsensible, that they must no longe [Transcriber's Note: longer] hope\nwith Impunity to abuse the World. For whilst such Men are quietly\npermitted to publish Books with promising Titles, and therein to\nAssert what they please, and contradict others, and ev'n themselves as\nthey please, with as little danger of being confuted as of being\nunderstood, they are encourag'd to get themselves a name, at the cost\nof the Readers, by finding that intelligent Men are wont for the\nreason newly mention'd, to let their Books and Them alone: And the\nignorant and credulous (of which the number is still much greater then\nthat of the other) are forward to admire most what they least\nunderstand. But if Judicious men skill'd in Chymical affaires shall\nonce agree to write clearly and plainly of them, and thereby keep men\nfrom being stunn'd, as it were, or imposd upon by dark or empty Words;\n'tis to be hop'd that these men finding that they can no longer write\nimpertinently and absurdly, without being laugh'd at for doing so,\nwill be reduc'd either to write nothing, or Books that may teach us\nsomething, and not rob men, as formerly, of invaluable Time; and so\nceasing to trouble the World with Riddles or Impertinencies, we shall\neither by their Books receive an Advantage, or by their silence escape\nan Inconvenience.\n\nBut after all this is said (continues _Eleutherius_) it may be\nrepresented in favour of the Chymists, that, in one regard the Liberty\nthey take in using names, if it be excusable at any time, may be more\nso when they speak of the substances whereinto their _Analysis_\nresolves mixt Bodies: Since as Parents have the Right to name their\nown Children, it has ever been allow'd to the Authors of new\nInventions, to Impose Names upon them. And therefore the subjects we\nspeak of being so the Productions of the Chymist's Art, as not to be\notherwise, but by it, obtainable; it seems but equitable to give the\nArtists leave to name them as they please: considering also that none\nare so fit and likely to teach us what those Bodies are, as they to\nwhom we ow'd them.\n\nI told You already (sayes _Carneades_) that there is great Difference\nbetwixt the being able to make Experiments, and the being able to give\na Philosophical Account of them. And I will not now add, that many a\nMine-digger may meet, whilst he follows his work, with a Gemm or a\nMineral which he knowes not what to make of, till he shews it a\nJeweller or a Mineralist to be inform'd what it is. But that which I\nwould rather have here observ'd, is, That the Chymists I am now in\ndebate with have given up the Liberty You challeng'd for them, of\nusing Names at Pleasure, and confin'd Themselves by their\nDescriptions, though but such as they are, of their Principles; so\nthat although they might freely have call'd any thing their _Analysis_\npresents them with, either Sulphur, or Mercury, or Gas, or Blas, or\nwhat they pleas'd; yet when they have told me that Sulphur (for\ninstance) is a Primogeneal and simple Body, Inflamable, Odorous, &c.\nthey must give me leave to dis-believe them, if they tell me that a\nBody that is either compounded or uninflamable is such a Sulphur; and\nto think they play with words, when they teach that Gold and some\nother Minerals abound with an Incombustible Sulphur, which is as\nproper an Expression, as a Sun-shine Night, or Fluid Ice.\n\nBut before I descend to the Mention of Particulars belonging to my\nFourth Consideration, I think it convenient to premise a few Generals;\nsome of which I shall the less need to insist on at present, because I\nhave Touched on them already.\n\nAnd first I must invite you to take notice of a certain passage in\n_Helmont_;[14] which though I have not Found much heeded by his\nReaders, He Himself _mentions_ as a notable thing, and I take to be a\nvery considerable one; for whereas the Distill'd oyle of _oyle-olive_,\nthough drawn _per se_ is (as I have try'd) of a very sharp and\nfretting Quality, and of an odious tast, He tells us that Simple oyle\nbeing only digested with _Paracelsus's sal circulatum_, is reduc'd\ninto dissimilar parts, and yields a sweet Oyle, very differing from\nthe oyle distill'd, from [Errata: distill'd from] sallet oyle; as also\nthat by the same way there may be separated from Wine a very sweet and\ngentle Spirit, partaking of a far other and nobler quality then that\nwhich is immediately drawn by distillation and call'd _Dephlegm'd Aqua\nvitae_, from whose Acrimony this other spirit is exceedingly remote,\nalthough the _sal circulatum_ that makes these _Anatomies_ be\nseparated from the Analyz'd Bodies, in the same weight and with the\nsame qualities it had before; which Affirmation of _Helmont_ if we\nadmit to be true, we must acknowledge that there may be a very great\ndisparity betwixt bodies of the same denomination (as several oyles,\nor several spirits) separable from compound Bodies: For, besides the\ndifferences I shall anon take notice of, betwixt those distill'd Oyles\nthat are commonly known to Chymists, it appears by this, that by means\nof the _Sal Circulatum_, There may be quite another sort of Oyles\nobtain'd from the same Body; and who knowes but that there may be yet\nother Agents found in Nature, by whose help there may, whether by\nTransmutation or otherwise, be obtain'd from the Bodies Vulgarly\ncall'd Mixt, Oyles or other substances, Differing from those of the\nsame Denomination, known either to Vulgar Chymists, or even to\n_Helmont_ Himself: but for fear You should tell me, that this is but a\nconjecture grounded upon another Man's Relation, whose Truth we have\nnot the means to Experiment, I will not Insist upon it; but leaving\nYou to Consider of it at leasure, I shall proceed to what is next.\n\n[Footnote 14: _Illud notabile, in vino esse Spiritum quendam mitiorem\nulterioris & nobilioris qualitatis participem qu[=a] qui immediate per\ndistillationem elicitur diciturque aqua vitae dephlegmata, quod\nfacilius in simplici Olivarum oleo ad oculum spectatur. Quippe\ndistillatum oleum absque laterum aut tigularum [Errata: tegularum]\nadditamento, quodque oleum Philosophorum dicitur, multum dissert ab\nejus oleitate; quae elicitur prius reducto oleo simplici in partes\ndissimilares sola digestione & Salis circulati Paracelsici\nappositione; siquidem sal circulatum idem in pondere & quantitatibus\npristinis ab oleo segregatur postquam oleum olivarum in sui\nheterogeneitates est dispositum. Dulce enim tunc Oleum Olivarum ex\noleo, prout & suavissimus vini spiritus a vino hoc pacto separantur,\nlongeque ab aquae vitae acrimonia distinctus._--Helmont. Aura vitalis,\npag. 725.]\n\nSecondly, Then if that be True which was the Opinion of _Lucippus_,\n_Democritus_, and other prime _Anatomists_ of old, and is in our dayes\nreviv'd by no mean Philosophers; namely, That our Culinary Fire, such\nas Chymists use, consists of swarmes of little Bodies swiftly moving,\nwhich by their smallness and motion are able to permeate the sollidest\nand Compactest Bodies, and even Glass it Self; If this (I say) be\nTrue, since we see that In flints and other Concretes, the Fiery part\nis Incorporated with the Grosser, it will not be Irrationall to\nconjecture, that multitudes of these Fiery Corpuscles, getting in at\nthe Pores of the Glass, may associate themselves with the parts of the\nmixt Body whereon they work, and with them Constitute new Kinds of\nCompound Bodies, according as the Shape, Size, and other Affections of\nthe Parts of the Dissipated Body happen to dispose them, in Reference\nto such Combinations; of which also there may be the greater Number;\nif it be likewise granted that the Corpuscles of the Fire, though all\nexceeding minute, and very swiftly moved, are not all of the same\nbigness, nor Figure. And if I had not Weightier Considerations to\nDiscourse to you of, I could name to you, to Countenance what I have\nnewly said, some particular Experiments by which I have been Deduc'd\nto think, that the Particles of an open Fire working upon some Bodies\nmay really Associate themselves therewith, and add to the Quantity.\nBut because I am not so sure, that when the Fire works upon Bodies\nincluded in Glasses, it does it by a reall Trajection of the Fiery\nCorpuscles themselves, through the Substance of the Glass, I will\nproceed to what is next to be mention'd.\n\nI could (sayes _Eleutherius_) help you to some Proofes, whereby I\nthink it may be made very probable, that when the Fire acts\nimmediately upon a Body, some of its Corpuscles may stick to those of\nthe burnt Body, as they seem to do in Quicklime, but in greater\nnumbers, and more permanently. But for fear of retarding Your\nProgress, I shall desire you to deferr this Enquiry till another time,\nand proceed as you intended.\n\nYou may then in the next place (sayes _Carneades_) observe with me,\nthat not only there are some Bodies, as Gold, and Silver, which do not\nby the usual Examens, made by Fire, Discover themselves to be mixt;\nbut if (as You may Remember I formerly told You) it be a De-compound\nBody that is Dissipable into several Substances, by being expos'd to\nthe Fire it may be resolv'd into such as are neither Elementary, nor\nsuch as it was upon its last mixture Compounded of; but into new\nKinds of mixts. Of this I have already given You some Examples in\nSope, Sugar of Lead, and Vitrioll. Now if we shall Consider that there\nare some Bodies, as well Natural, (as that I last nam'd) as\nFactitious, manifestly De-compounded; That in the Bowells of the Earth\nNature may, as we see she sometimes does, make strange Mixtures; That\nAnimals are nourish'd with other Animals and Plants; And, that these\nthemselves have almost all of them their Nutriment and Growth,\n_either_ from a certain Nitrous Juice Harbour'd in the Pores of the\nEarth, _or_ from the Excrements of Animalls, _or_ from the putrify'd\nBodies, either of living Creatures or Vegetables, _or_ from other\nSubstances of a Compounded Nature; If, I say, we consider this, it may\nseem probable, that there may be among the Works of Nature (not to\nmention those of Art) a greater Number of De-compound Bodies, then men\ntake Notice of; And indeed, as I have formerly also observ'd, it does\nnot at all appear, that all Mixtures must be of Elementary Bodies; but\nit seems farr more probable, that there are divers sorts of compound\nBodies, even in regard of all or some of their Ingredients, consider'd\nAntecedently to their Mixture. For though some seem to be made up by\nthe immediate Coalitions of the Elements, or Principles themselves,\nand therefore may be call'd _Prima Mista_, or _Mista Primaria_; yet it\nseems that many other Bodies are mingl'd (if I may so speak) at the\nsecond hand, their immediate Ingredients being not Elementary, but\nthese primary Mixts newly spoken of; And from divers of these\nSecondary sort of Mixts may result, by a further Composition, a Third\nsort, and so onwards. Nor is it improbable, that some Bodies are made\nup of Mixt Bodies, not all of the same Order, but of several; as (for\nInstance) a Concrete may consist of Ingredients, whereof the one may\nhave been a primary, the other a Secondary Mixt Body; (as I have in\nNative Cinnaber, by my way of Resolving it, found both that Courser\nthe [Errata: delete \"the\"] part that seems more properly to be Oar,\nand a Combustible Sulphur, and a Running Mercury:) or perhaps without\nany Ingredient of this latter sort, it may be compos'd of Mixt Bodies,\nsome of them of the first, and some of the third Kind; And this may\nperhaps be somewhat Illustrated by reflecting upon what happens in\nsome Chymical Preparations of those Medicines which they call their\n_Bezoardicum's_. For first, they take Antimony and Iron, which may be\nlook'd upon as _Prima Mista_; of these they compound a Starry\n_Regulus_, and to this they add according to their Intention, either\nGold, or Silver, which makes with it a new and further Composition. To\nthis they add Sublimate, which is it self a De-compound body,\n(consisting of common Quicksilver, and divers Salts United by\nSublimation into a Crystalline Substance) and from this Sublimate, and\nthe other Metalline Mixtures, they draw a Liquor, which may be allow'd\nto be of a yet more Compounded Nature. If it be true, as Chymists\naffirm it, that by this Art some of the Gold or Silver mingl'd with\nthe _Regulus_ may be carry'd over the Helme with it by the Sublimate;\nas indeed a Skilfull and Candid person complain'd to me a while since,\nThat an experienc'd Friend of His and mine, having by such a way\nbrought over a great Deal of Gold, in hope to do something further\nwith it, which might be gainfull to him, has not only miss'd of his\nAim, but is unable to recover his Volatiliz'd Gold out of the\nAntimonial butter, wherewith it is strictly united.\n\nNow (Continues _Carneades_) if a Compound body consist of Ingredients\nthat are not meerly Elementary; it is not hard to conceive, that the\nSubstances into which the Fire Dissolves it, though seemingly\nHomogeneous enough, may be of a Compounded Nature, those parts of each\nbody that are most of Kin associating themselves into a Compound of a\nnew Kind. As when (for example sake) I have caus'd Vitrioll and _Sal\nArmoniack_, and Salt Petre to be mingl'd and Destill'd together, the\nLiquor that came over manifested it self not to be either Spirit of\nNitre, or of _Sal Armoniack_, or of Vitrioll. For none of these would\ndissolve crude gold, which yet my Liquor was able readily to do; and\nthereby manifested it self to be a new Compound, consisting at least\nof Spirit of Nitre, and _Sal Armoniack_, (for the latter dissolv'd in\nthe former, will Work on Gold) which nevertheless are not by any\nknown way separable, and consequently would not pass for a Mixt Body,\nif we our selves did not, to obtain it, put and Distill together\ndivers Concretes, whose Distinct Operations were known before hand.\nAnd, to add on this Occasion the Experiment I lately promis'd You,\nbecause it is Applicable to our present purpose, I shall Acquaint You,\nthat suspecting the Common Oyle of Vitrioll not to be altogether such\na simple Liquor as Chymists presume it, I mingl'd it with an equal or\na Double Quantity (for I try'd the Experiment more then once) of\ncommon Oyle of Turpentine, such as together with the other Liquor I\nbought at the Drugsters. And having carefully (for the Experiment is\nNice, and somewhat dangerous) Distill'd the Mixture in a small Glass\nRetort, I obtain'd according to my Desire, (besides the two Liquors I\nhad put in) a pretty Quantity of a certain substance, which sticking\nall about the Neck of the Retort Discover'd it self to be Sulphur, not\nonly by a very strong Sulphureous smell, and by the colour of\nBrimstone; but also by this, That being put upon a coal, it was\nimmediately kindl'd, and burn'd like common Sulphur. And of this\nSubstance I have yet by me some little Parcells, which You may command\nand examine when you please. So that from this Experiment I may deduce\neither one, or both of these Propositions, That a real Sulphur may be\nmade by the Conjunction of two such Substances as Chymists take for\nElementary, And which did not either of them apart appear to have any\nsuch body in it; or that Oyle of Vitrioll though a Distill'd Liquor,\nand taken for part of the Saline Principle of the Concrete that yields\nit, may yet be so Compounded a body as to contain, besides its Saline\npart, a Sulphur like common brimstone, which would hardly be it self a\nsimple or un-compounded body.\n\nI might (pursues _Carneades_) remind You, that I formerly represented\nit, as possible, That as there may be more Elements then five, or six;\nso the Elements of one body may be Different from those of another;\nwhence it would follow, that from the Resolution of De-compound body\n[Errata: bodies], there may result Mixts of an altogether new kind, by\nthe Coalition of Elements that never perhaps conven'd before. I might,\nI say, mind You of this, and add divers things to this second\nConsideration; but for fear of wanting time I willingly pretermit\nthem, to pass on to the third, which is this, That the Fire does not\nalwayes barely resolve or take asunder, but may also after a new\nmanner mingle and compound together the parts (whether Elementary or\nnot) of the Body Dissipated by it.\n\nThis is so evident, sayes _Carneades_, in some obvious Examples, that\nI cannot but wonder at their Supiness that have not taken notice of\nit. For when Wood being burnt in a Chimney is dissipated by the Fire\ninto Smoke and Ashes, that smoke composes soot, which is so far from\nbeing any one of the principles of the Wood, that (as I noted above)\nyou may by a further _Analysis_ separate five or six distinct\nsubstances from it. And as for the remaining Ashes, the Chymists\nthemselves teach us, that by a further degree of fire they may be\nindissolubly united into glass. 'Tis true, that the _Analysis_ which\nthe Chymists principally build upon is made, not in the open air, but\nin close Vessels; but however, the Examples lately produc'd may invite\nyou shrewdly to suspect, That heat may as well compound as dissipate\nthe Parts of mixt Bodies: and not to tell you, that I have known a\nVitrification made even in close vessels, I must remind you that the\nFlowers of Antimony, and those of Sulphur, are very mix'd Bodies,\nthough they ascend in close vessells: And that 'twas in stopt glasses\nthat I brought up the whole Body of Camphire. And whereas it may be\nobjected, that all these Examples are of Bodies forc'd up in a dry,\nnot a Fluid forme, as are the Liquors wont to be obtain'd by\ndistillation; I answer, That besides that 'tis possible, that a Body\nmay be chang'd from Consistent to Fluid, or from Fluid to Consistent,\nwithout being otherwise much altered, as may appear by the Easiness\nwherewith in Winter, without any Addition or Separation of Visible\nIngredients, the same substance may be quickly harden'd into brittle\nIce, and thaw'd again into Fluid Water; Besides this, I say it would\nbe consider'd, that common Quick-silver it self, which the Eminentest\nChymists confess to be a mixt Body, may be Driven over the Helme in\nits Pristine forme of Quicksilver, and consequently, in that of a\nLiquor. And certainly 'tis possible that very compounded Bodies may\nconcur to Constitute Liquors; Since, not to mention that I have found\nit possible, by the help of a certain _Menstruum_, to distill Gold it\nself through a Retort, even with a Moderate Fire: Let us but consider\nwhat happens in Butter of Antimony. For if that be carefully\nrectify'd, it may be reduc'd into a very clear Liquor; and yet if You\ncast a quantity of fair water upon it, there will quickly precipitate\na Ponderous and Vomitive Calx, which made before a considerable part\nof the Liquor, and yet is indeed (though some eminent Chymists would\nhave it Mercurial) an Antimonial Body carryed over and kept dissolv'd\nby the Salts of the Sublimate, and consequently a compounded one; as\nYou may find if You will have the Curiosity to Examine this White\npowder by a skilful Reduction. And that You may not think that Bodies\nas compounded as flowers of Brimstone cannot be brought to Concurr to\nConstitute Distill'd Liquors; And also That You may not imagine with\nDivers Learned Men that pretend no small skill in Chymistry, that at\nleast no mixt Body can be brought over the Helme, but by corrosive\nSalts, I am ready to shew You, when You please, among other wayes of\nbringing over Flowers of Brimstone (perhaps I might add even Mineral\nSulphurs) some, wherein I employ none but Oleaginous bodies to make\nVolatile Liquors, in which not only the colour, but (which is a much\nsurer mark) the smell and some Operations manifest that there is\nbrought over a Sulphur that makes part of the Liquor.\n\nOne thing more there is, _Eleutherius_, sayes _Carneades_, which is so\npertinent to my present purpose, that though I have touch'd upon it\nbefore, I cannot but on this occasion take notice of it. And it is\nthis, That the Qualities or Accidents, upon whose account Chymists are\nwont to call a portion of Matter by the name of Mercury or some other\nof their Principles, are not such but that 'tis possible as Great (and\ntherefore why not the like?) may be produc'd by such changes of\nTexture, and other Alterations, as the Fire may make in the small\nParts of a Body. I have already prov'd, when I discours'd of the\nsecond General Consideration, by what happens to plants nourish'd only\nwith fair water, and Eggs hatch'd into Chickens, that by changing the\ndisposition of the component parts of a Body, Nature is able to effect\nas great Changes in a parcell of Matter reputed similar, as those\nrequisite to Denominate one of the _Tria Prima_. And though _Helmont_\ndo somewhere wittily call the Fire the Destructor and the Artificial\nDeath of Things; And although another Eminent Chymist and Physitian be\npleas'd to build upon this, That Fire can never generate any thing but\nFire; Yet You will, I doubt not, be of another mind, If You consider\nhow many new sorts of mixt Bodies Chymists themselves have produc'd by\nmeans of the Fire: And particularly, if You consider how that Noble\nand Permanent Body, Glass, is not only manifestly produc'd by the\nviolent action of the Fire, but has never, for ought we know, been\nproduc'd any other way. And indeed it seems but an inconsiderate\nAssertion of some _Helmontians_, that every sort of Body of a\nPeculiar Denomination must be produc'd by some Seminal power; as I\nthink I could evince, if I thought it so necessary, as it is for me to\nhasten to what I have further to discourse. Nor need it much move us,\nthat there are some who look upon whatsoever the Fire is employ'd to\nproduce, not as upon Natural but Artificial Bodies. For there is not\nalwaies such a difference as many imagine betwixt the one and the\nother: Nor is it so easy as they think, clearly to assigne that which\nProperly, Constantly, and Sufficiently, Discriminates them. But not to\nengage my self in so nice a Disquisition, it may now suffice to\nobserve, that a thing is commonly termed Artificial, when a parcel of\nmatter is by the Artificers hand, or Tools, or both, brought to such a\nshape or Form, as he Design'd before-hand in his Mind: Whereas in many\nof the Chymical Productions the effect would be produc'd whether the\nArtificer intended it or no; and is oftentimes very much other then he\nIntended or Look't for; and the Instruments employ'd, are not Tools\nArtificially fashion'd and shaped, like those of Tradesmen, for this\nor that particular Work; but, for the most part, Agents of Nature's\nown providing, and whose chief Powers of Operation they receive from\ntheir own Nature or Texture, not the Artificer. And indeed, the Fire\nis as well a Natural Agent as Seed: And the Chymist that imployes it,\ndoes but apply Natural Agents and Patients, who being thus brought\ntogether, and acting according to their respective Natures, performe\nthe worke themselves; as Apples, Plums, or other fruit, are natural\nProductions, though the Gardiner bring and fasten together the Sciens\nof the Stock, and both Water, and do perhaps divers other wayes\nContribute to its bearing fruit. But, to proceed to what I was going\nto say, You may observe with me, _Eleutherius_, that, as I told You\nonce before, Qualities sleight enough may serve to Denominate a\nChymical Principle. For, when they anatomize a compound Body by the\nFire, if they get a Substance inflamable, and that will not mingle\nwith Water, that they presently call Sulphur; what is sapid and\nDissoluble in Water, that must pass for Salt; Whatsoever is fix'd and\nindissoluble in Water, that they name Earth. And I was going to add,\nthat, whatsoever Volatile substance they know not what to make of, not\nto say, whatsoever they please, that they call Mercury. But that these\nQualities may either be produc'd, otherwise then by such as they call\nSeminal Agents, or may belong to bodies of a compounded Nature, may be\nshewn, among other Instances, in Glass made of ashes, where the\nexceeding strongly-tasted _Alcalizate_ Salt joyning with the Earth\nbecomes insipid, and with it constitutes a Body, which though also\ndry, fixt, and indissoluble in Water, is yet manifestly a mixt Body;\nand made so by the Fire itself.\n\nAnd I remmember to our present purpose, that _Helmont_,[15] amongst\nother Medicines that he commends, has a short processe, wherein,\nthough the Directions for Practice are but obscurely intimated; yet I\nhave some reason not to Dis-believe the Process, without affirming or\ndenying any thing about the vertues of the remedy to be made by it.\n_Quando_ (sayes he) _oleum cinnamomi &c. suo sali alkali miscetur\nabsque omni aqua, trium mensium artificiosa occultaque circulatione,\ntotum in salem volatilem commutatum est, vere essentiam sui simplicis\nin nobis exprimit, & usque in prima nostri constitutivasese ingerit._\nA not unlike Processe he delivers in another place; from whence, if we\nsuppose him to say true, I may argue, that since by the Fire there may\nbe produc'd a substance that is as well Saline and volatile as the\nSalt of Harts-horn, blood, &c. which pass for Elementary; and since\nthat this Volatile Salt is really compounded of a Chymical Oyle and a\nfixt Salt, the one made Volatile by the other, and both associated by\nthe fire, it may well be suspected that other Substances, emerging\nupon the Dissipation of Bodies by the Fire, may be new sorts of Mixts,\nand consist of Substances of differing natures; and particularly, I\nhave sometimes suspected, that since the Volatile Salts of Blood,\nHarts-horn, &c. are figitive [Errata: fugitive] and endow'd with an\nexceeding strong smell, either that Chymists do Erroneously ascribe\nall odours to sulphurs, or that such Salts consist of some oyly parts\nwell incorporated with the Saline ones. And the like conjecture I have\nalso made concerning Spirit of Vinager, which, though the Chymists\nthink one of the Principles of that Body, and though being an Acid\nSpirit it seems to be much less of kin then Volatile Salts to\nsulphurs; yet, not to mention its piercing smell; which I know not\nwith what congruity the Chymist will deduce from Salt, I wonder they\nhave not taken notice of what their own _Tyrocinium Chymicum_ teach us\nconcerning the Destillation of _Saccharum Saturni_; out of which\n_Beguinus_[16] assures Us, that he distill'd, besides a very fine\nspirit, no lesse then two Oyles, the one blood-red and ponderous, but\nthe other swimming upon the top of the Spirit, and of a yellow colour;\nof which he sayes that he kept then some by him, to verify what he\ndelivers. And though I remember not that I have had two distinct Oyles\nfrom Sugar of Lead, yet that it will though distill'd without addition\nyield some Oyle, disagrees not with my Experience. I know the Chymists\nwill be apt to pretend, that these Oyls are but the volatiliz'd\nsulphur of the lead; and will perhaps argue it from what _Beguinus_\nrelates, that when the Distillation is ended, you'l find a _Caput\nMortuum_ extreamly black, and (as he speaks) _nullius momenti_, as if\nthe Body, or at least the chief part of the Metal it self were by the\ndistillation carried over the Helme. But since you know as well as I\nthat _Saccharum Saturni_ is a kind of Magistery, made only by\ncalcining of Lead _per se_, dissolving it in distill'd Vinager, and\ncrystalizing the solution; if I had leasure to tell You how Differing\na thing I did upon examination find the _Caput Mortuum_, so sleighted\nby _Beguinus_, to be from what he represents it, I believe you would\nthink the conjecture propos'd less probable then one or other of these\nthree; either that this Oyle did formerly concur to constitute the\nSpirit of Vinager, and so that what passes for a Chymical Principle\nmay yet be further resoluble into distinct substances; or that some\nparts of the Spirit together with some parts of the Lead may\nconstitute a Chymical Oyle, which therefore though it pass for\nHomogeneous, may be a very compounded Body: or at least that by the\naction of the Distill'd Vinager and the Saturnine Calx one upon\nanother, part of the Liquor may be so alter'd as to be transmuted from\nan Acid Spirit into an Oyle. And though the truth of either of the two\nformer conjectures would make the example I have reflected on more\npertinent to my present argument; yet you'l easily discern, the Third\nand last Conjecture cannot be unserviceable to confirm some other\npassages of my discourse.\n\n[Footnote 15: Helmont pag. 412.]\n\n[Footnote 16: Tyroc. Chym. L. 1. C. 4.]\n\nTo return then to what I was saying just before I mention'd\n_Helmont's_ Experiment, I shall subjoyne, That Chymists must confess\nalso that in the perfectly Dephlegm'd spirit of Wine, or other\nFermented Liquors, that which they call the Sulphur of the Concrete\nloses, by the Fermentation, the Property of Oyle, (which the Chymists\nlikewise take to be the true Sulphur of the Mixt) of being unminglable\nwith the Water. And if You will credit _Helmont_,[17] all [Errata: a\npound] of the purest Spirit of Wine may barely by the help of pure\nSalt of Tartar (which is but the fixed Salt of Wine) be resolv'd or\nTransmuted into scarce half an ounce of Salt, and as much Elementary\nWater as amounts to the remaining part of the mention'd weight. And it\nmay (as I think I formerly also noted) be doubted, whether that Fixt\nand Alcalizate Salt, which is so unanimously agreed on to be the\nSaline Principle of incinerated Bodies, be not, as 'tis Alcalizate, a\nProduction of the Fire? For though the tast of Tartar, for Example,\nseem to argue that it contains a Salt before it be burn'd, yet that\nSalt being very Acid is of a quite Differing Tast from the Lixiviate\nSalt of Calcin'd Tartar. And though it be not truly Objected against\nthe Chymists, that they obtain all Salts they make, by reducing the\nBody they work on into Ashes with Violent Fires, (since Hartshorn,\nAmber, Blood, and divers other Mixts yield a copious Salt before they\nbe burn'd to Ashes) yet this Volatile Salt Differs much, as we shall\nsee anon, from the Fixt Alcalizate Salt I speak of; which for ought I\nremember is not producible by any known Way, without Incineration.\n'Tis not unknown to Chymists, that Quicksilver may be Precipitated,\nwithout Addition, into a dry Powder, that remains so in Water. And\nsome eminent _Spagyrists_, and even _Raimund Lully_ himself, teach,\nthat meerly by the Fire Quicksilver may in convenient Vessels be\nreduc'd (at least in great part) into a thin Liquor like Water, and\nminglable with it. So that by the bare Action of the Fire, 'tis\npossible, that the parts of a mixt Body should be so dispos'd after\nnew and differing manners, that it may be sometimes of one\nconsistence, sometimes of another; And may in one State be dispos'd to\nbe mingl'd with Water, and in another not. I could also shew you, that\nBodies from which apart Chymists cannot obtain any thing that is\nCombustible, may by being associated together, and by the help of the\nFire, afford an inflamable Substance. And that on the other side, 'tis\npossible for a Body to be inflamable, from which it would very much\npuzzle any ordinary Chymist; and perhaps any other, to separate an\ninflamable Principle or Ingredient. Wherefore, since the Principles of\nChymists may receive their Denominations from Qualities, which it\noften exceeds not the power of Art, nor alwayes that of the Fire to\nproduce; And since such Qualities may be found in Bodies that differ\nso much in other Qualities from one another, that they need not be\nallow'd to agree in that pure and simple Nature, which Principles, to\nbe so indeed, must have; it may justly be suspected, that many\nProductions of the Fire that are shew'd us by Chymists, as the\nPrinciples of the Concrete that afforded them, may be but a new kind\nof Mixts. And to annex, on this Occasion, to these arguments taken\nfrom the Nature of the thing, one of those which _Logicians_ call _ad\nHominem_, I shall desire You to take Notice, that though _Paracelsus_\nHimself, and some that are so mistaken as to think he could not be so,\nhave ventur'd to teach, that not only the bodies here below, but the\nElements themselves, and all the other Parts of the Universe, are\ncompos'd of Salt, Sulphur and Mercury; yet the learned _Sennertus_,\nand all the more wary Chymists, have rejected that conceit, and do\nmany of them confess, that the _Tria Prima_ are each of them made up\nof the four Elements; and others of them make Earth and Water concur\nwith Salt, Sulphur and Mercury, to the Constitution of Mixt bodies. So\nthat one sort of these _Spagyrists_, notwithstanding the specious\nTitles they give to the productions of the Fire, do in effect grant\nwhat I contend for. And, of the other sort I may well demand, to what\nKind of Bodies the Phlegme and dead Earth, to be met with in Chymical\nResolutions, are to be referr'd? For either they must say, with\n_Paracelsus_, but against their own Concessions as well as against\nExperience, that these are also compos'd of the _Tria Prima_, whereof\nthey cannot separate any one from either of them; or else they must\nconfess that two of the vastest Bodies here below, Earth, and Water,\nare neither of them compos'd of the _Tria Prima_; and that\nconsequently those three are not the Universal, and Adequate\nIngredients, neither of all Sublunary Bodies, nor even of all mixt\nBodies.\n\n[Footnote 17: _Ostendi alias, quomodo lib. una aquae vitae combibita in\nsale Tartari siccato, vix fiat semuncia salis, caeterum totum corpus\nfiat aqua Elementalis. Helmont. in Aura vitali._]\n\nI know that the chief of these Chymists represent, that though the\nDistinct Substances into which they divide mixt bodies by the Fire,\nare not pure and Homogeneous; yet since the four Elements into which\nthe _Aristotelians_ pretend to resolve the like bodies by the same\nAgent, are not simple neither, as themselves acknowledge, 'tis as\nallowable for the Chymists to call the one Principles, as for the\nPeripateticks to call the other Elements; since in both cases the\nImposition of the name is grounded only upon the Predominancy of that\nElement whose name is ascrib'd to it. Nor shall I deny, that this\nArgument of the Chymists is no ill one against the _Aristotelians_.\nBut what Answer can it prove to me, who you know am disputing against\nthe _Aristotelian_ Elements, as the Chymicall Principles, and must not\nlook upon any body as a true Principle or Element, but as yet\ncompounded, which is not perfectly Homogeneous, but is further\nResoluble into any number of Distinct Substances how small soever. And\nas for the Chymists calling a body Salt, or Sulphur, or Mercury, upon\npretence that the Principle of the same name is predominant in it,\nThat it self is an Acknowledgment of what I contend for; namely that\nthese productions of the Fire, are yet compounded bodies. And yet\nwhilst this is granted, it is affirm'd, but not prov'd, that the\nreputed Salt, or Sulphur, or Mercury, consists mainly of one body that\ndeserves the name of a principle of the same Denomination. For how do\nChymists make it appear that there are any such primitive and simple\nbodies in those we are speaking of; since 'tis upon the matter\nconfess'd by the answer lately made, that these are not such? And if\nthey pretend by Reason to evince what they affirm, what becomes of\ntheir confident boasts, that the Chymists [Errata: Chymist] (whom they\ntherefore, after _Beguinus_, call a _Philosophus_ or _Opifex\nSensatus_) can convince our Eyes, by manifestly shewing in any mixt\nbody those simple substances he teaches them to be compos'd of? And\nindeed, for the Chymists to have recourse in this case to other proofs\nthen Experiments, as it is to wave the grand Argument that has all\nthis while been given out for a Demonstrative One; so it releases me\nfrom the obligation to prosecute a Dispute wherein I am not engag'd to\nExamine any but Experimentall proofs. I know it may plausibly Enough\nbe Represented, in favour of the Chymists, that it being evident that\nmuch the greater part of any thing they call Salt, or Sulphur, or\nMercury, is really such; it would be very rigid to deny those\nSubstances the names ascribed them, only because of some sleight\nmixture of another Body; since not only the Peripateticks call\nparticular parcels of matter Elementary, though they acknowledge that\nElements are not to be anywhere found pure, at least here below; And\nsince especially there is a manifest Analogie and Resemblance betwixt\nthe bodies obtainable by Chymical Anatomies and the principles whose\nnames are given them; I have, I say, consider'd that these things may\nbe represented: But as for what is drawn from the Custome of the\nPeripateticks, I have already told You, that though it may be employ'd\nagainst Them, Yet it is not available against me who allow nothing to\nbe an Element that is not perfectly Homogeneous. And whereas it is\nalledg'd, that the Predominant Principle ought to give a name to the\nsubstance wherein it abounds; I answer, that that might much more\nreasonably be said, if either we or the Chymists had seen Nature take\npure Salt, pure Sulphur, and pure Mercury, and compound of them every\nsort of Mixt Bodies. But, since 'tis to experience that they appeal,\nwe must not take it for granted, that the Distill'd Oyle (for\ninstance) of a plant is mainly compos'd of the pure principle call'd\nSulphur, till they have given us an ocular proof, that there is in\nthat sort of Plants such an Homogeneous Sulphur. For as for the\nspecious argument, which is drawn from the Resemblance betwixt the\nProductions of the Fire, and the Respective, either _Aristotelian_\nElements, or _Chymical_ Principles, by whose names they are call'd; it\nwill appear more plausible then cogent, if You will but recall to mind\nthe state of the controversie; which is not, whether or no there be\nobtain'd from mixt Bodies certain substances that agree in outward\nappearance, or in some Qualities with Quicksilver or Brimstone, or\nsome such obvious or copious Body; But whether or no all Bodies\nconfess'd to be perfectly mixt were compos'd of, and are resoluble\ninto a determinate number of primary unmixt Bodies. For, if you keep\nthe state of the question in your Eye, you'l easily discerne that\nthere is much of what should be Demonstrated, left unprov'd by those\nChymical Experiments we are Examining. But (not to repeat what I have\nalready discover'd more at large) I shall now take notice, that it\nwill not presently follow, that because a Production of the Fire has\nsome affinity with some of the greater Masses of matter here below,\nthat therefore they are both of the same Nature, and deserve the same\nName; for the Chymists are not content, that flame should be look't\nupon as a parcel of the Element of Fire, though it be hot, dry, and\nactive, because it wants some other Qualities belonging to the nature\nof Elementary fire. Nor will they let the Peripateticks call Ashes, or\nQuicklime, Earth, notwithstanding the many likenesses between them;\nbecause they are not tastlesse, as Elementary Earth ought to be: But\nif you should ask me, what then it is, that all the Chymical Anatomies\nof Bodies do prove, if they prove not that they consist of the three\nPrinciples into which the fire resolves them? I answer, that their\nDissections may be granted to prove, that some mixt bodies (for in\nmany it will not hold) are by the fire, when they are included in\nclose Vessels, (for that Condition also is often requisite) dissolube\n[Transcriber's Note: dissoluble] into several Substances differing in\nsome Qualities, but principally in Consistence. So that out of most of\nthem may be obtain'd a fixt substance partly saline, and partly\ninsipid, an unctuous Liquor, and another Liquor or more that without\nbeing unctuous have a manifest taste. Now if Chymists will agree to\ncall the dry and sapid substance salt, the Unctous liquor Sulphur, and\nthe other Mercury, I shall not much quarrel with them for so doing:\nBut if they will tell me that Salt, Sulphur, and Mercury, are simple\nand primary bodies whereof each mixt body was actually compounded, and\nwhich was really in it antecedently to the operation of the fire, they\nmust give me leave to doubt whether (whatever their other arguments\nmay do) their Experiments prove all this. And if they will also tell\nme that the Substances their Anatomies are wont to afford them, are\npure and similar, as Principles ought to be, they must give me leave\nto believe my own senses; and their own confessions, before their bare\nAssertions. And that you may not (_Eleutherius_) think I deal so\nrigidly with them, because I scruple to Take these Productions of the\nFire for such as the Chymists would have them pass for, upon the\naccount of their having some affinity with them; consider a little\nwith me, that in regard an Element or Principle ought to be perfectly\nSimilar and Homogeneous, there is no just cause why I should rather\ngive the body propos'd the Name of this or that Element or Principle,\nbecause it has a resemblance to it in some obvious Quality, rather\nthen deny it that name upon the account of divers other Qualities,\nwherein the propos'd Bodies are unlike; and if you do but consider\nwhat sleight and easily producible qualities they are that suffice, as\nI have already more then once observ'd, to Denominate a Chymical\nPrinciple or an Element, you'l not, I hope, think my wariness to be\ndestitute either of Example, or else of Reason. For we see that the\nChymists will not allow the _Aristotelians_ that the Salt in Ashes\nought to be called Earth, though the Saline and Terrestrial part\nsymbolize in weight, in dryness, in fixness and fusibility, only\nbecause the one is sapid and dissoluble in Water, and the other not:\nBesides, we see that sapidness and volatility are wont to denominate\nthe Chymists Mercury or Spirit; and yet how many Bodies, think you,\nmay agree in those Qualities which may yet be of very differing\nnatures, and disagree in qualities either more numerous, or more\nconsiderable, or both. For not only Spirit of Nitre, Aqua Fortis,\nSpirit of Salt, Spirit of Oyle of Vitriol, Spirit of Allome, Spirit of\nVinager, and all Saline Liquors Distill'd from Animal Bodies, but all\nthe Acetous Spirits of Woods freed from their Vinager; All these, I\nsay, and many others must belong to the Chymists Mercury, though it\nappear not why some of them should more be comprehended under one\ndenomination then the Chymists Sulphur, or Oyle should likewise be;\nfor their Distill'd Oyles are also Fluid, Volatile, and Tastable, as\nwell as their Mercury; Nor is it Necessary, that their Sulphur should\nbe Unctuous or Dissoluble in Water, since they generally referr Spirit\nof Wine to Sulphurs, although that Spirit be not Unctuous, and will\nfreely mingle with Water. So that bare Inflamability must constitute\nthe Essence of the Chymists Sulphur; as uninflamablenesse joyned with\nany taste is enough to intitle a Distill'd Liquor to be their Mercury.\nNow since I can further observe to You, that Spirit of Nitre and\nSpirit of Harts-horne being pour'd together will boile and hisse and\ntosse up one another into the air, which the Chymists make signes of\ngreat Antipathy in the Natures of Bodies (as indeed these Spirits\ndiffer much both in Taste, Smell, and Operations;) Since I elsewhere\ntell you of my having made two sorts of Oyle out of the same mans\nblood, that would not mingle with one another; And since I might tell\nYou Divers Examples I have met with, of the Contrariety of Bodies\nwhich according to the Chymists must be huddl'd up together under one\nDenomination; I leave you to Judge whether such a multitude of\nSubstances as may agree in these sleight Qualities, and yet Disagree\nin Others more Considerable, are more worthy to be call'd by the Name\nof a Principle (which ought to be pure and homogeneous,) than to have\nappellations given them that may make them differ, in name too, from\nthe bodies from which they so wildly differ in Nature. And hence also,\nby the bye, you may perceive that 'tis not unreasonable to distrust\nthe Chymists way of Argumentation, when being unable to shew us that\nsuch a Liquor is (for Example) purely saline, they prove, that at\nleast salt is much the predominant principle, because that the\npropos'd substance is strongly tasted, and all Tast proceeds from\nsalt; whereas those Spirits, such as spirit of Tartar, spirit of\nHarts-horn, and the like, which are reckoned to be the Mercuries of\nthe Bodies that afford them, have manifestly a strong and piercing\ntast, and so has (according to what I formerly noted) the spirit of\nBox &c. even after the acid Liquor that concurr'd to compose it has\nbeen separated from it. And indeed, if sapidness belong not to the\nspirit or Mercurial Principle of Vegitables and Animals: I scarce know\nhow it will be discriminated from their phlegm, since by the absence\nof Inflamability it must be distinguish'd from their sulphur, which\naffords me another Example, to prove how unacurate the Chymical\nDoctrine is in our present Case; since not only the spirits of\nVegitables and Animals, but their Oyles are very strongly tasted, as\nhe that shall but wet his tongue with Chymical Oyle of Cinnamon, or of\nCloves, or even of Turpentine, may quickly find, to his smart. And not\nonly I never try'd any Chymical Oyles whose tast was not very\nmanifest and strong; but a skilful and inquisitive person who made it\nhis business by elaborate operations to depurate Chymical Oyles, and\nreduce them to an Elementary simplicity, Informes us, that he never\nwas able to make them at all Tastless; whence I might inferr, that the\nproof Chymists confidently give us of a bodies being saline, is so far\nfrom demonstrating the Predominancy, that it does not clearly Evince\nso much as the presence of the saline Principle in it. But I will not\n(pursues _Carneades_) remind you, that the Volatile salt of\nHarts-horn, Amber, Blood, &c. are exceeding strongly scented,\nnotwithstanding that most Chymists deduce Odours from Sulphur, and\nfrom them argue the Predominancy of that Principle in the Odorous\nbody, because I must not so much as add any new Examples of the\nincompetency of this sort of Chymical arguments; since having already\ndetain'd You but too long in those generals that appertain to my\nfourth consideration, 'tis time that I proceed to the particulars\nthemselves, to which I thought fit they should be previous:\n\nThese Generals (continues _Carneades_) being thus premis'd, we might\nthe better survey the Unlikeness that an attentive and unprepossess'd\nobserver may take notice of in each sort of Bodies which the Chymists\nare wont to call the salts or sulphurs or Mercuries of the Concretes\nthat yield Them, as if they had all a simplicity, and Identity of\nNature: whereas salts if they were all Elementary would as little\ndiffer as do the Drops of pure and simple Water. 'Tis known that both\nChymists and Physitians ascribe to the fixt salts of calcin'd Bodies\nthe vertues of their concretes; and consequently very differing\nOperations. So we find the _Alkali_ of Wormwood much commended in\ndistempers of the stomach; that of Eyebright for those that have a\nweak sight; and that of _Guaiacum_ (of which a great Quantity yields\nbut a very little salt) is not only much commended in Venereal\nDiseases, but is believed to have a peculiar purgative vertue, which\nyet I have not had occasion to try. And though, I confess, I have long\nthought, that these _Alkalizate_ salts are, for the most part, very\nneer of kin, and retain very little of the properties of the\nConcretes whence they were separated; Yet being minded to Observe\nwatchfully whether I could meet with any Exceptions to this General\nObservation, I observ'd at the Glasse-house, that sometimes the Metal\n(as the Workmen call it) or Masse of colliquated Ingredients, which by\nBlowing they fashion into Vessels of divers shapes, did sometimes\nprove of a very differing colour, and a somewhat differing Texture,\nfrom what was usuall. And having enquired whether the cause of such\nAccidents might not be derived from the peculiar Nature of the fixt\nsalt employ'd to bring the sand to fusion, I found that the knowingst\nWorkmen imputed these Mis-adventures to the Ashes, of [Errata: Ashes\noff] some certain kind of Wood, as having observ'd the ignobler kind\nof Glass I lately mention'd to be frequently produc'd when they had\nemploy'd such sorts of Ashes which therefore they scruple to make use\nof, if they took notice of them beforehand. I remember also, that an\nIndustrious Man of my acquaintance having bought a vast quantity of\nTobacco stalks to make a fixt Salt with, I had the Curiosity to go see\nwhether that Exotick Plant, which so much abounds in volatile salt,\nwould afford a peculiar kind of _Alcali_; and I was pleas'd to find\nthat in the _Lixivium_ of it, it was not necessary, as is usual, to\nevaporate all the Liquor, that there might be obtain'd a Saline Calx,\nconsisting like lime quench'd in the Air of a heap of little\nCorpuscles of unregarded shapes; but the fixt salt shot into figur'd\nCrystal, almost as Nitre or _Sal-armoniack_ and other uncalcin'd salts\nare wont to do; And I further remember that I have observ'd in the\nfixt Salt of Urine, brought by depuration to be very white, a tast not\nso unlike to that of common salt, and very differing from the wonted\ncaustick Lixiviate tast of other salts made by Incineration. But\nbecause the Instances I have alledg'd of the Difference of\n_Alcalizate_ salt are but few, and therefore I am still inclin'd to\nthink, that most Chymists and many Physitians do, inconsideratly\nenough and without Warrant from Experience, ascribe the Vertues of the\nConcretes expos'd to Calcination, to the salts obtain'd by it; I shall\nrather, to shew the Disparity of salts, mention in the first Place the\napparent Difference betwixt the Vegetable fixt salts and the Animal\nVolatile ones: As (for Example) betwixt salt of Tartar, and salt of\nHarts-horn; whereof the former is so fixt that 'twill indure the brunt\nof a violent Fire, and stand in fusion like a Metal; whereas the other\n(besides that it has a differing tast and a very differing smell) is\nso far from being fixt, that it will fly away in a gentle heat as\neasily as Spirit of Wine it self. And to this I shall add, in the next\nplace, That even among the Volatile salts themselves, there is a\nconsiderable Difference, as appears by the distinct Properties of (for\nInstance) salt of Amber, salt of Urine, salt of Mans Skull, (so much\nextoll'd against the falling Sicknesse) and divers others which cannot\nescape an ordinary Observer. And this Diversity of Volatile salts I\nhave observ'd to be somtimes Discernable even to the Eye, in their\nFigures. For the salt of Harts-horn I have observ'd to adhere to the\nReceiver in the forme almost of a _Parallelipipedon_; and of the\nVolatile salt of humane blood (long digested before distillation, with\nspirit of Wine) I can shew you store of graines of that Figure which\n_Geometricians_ call a _Rhombus_; though I dare not undertake that\nthe Figures of these or other Saline Crystals (if I may so call Them)\nwill be alwaies the same, whatever degree of Fire have been employ'd\nto force them up, or how hastily soever they have been made to convene\nin the spirits or liquors, in the lower part of which I have usually\nobserv'd them after a while to shoot. And although, as I lately told\nYou, I seldom found any Difference, as to Medical Vertues, in the fixt\nSalts of Divers Vegetables; and accordingly I have suspected that most\nof these volatile Salts, having so great a Resemblance in smell, in\ntast, and fugitiveness, differ but little, if at all, in their\nMedicinal properties: As indeed I have found them generally to agree\nin divers of them (as in their being somewhat Diaphoretick and very\nDeopilative; [Errata: Deopilative)] Yet I remember _Helmont_[18]\nsomewhere informes us, that there is this Difference betwixt the\nsaline spirit of Urine and that of Mans blood, that the former will\nnot cure the Epilepsy, but the Latter will. Of the Efficacy also of\nthe Salt of Common Amber against the same Disease in Children, (for in\nGrown Persons it is not a specifick) I may elsewhere have an Occasion\nto Entertain You. And when I consider that to the obtaining of these\nVolatile Salts (especially that of Urine) there is not requisite such\na Destructive Violence of the Fire, as there is to get those Salts\nthat must be made by Incineration, I am the more invited to conclude,\nthat they may differ from one another, and consequently recede from an\nElementary Simplicity. And, if I could here shew You what Mr. _Boyle_\nhas Observ'd, touching the Various Chymicall Distinctions of Salts;\nYou would quickly discern, not only that Chymists do give themselves a\nstrange Liberty to call Concretes Salts, that are according to their\nown Rules to be look'd upon as very Compounded Bodies; but that among\nthose very Salts that seem Elementary, because produc'd upon the\nAnatomy of the Bodies that yield them, there is not only a visible\nDisparity, but, to speak in the common Language, a manifest Antipathy\nor Contrariety: As is evident in the Ebullition and hissing that is\nwont to ensue, when the Acid Spirit of Vitrioll, for Instance, is\npour'd upon pot ashes, or Salt of Tartar. And I shall beg leave of\nthis Gentleman, sayes _Carneades_, casting his Eyes on me, to let me\nobserve to You out of some of his papers, particularly those wherein\nhe treats of some Preparations of Urine, that not only one and the\nsame body may have two Salts of a contrary Nature, as he exemplifies\nin the Spirit and _Alkali_ of Nitre; but that from the same body there\nmay without addition be obtain'd three differing and Visible Salts.\nFor He Relates, that he observ'd in Urine, not only a Volatile and\nCrystalline Salt, and a fixt Salt, but likewise a kind of _Sal\nArmoniack_, or such a Salt as would sublime in the form of a salt, and\ntherefore was not fixt, and yet was far from being so fugitive as the\nVolatile salt; from which it seem'd also otherwise to differ. I have\nindeed suspected that this may be a _Sal Armoniack_ properly enough so\ncall'd, as Compounded of the Volatile salt of Urine, and the fixt of\nthe same Liquor, which, as I noted, is not unlike sea-salt; but that\nit self argues a manifest Difference betwixt the salts, since such a\nVolatile salt is not wont to Unite thus with an ordinary _Alcali_, but\nto fly away from it in the Heat. And on this occasion I remember that,\nto give some of my Friends an Ocular proof of the difference betwixt\nthe fixt and Volatile salt (of the same Concrete) Wood, I devis'd the\nfollowing Experiment. I took common Venetian sublimate, and dissolv'd\nas much of it as I well could in fair Water: then I took Wood Ashes,\nand pouring on them Warme Water, Dissolv'd their salt; and filtrating\nthe Water, as soon as I found the _Lixivium_ sufficiently sharp upon\nthe tongue, I reserv'd it for use: Then on part of the former solution\nof sublimate dropping a little of this Dissolv'd Fixt salt of Wood,\nthe Liquors presently turn'd of an Orange Colour; but upon the other\npart of the clear solution of sublimate putting some of the Volatile\nsalt of Wood (which abounds in the spirit of soot) the Liquor\nimmediately turn'd white, almost like Milke, and after a while let\nfall a white sediment, as the other Liquor did a Yellow one. To all\nthis that I have said concerning the Difference of salts, I might add\nwhat I Formerly told you, concerning the simple spirit of Box, and\nsuch like Woods, which differ much from the other salts hitherto\nmention'd, and yet would belong to the saline Principle, if Chymists\ndid truly teach that all Tasts proceed from it. And I might also\nannex, what I noted to you out of _Helmont_[19] concerning Bodies,\nwhich, though they consist in great part of Chymical Oyles, do yet\nappear but Volatile salts; But to insist on these things, were to\nrepeat; and therefore I shall proceed.\n\n[Footnote 18: _Error vero per distillationem nobis monstrat etiam\nSpiritum salinum plane volatilem odore nequicquam ut nec gustu\ndistinguibilem a spiritu Urinae; In eo tamen essentialiter diversum,\nquod spiritus talis cruoris curat Epilepsiam, non autem Spiritus salis\nlotii._ Helmont. Aura Vitalis.]\n\n[Footnote 19: _Aliquando oleum Cinnamomi, &c. suo sali Alcali miscetur\nabsque omni aqua, trium mensium Artificiosa occultaque circulatione,\ntotum in salem volatilem commutatum est. Helmont. Tria Prima\nChymicorum, &c. pag. 412._]\n\nThis Disparity is also highly eminent in the separated sulphurs or\nChymical Oyles of things. For they contain so much of the scent, and\ntast, and vertues, of the Bodies whence they were drawn, that they\nseem to be but the Material _Crasis_ (if I may so speak) of their\nConcretes. Thus the Oyles of Cinnamon, Cloves, Nutmegs and other\nspices, seem to be but the United Aromatick parts that did ennoble\nthose Bodies. And 'tis a known thing, that Oyl of Cinnamon, and oyle\nof Cloves, (which I have likewise observ'd in the Oyles of several\nWoods) will sink to the Bottom of Water: whereas those of Nutmegs and\ndivers other Vegetables will swim upon it. The Oyle (abusively call'd\nspirit) of Roses swims at the Top of the Water in the forme of a white\nbutter, which I remember not to have observ'd in any other Oyle drawn\nin any Limbeck; yet there is a way (not here to be declar'd) by which\nI have seen it come over in the forme of other Aromatick Oyles, to the\nDelight and Wonder of those that beheld it. In Oyle of Anniseeds,\nwhich I drew both with, and without Fermentation, I observ'd the whole\nBody of the Oyle in a coole place to thicken into the Consistence and\nAppearance of white Butter, which with the least heat resum'd its\nFormer Liquidness. In the Oyl of Olive drawn over in a Retort, I have\nlikewise more then once seen a spontaneous Coagulation in the\nReceiver: And I have of it by me thus Congeal'd; which is of such a\nstrangely Penetrating scent, as if 'twould Perforate the Noses that\napproach it. The like pungent Odour I also observ'd in the Distill'd\nLiquor of common sope, which forc'd over from _Minium_, lately\nafforded an oyle of a most admirable Penetrancy; And he must be a\ngreat stranger, both to the Writings and preparations of Chymists,\nthat sees not in the Oyles they distill from Vegetables and Animals, a\nconsiderable and obvious Difference. Nay I shall venture to add,\n_Eleutherius_, (what perhaps you will think of kin to a Paradox) that\ndivers times out of the same Animal or Vegetable, there may be\nextracted Oyles of Natures obviously differing. To which purpose I\nshall not insist on the swimming and sinking Oyles, which I have\nsometimes observ'd to float on, and subside under the spirit of\n_Guajacum_, and that of divers other Vegetables Distill'd with a\nstrong and lasting Fire; Nor shall I insist on the observation\nelsewhere mention'd, of the divers and unminglable oyles afforded us\nby Humane Blood long fermented and Digested with spirit of Wine,\nbecause these kind of oyles may seem chiefly to differ in Consistence\nand Weight, being all of them high colour'd and adust. But the\nExperiment which I devis'd to make out this Difference of the oyles of\nthe same Vegetable, _ad Oculum_, (as they speak) was this that\nfollowes. I took a pound of Annisseeds, and having grosly beaten them,\ncaused them to be put into a very large glass Retort almost filled\nwith fair Water; and placing this Retort in a sand Furnace, I caus'd a\nvery Gentle heat to be administer'd during the first day, and a great\npart of the second, till the Water was for the most part drawn off,\nand had brought over with it at least most of the Volatile and\nAromatick Oyle of the seeds. And then encreasing the Fire, and\nchanging the Receiver, I obtain'd besides an Empyreumatical Spirit, a\nquantity of adust oyle; whereof a little floated upon the Spirit, and\nthe rest was more heavy, and not easily separable from it. And whereas\nthese oyles were very dark, and smell'd (as Chymists speak) so\nstrongly of the Fire, that their Odour did not betray from what\nVegetables they had been forc'd; the other _Aromatick_ Oyle was\nenrich'd with the genuine smell and tast of the Concrete; and\nspontaneously coagulating it self into white butter did manifest self\n[Errata: it self] to be the true Oyle of Annisseeds; which Concrete I\ntherefore chose to employ about this Experiment, that the Difference\nof these Oyles might be more conspicuous then it would have been, had\nI instead of it destill'd another Vegetable.\n\nI had almost forgot to take notice, that there is another sort of\nBodies, which though not obtain'd from Concretes by Distillation, many\nChymists are wont to call their Sulphur; not only because such\nsubstances are, for the most part, high colour'd (whence they are\nalso, and that more properly, called Tinctures) as dissolv'd Sulphurs\nare wont to be; but especially because they are, for the most part,\nabstracted and separated from the rest of the Masse by Spirit of Wine:\nwhich Liquor those men supposing to be Sulphureous, they conclude,\nthat what it works upon, and abstracts, must be a Sulphur also. And\nupon this account they presume, that they can sequester the sulphur\neven of Minerals and Metalls; from which 'tis known that they cannot\nby Fire alone separate it. To all This I shall answer; That if these\nsequestred substances where indeed the sulphurs of the Bodies whence\nthey are drawn, there would as well be a great Disparity betwixt\nChymical Sulphurs obtain'd by Spirit of Wine, as I have already shewn\nthere is betwixt those obtain'd by Distillation in the forme of Oyles:\nwhich will be evident from hence, that not to urge that themselves\nascribe distinct vertues to Mineral Tinctures, extolling the Tincture\nof Gold against such and such Diseases; the Tincture of Antimony, or\nof its Glass, against others; and the Tincture of Emerauld against\nothers; 'tis plain, that in Tinctures drawn from Vegetables, if the\nsuperfluous spirit of Wine be distill'd off, it leaves at the bottom\nthat thicker substance which Chymists use to call the Extract of the\nVegetable. And that these Extracts are endow'd with very differing\nQualities according to the Nature of the Particular Bodies that\nafforded them (though I fear seldom with so much of the specifick\nvertues as is wont to be imagin'd) is freely confess'd both by\nPhysitians and Chymists. But, _Eleutherius_, (sayes _Carneades_) we\nmay here take Notice that the Chymists do as well in this case, as in\nmany others, allow themselves a License to abuse Words: For not again\nto argue from the differing properties of Tinctures, that they are not\nexactly pure and Elementary Sulphurs; they would easily appear not to\nbe so much as Sulphur's, although we should allow Chymical Oyles to\ndeserve that Name. For however in some Mineral Tinctures the Natural\nfixtness of the extracted Body does not alwayes suffer it to be easily\nfurther resoluble into differing substances; Yet in very many extracts\ndrawn from Vegetables, it may very easily be manifested that the\nspirit of Wine has not sequestred the sulphureous Ingredient from the\nsaline and Mercurial ones; but has dissolv'd (for I take it to be a\nSolution) the finer Parts of the Concrete (without making any nice\ndistinction of their being perfectly Sulphureous or not) and united it\nself with them into a kind of Magistery; which consequently must\ncontain Ingredients or Parts of several sorts. For we see that the\nstones that are rich in vitriol, being often drench'd with\nrain-Water, the Liquor will then extract a fine and transparent\nsubstance coagulable into Vitriol; and yet though this Vitriol be\nreadily dissoluble in Water, it is not a true Elementary Salt, but, as\nYou know, a body resoluble into very differing Parts, whereof one (as\nI shall have occasion to tell You anon) is yet of a Metalline, and\nconsequently not of an Elementary Nature. You may consider also, that\ncommon Sulphur is readily dissoluble in Oyle of Turpentine, though\nnotwithstanding its Name it abounds as well, if not as much, in Salt\nas in true Sulphur; witness the great quantity of saline Liquor it\naffords being set to flame away under a glasse Bell. Nay I have, which\nperhaps You will think strange, with the same Oyle of Turpentine alone\neasily enough dissolv'd crude Antimony finely powder'd into a\nBlood-red Balsam, wherewith perhaps considerable things may be\nperform'd in Surgery. And if it were now Requisite, I could tell You\nof some other Bodies (such as Perhaps You would not suspect) that I\nhave been able to work upon with certain Chymical Oyles. But instead\nof digressing further I shall make this use of the Example I have\nnam'd. That 'tis not unlikely, but that Spirit of Wine which by its\npungent tast, and by some other Qualities that argue it better\n(especially its Reduciblenesse, according to _Helmont_, into _Alcali_,\nand Water,) seems to be as well of a Saline as of a Sulphureous\nNature, may well be suppos'd Capable of Dissolving Substances That are\nnot meerly Elementary sulphurs, though perhaps they may abound with\nParts that are of kin thereunto. For I find that Spirit of Wine will\ndissolve _Gumm Lacca_, _Benzoine_, and the _Resinous_ Parts of\n_Jallap_, and even of _Guaiacum_; whence we may well suspect that it\nmay from Spices, Herbs, and other lesse compacted Vegetables, extract\nsubstances that are not perfect Sulphurs but mixt Bodies. And to put\nit past Dispute, there is many a Vulgar Extract drawn with Spirit of\nWine, which committed to Distillation will afford such differing\nsubstances as will Loudly proclaim it to have been a very compounded\nBody. So that we may justly suspect, that even in Mineral Tinctures it\nwill not alwaies follow, that because a red substance is drawn from\nthe Concrete by spirit of Wine, that Substance is its true and\nElementary Sulphur. And though some of these Extracts may perhaps be\ninflamable; Yet besides that others are not, and besides that their\nbeing reduc'd to such Minuteness of Parts may much facilitate their\ntaking Fire; besides this, I say, We see that common Sulphur, common\nOyle, Gumm Lac, and many Unctuous and Resinous Bodies, will flame well\nenough, though they be of very compounded natures: Nay Travellers of\nUnsuspected Credit assure Us, as a known thing, that in some Northern\nCountries where Firr trees and Pines abound, the poorer sort of\nInhabitants use Long splinters of those Resinous Woods to burne\ninstead of Candles. And as for the rednesse wont to be met with in\nsuch solutions, I could easily shew, that 'tis not necessary it should\nproceed from the Sulphur of the Concrete, Dissolv'd by the Spirit of\nWine; if I had leasure to manifest how much Chymists are wont to\ndelude themselves and others by the Ignorance of those other causes\nupon whose account spirit of Wine and other _Menstruums_ may acquire\na red or some other high colour. But to returne to our Chymical Oyles,\nsupposing that they were exactly pure; Yet I hope they would be, as\nthe best spirit of Wine is, but the more inflamable and deflagrable.\nAnd therefore since an Oyle can be by the Fire alone immediately\nturn'd into flame, which is something of a very differing Nature from\nit: I shall Demand how this Oyle can be a Primogeneal and\nIncorruptible Body, as most Chymists would have their Principles;\nSince it is further resoluble into flame, which whether or no it be a\nportion of the Element of Fire, as an _Aristotelian_ would conclude,\nis certainly something of a very differing Nature from a Chymical\nOyle, since it burnes, and shines, and mounts swiftly upwards; none of\nwhich a Chymical Oyle does, whilst it continues such. And if it should\nbe Objected, that the Dissipated Parts of this flaming Oyle may be\ncaught and collected again into Oyl or Sulphur; I shall demand, what\nChymist appears to have ever done it; and without Examining whether it\nmay not hence be as well said that sulphur is but compacted Fire, as\nthat Fire is but diffus'd Sulphur, I shall leave you to consider\nwhether it may not hence be argu'd, that neither Fire nor Sulphur are\nprimitive and indestructible Bodies; and I shall further observe that,\nat least it will hence appear that a portion of matter may without\nbeing Compounded with new Ingredients, by having the Texture and\nMotion of its small parts chang'd, be easily, by the means of the\nFire, endow'd with new Qualities, more differing from them it had\nbefore, then are those which suffice to discriminate the Chymists\nPrinciples from one another.\n\nWe are next to Consider, whether in the Anatomy of mixt Bodies, that\nwhich Chymists call the Mercurial part of them be un-compounded, or\nno. But to tell You True, though Chymists do Unanimously affirm that\ntheir Resolutions discover a Principle, which they call Mercury, yet I\nfind them to give of it Descriptions so Differing, and so\nAEnigmaticall, that I, who am not asham'd to confess that I cannot\nunderstand what is not sence, must acknowledge to you that I know not\nwhat to make of them. _Paracelsus_ himself, and therefore, as you\nwill easily believe, many of his Followers, does somewhere call that\nMercury which ascends upon the burning of Wood, as the Peripateticks\nare wont to take the same smoke for Air; and so seems to define\nMercury by Volatility, or (if I may coyne such a Word) Effumability.\nBut since, in this Example, both Volatile Salt and Sulphur make part\nof the smoke, which does indeed consist also both of Phlegmatick and\nTerrene Corpuscles, this Notion is not to be admitted; And I find that\nthe more sober Chymists themselves disavow it. Yet to shew you how\nlittle of clearness we are to expect in the accounts even of latter\n_Spagyrists_, be pleas'd to take notice, that _Beguinus_, even in his\n_Tyrocinium Chymicum_,[20] written for the Instruction of Novices,\nwhen he comes to tell us what are meant by the _Tria Prima_, which for\ntheir being Principles ought to be defin'd the more accurately and\nplainly, gives us this Description of Mercury; _Mercurius_ (sayes he)\n_est liquor ille acidus, permeabilis, penetrabilis, aethereus, ac\npurissimus, a quo omnis Nutricatio, Sensus, Motus, Vires, Colores,\nSenectutisque Praeproperae retardatio._ Which words are not so much a\nDefinition of it, as an _Encomium_: and yet _Quercetanus_ in his\nDescription of the same Principle adds to these, divers other\n_Epithets_. But both of them, to skip very many other faults that may\nbe found with their Metaphoricall Descriptions, speak incongruously to\nthe Chymists own Principles. For if Mercury be an Acid Liquor, either\nHermetical Philosophy must err in ascribing all Tasts to Salt, or else\nMercury must not be a Principle, but Compounded of a Saline Ingredient\nand somewhat else. _Libavius_, though he find great fault with the\nobscurity of what the Chymists write concerning their Mercurial\nPrinciple, does yet but give us such a Negative Description of it, as\n_Sennertus_, how favourable soever to the _Tria Prima_, is not\nsatisfi'd with. And this _Sennertus_ Himself, though the Learnedst\nChampion for the Hypostatical Principles, does almost as frequently as\njustly complain of the unsatisfactoriness of what the Chymists teach\nconcerning their Mercury; and yet he himself (but with his wonted\nmodesty) Substitutes instead of the Description of _Libavius_,\nanother, which many Readers, especially if they be not Peripateticks,\nwill not know what to make of. For scarce telling us any more, then\nthat in all bodies that which is found besides Salt and Sulphur, and\nthe Elements, or, as they call them, Phlegm and Dead Earth, is that\nSpirit which in _Aristotles_ Language may be call'd [Greek: ousian\nanalogon [Errata: ousia analogos] to ton astron stoichaio [Errata:\nastron stoicheio]]. He sayes that which I confess is not at all\nsatisfactory to me, who do not love to seem to acquiesce in any mans\nMystical Doctrines, that I may be thought to understand them.\n\n[Footnote 20: _Chm. Tyrocin. lib. 1. Cap. 2._]\n\nIf (sayes _Eleutherius_) I durst presume that the same thing would be\nthought clear by me, and those that are fond of such cloudy\nExpressions as You justly Tax the Chymists for, I should venture to\noffer to Consideration, whether or no, since the Mercurial Principle\nthat arises from Distillation is unanimously asserted to be distinct\nfrom the salt and Sulphur of the same Concrete, that may not be call'd\nthe Mercury of a Body, which though it ascend in Distillation, as do\nthe Phlegme and Sulphur, is neither insipid like the former, nor\ninflamable like the latter. And therefore I would substitute to the\ntoo much abused Name of Mercury, the more clear and Familiar\nAppellation of Spirit, which is also now very much made use of even by\nthe Chymists themselves, of our times, though they have not given us\nso Distinct an Explication, as were fit, of what may be call'd the\nSpirit of a mixt Body.\n\nI should not perhaps (sayes _Carneades_) much quarrel with your Notion\nof Mercury. But as for the Chymists, what they can mean, with\ncongruity to their own Principles, by the Mercury of Animals and\nVegetables, 'twill not be so easie to find out; for they ascribe Tasts\nonly to the Saline Principle, and consequently would be much put to it\nto shew what Liquor it is, in the Resolution of Bodies, that not being\ninsipid, for that they call Phlegme, neither is inflamable as Oyle or\nSulphur, nor has any Tast; which according to them must proceed from a\nMixture, at least, of Salt. And if we should take Spirit in the sence\nof the Word receiv'd among Modern Chymists and Physitians, for any\nDistill'd Liquor that is neither Phlegme nor oyle, the Appellation\nwould yet appear Ambiguous enough. For, plainly, that which first\nascends in the Distillation of Wine and Fermented Liquors, is\ngenerally as well by Chymists as others reputed a Spirit. And yet pure\nSpirit of Wine being wholly inflamable ought according to them to be\nreckon'd to the Sulphureous, not the Mercurial Principle. And among\nthe other Liquors that go under the name of Spirits, there are divers\nwhich seem to belong to the family of Salts, such as are the Spirits\nof Nitre, Vitriol, Sea-Salt and others, and even the Spirit of\nHarts-horn, being, as I have try'd, in great part, if not totally\nreducible into Salt and Phlegme, may be suspected to be but a Volatile\nSalt disguis'd by the Phlegme mingl'd with it into the forme of a\nLiquor. However if this be a Spirit, it manifestly differs very much\nfrom that of Vinager, the Tast of the one being Acid, and the other\nSalt, and their Mixture in case they be very pure, sometimes\noccasioning an Effervescence like that of those Liquors the Chymists\ncount most contrary to one another. And even among those Liquors that\nseem to have a better title then those hitherto mention'd, to the name\nof Spirits, there appears a sensible Diversity; For spirit of Oak, for\ninstance, differs from that of Tartar, and this from that of Box, or\nof _Guaiacum_. And in short, even these spirits as well as other\nDistill'd Liquors manifest a great Disparity betwixt themselves,\neither in their Actions on our senses, or in their other operations.\n\nAnd (continues _Carneades_) besides this Disparity that is to be met\nwith among those Liquors that the Modernes call spirits, & take for\nsimilar bodies, what I have formerly told you concerning the Spirit of\nBox-wood may let you see that some of those Liquors not only have\nqualities very differing from others, but may be further resolved into\nsubstances differing from one another.\n\nAnd since many moderne Chymists and other Naturalists are pleased to\ntake the Mercurial spirit of Bodies for the same Principle, under\ndiffering names, I must invite you to observe, with me, the great\ndifference that is conspicuous betwixt all the Vegetable and Animal\nspirits I have mention'd and running Mercury. I speak not of that\nwhich is commonly sold in shops that many of themselves will confesse\nto be a mixt Body; but of that which is separated from Metals, which\nby some Chymists that seem more Philosophers then the rest, and\nespecially by the above mentioned _Claveus_, is (for distinction sake)\ncalled _Mercurius Corporum_. Now this Metalline Liquor being one of\nthose three Principles of which Mineral Bodies are by _Spagyrists_\naffirmed to be compos'd and to be resoluble into them, the many\nnotorious Differences betwixt them and the Mercuries, as They call\nThem, of Vegetables and Animals will allow me to inferr, either that\nMinerals and the other two sorts of Mixt Bodies consist not of the\nsame Elements, or that those Principles whereinto Minerals are\nimmediately resolved, which Chymists with great ostentation shew us as\nthe true principles, of them, are but Secundary Principles, or Mixts\nof a peculiar sort, which must be themselves reduc'd to a very\ndiffering forme, to be of the same kind with Vegetable and Animal\nLiquors.\n\nBut this is not all; for although I formerly told You how Little\nCredit there is to be given to the Chymical Processes commonly to be\nmet with, of Extracting the Mercuries of Metals, Yet I will now add,\nthat supposing that the more Judicious of Them do not untruly affirme\nthat they have really drawn true and running Mercury from several\nMetals (which I wish they had cleerly taught Us how to do also,) yet\nit may be still doubted whether such extracted Mercuries do not as\nwell differ from common Quicksilver, and from one another, as from the\nMercuries of Vegetables and Animalls. _Claveus_,[21] in his Apology,\nspeaking of some _experiments_ whereby Metalline Mercuries may be fixt\ninto the nobler metals, adds, that he spake of the Mercuries drawn\nfrom metals; because common Quicksilver by reason of its excessive\ncoldnesse and moisture is unfit for that particular kind of operation;\nfor which though a few lines before he prescribes in general the\nMercuries of Metalline Bodies, yet he chiefly commends that drawn by\nart from silver. And elsewhere, in the same Book, he tells us, that\nhe himself tryed, that by bare coction the quicksilver of Tin or\nPewter (_argentum vivum ex stanno prolicitum_) may by an efficient\ncause, as he speaks, be turn'd into pure Gold. And the Experienc'd\n_Alexander van Suchten_, somewhere tells us, that by a way he\nintimates may be made a Mercury of Copper, not of the Silver colour of\nother Mercuries, but green; to which I shall add, that an eminent\nperson, whose name his travells and learned writings have made famous,\nlately assur'd me that he had more then once seen the Mercury of Lead\n(which whatever Authors promise, you will find it very difficult to\nmake, at least in any considerable quantity) fixt into perfect Gold.\nAnd being by me demanded whether or no any other Mercury would not as\nwell have been changed by the same Operations, he assured me of the\nNegative.\n\n[Footnote 21: _Dixi autem de argento vivo a metallis prolicito, quod\nvulgare ob nimiam frigiditatem & humiditatem nimium concoctioni est\ncontumax, nec ab auro solum alterato coerceri potest._ Gast. Clave. in\nApoll.]\n\nAnd since I am fallen upon the mention of the Mercuries of metals, you\nwill perhaps expect (_Eleutherius_!) that I should say something of\ntheir two other principles; but must freely confess to you, that what\nDisparity there may be between the salts and sulphurs of Metals and\nother Menerals [Transcriber's Note: Minerals], I am not my self\nexperienced enough in the separations and examens of them, to venture\nto determine: (for as for the salts of Metals, I formerly represented\nit as a thing much to be question'd, whether they have any at all:)\nAnd for the processes of separation I find in Authors, if they were\n(what many of them are not) successfully practicable, as I noted\nabove, yet they are to be performed by the assistance of other bodies,\nso hardly, if upon any termes at all, separable from them, that it is\nvery difficult to give the separated principles all their due, and no\nmore. But the Sulphur of Antimony which is vehemently vomitive, and\nthe strongly scented Anodyne Sulphur of Vitriol inclines me to think\nthat not only Mineral Sulphurs differ from Vegetable ones, but also\nfrom one another, retaining much of the nature of their Concretes. The\nsalts of metals, and of some sort of minerals, You will easily guesse\nby [Errata: (by] the Doubts I formerly express'd, whether metals have\nany salt at all [Errata: all)], that I have not been so happy as yet\nto see, perhaps not for want of curiosity. But if _Paracelsus_ did\nalwaies write so consentaneously to himself that his opinion were\n_confidently_ to be collected from every place of his writings where\nhe seems to expresse it, I might safely take upon me to tell you, that\nhe both countenances in general what I have delivered in my Fourth\nmain consideration, and in particular warrants me to suspect that\nthere may be a difference in metalline and mineral Salts, as well as\nwe find it in those of other bodies. For, _Sulphur_ (sayes he)[22]\n_aliud in auro, aliud in argento, aliud in ferro, aliud in plumbo,\nstanno, &c. sic aliud in Saphiro, aliud in Smaragdo, aliud in rubino,\nchrysolito, amethisto, magnete, &c. Item aliud in lapidibus, silice,\nsalibus, fontibus, &c. nec vero tot sulphura tantum, sed & totidem\nsalia; sal aliud in metallis, aliud in gemmis, aliud in lapidibus,\naliud in salibus, aliud in vitriolo, aliud in alumine: similis etiam\nMercurii est ratio. Alius in Metallis, alius in Gemmis, &c. Ita ut\nunicuique speciei suus peculiaris Mercurius sit. Et tamen res saltem\ntres sunt; una essentia est sulphur; una est sal; una est Mercurius.\nAddo quod & specialius adhuc singula dividantur; aurum enim non unum,\nsed multiplex, ut et non unum pyrum, pomum, sed idem multiplex;\ntotidem etiam sulphura auri, salia auri, mercurii auri; idem competit\netiam metallis & gemmis; ut quot saphyri praestantiores, laevioris, &c.\ntot etiam saphyrica sulphura, saphyrica salia, saphyrici Mercurii, &c.\nIdem verum etiam est de turconibus & gemmis aliis universis._ From\nwhich passage (_Eleutherius_) I suppose you will think I might without\nrashness conclude, either that my opinion is favoured by that of\n_Paracelsus_, or that _Paracelsus_ his opinion was not alwaies the\nsame. But because in divers other places of his writings he seems to\ntalk at a differing rate of the three Principles and the four\nElements, I shall content my self to inferr from the alledg'd passage,\nthat if his doctrine be not consistent with that Part of mine which it\nis brought to countenance, it is very difficult to know what his\nopinion concerning salt, sulphur and mercury, was; and that\nconsequently we had reason about the beginning of our conferences, to\ndecline taking upon us, either to examine or oppose it.\n\n[Footnote 22: Paracel. de Mineral. Tract. 1. pag. 141.]\n\nI know not whether I should on this occasion add, that those very\nbodies the Chymists call Phlegme and Earth do yet recede from an\nElementary simplicity. That common Earth and Water frequently do so,\nnotwithstanding the received contrary opinion, is not deny'd by the\nmore wary of the moderne Peripateticks themselves: and certainly, most\nEarths are much lesse simple bodies then is commonly imagined even by\nChymists, who do not so consideratly to prescribe and employ Earths\nPromiscuously in those distillations that require the mixture of some\n_caput mortuum_, to hinder the flowing together of the matter, and to\nretain its grosser parts. For I have found some Earths to yield by\ndistillation a Liquor very far from being inodorous or insipid; and\n'tis a known observation, that most kinds of fat Earth kept cover'd\nfrom the rain, and hindred from spending themselves in the production\nof vegetables, will in time become impregnated with Salt-Petre.\n\nBut I must remember that the Water and Earths I ought here to speak\nof, are such as are separated from mixt Bodies by the fire; and\ntherefore to restrain my Discourse to such, I shall tell you, That we\nsee the Phlegme of Vitriol (for instance) is a very effectual remedie\nagainst burnes; and I know a very Famous and experienc'd _Physitian_,\nwhose unsuspected secret (himself confess'd to me) it is, for the\ndiscussing of hard and Obstinate Tumours. The Phlegme of Vinager,\nthough drawn exceeding leasurly in a digesting Furnace, I have\npurposely made tryall of; and sometimes found it able to draw, though\nslowly, a saccharine sweetness out of Lead; and as I remember by long\nDigestion, I dissolv'd Corpals [Errata: Corals] in it. The Phlegme of\nthe sugar of Saturne is said to have very peculiar properties. Divers\nEminent Chymists teach, that it will dissolve Pearls, which being\nprecipitated by the spirit of the same concrete are thereby (as they\nsay) rendred volatile; which has been confirmed to me, upon his own\nobservation, by a person of great veracity. The Phlegme of Wine, and\nindeed divers other Liquors that are indiscriminately condemnd to be\ncast away as phlegm, are endow'd with qualities that make them differ\nboth from meer water, and from each other; and whereas the Chymists\nare pleas'd to call the _caput mortuum_ of what they have distill'd\n(after they have by affusion of water drawn away its salt) _terra\ndamnata_, or Earth, it may be doubted whether or no those earths are\nall of them perfectly alike: and it is scarce to be doubted, but that\nthere are some of them which remain yet unreduc'd to an Elementary\nnature. The ashes of wood depriv'd of all the salt, and bone-Ashes, or\ncalcin'd Harts-horn, which Refiners choose to make Tests of, as freest\nfrom Salt, seem unlike: and he that shall compare either of these\ninsipid ashes to Lime, and much more to the _calx_ of Talk\n[Transcriber's Note: Talck] (though by the affusion of water they be\nexquisitely dulcify'd) will perhaps see cause to think them things of\na somewhat differing nature. And it is evident in Colcothar that the\nexactest calcination, follow'd by an exquisite dulcification, does not\nalwaies reduce the remaining body into elementary earth; for after the\nsalt or Vitriol (if the Calcination have been too faint) is drawn out\nof the Colcothar, the residue is not earth, but a mixt body, rich in\nMedical vertues (as experience has inform'd me) and which _Angelus\nSala_ affirmes to be partly reducible into malleable Copper; which I\njudge very probable: for though when I was making Experiments upon\nColcothar, I was destitute of a Furnace capable of giving a heat\nintense Enough to bring such a Calx to Fusion; yet having conjectur'd\nthat if Colcothar abounded with that Metal, Aqua Fortis would find it\nout there, I put some dulcifi'd Colcothar into that _Menstruum_, and\nfound the Liquor, according to my Expectation, presently Colour'd as\nHighly as if it had been an Ordinary Solution of Copper.\n\n\n\n\nTHE\n\nSCEPTICAL CHYMIST.\n\n_The Fifth Part._\n\n\nHere _Carneades_ making a pause, I must not deny (sayes his Friend to\nhim) that I think You have sufficiently prov'd that these distinct\nSubstances which Chymists are wont to obtain from Mixt Bodies, by\ntheir Vulgar Destillation, are not pure and simple enough to deserve,\nin Rigour of speaking, the Name of Elements, or Principles. But I\nsuppose You have heard, that there are some Modern _Spagyrists_, who\ngive out that they can by further and more Skilfull Purifications, so\nreduce the separated Ingredients of Mixt Bodies to an Elementary\nsimplicity, That the Oyles (for Instance) extracted from all Mixts\nshall as perfectly resemble one another, as the Drops of Water do.\n\nIf you remember (replies _Carneades_) that at the Beginning of our\nConference with _Philoponus_, I declar'd to him before the rest of the\nCompany, that I would not _engage_ my self at present to do any more\nthen examine the usual proofs alledg'd by Chymists, for the Vulgar\ndoctrine of their three Hypostatical Principles; You will easily\nperceive that I am not oblig'd to make answer to what you newly\npropos'd; and that it rather grants, then disproves what I have been\ncontending for: Since by pretending to make so great a change in the\nreputed Principles that Destillation affords the common _Spagyrists_,\n'tis plainly enough presuppos'd, that before such Artificial\nDepurations be made, the Substances to be made more simple were not\nyet simple enough to be look'd upon as Elementary; Wherefore in case\nthe _Artists_ you speak of could perform what they give out they can,\nyet I should not need to be asham'd of having question'd the Vulgar\nOpinion touching the _tria Prima_. And as to the thing it self, I\nshall freely acknowledge to you, that I love not to be forward in\ndetermining things to be impossible, till I know and have consider'd\nthe means by which they are propos'd to be effected. And therefore I\nshall not peremptorily deny either the possibility of what these\n_Artists_ promise, or my Assent to any just Inference; however\ndestructive to my Conjectures, that may be drawn from their\nperformances. But give me leave to tell you withall, that because such\npromises are wont (as Experience has more then once inform'd me) to be\nmuch more easily made, then made good by Chymists, I must withhold my\nBeliefe from their assertions, till their Experiments exact it; and\nmust not be so easie as to expect before hand, an unlikely thing upon\nno stronger Inducements then are yet given me: Besides that I have not\nyet found by what I have heard of these Artists, that though they\npretend to bring the several Substances into which the Fire has\ndivided the Concrete, to an exquisite simplicity, They pretend also to\nbe able by the Fire to divide all Concretes, Minerals, and others,\ninto the same number of Distinct Substances. And in the mean time I\nmust think it improbable, that they can either truly separate as many\ndiffering Bodies from Gold (for Instance) or _Osteocolla_, as we can\ndo from Wine, or Vitriol; or that the Mercury (for Example) of Gold or\nSaturn would be perfectly of the same Nature with that of Harts-horn;\nand that the sulphur of Antimony would be but Numerically different\nfrom the Distill'd butter or oyle of Roses.\n\nBut suppose (sayes _Eleutherius_) that you should meet with Chymists,\nwho would allow you to take in Earth and Water into the number of the\nprinciples of Mixt Bodies; and being also content to change the\nAmbiguous Name of Mercury for that more intelligible one of spirit,\nshould consequently make the principles of Compound Bodies to be Five;\nwould you not think it something hard to reject so plausible an\nOpinion, only because the Five substances into which the Fire divides\nmixt Bodies are not exactly pure, and Homogeneous? For my part\n(Continues _Carneades_) I cannot but think it somewhat strange, in\ncase this Opinion be not true, that it should fall out so luckily,\nthat so great a Variety of Bodies should be Analyz'd by the Fire into\njust five Distinct substances; which so little differing from the\nBodies that bear those names, may so Plausibly be call'd Oyle, Spirit,\nSalt, Water, and Earth.\n\nThe Opinion You now propose (answers _Carneades_) being another then\nthat I was engag'd to examine, it is not requisite for me to Debate it\nat present; nor should I have leisure to do it thorowly. Wherefore I\nshall only tell you in General, that though I think this Opinion in\nsome respects more defensible then that of the Vulgar Chymists; yet\nyou may easily enough learn from the past Discourse what may be\nthought of it: Since many of the Objections made against the Vulgar\nDoctrine of the Chymists seem, without much alteration, employable\nagainst this _Hypothesis_ also. For, besides that this Doctrine does\nas well as the other take it for granted, (what is not easie to be\nprov'd) that the Fire is the true and Adequate Analyzer of Bodies,\nand that all the Distinct substances obtainable from a mixt Body by\nthe Fire, were so pre-existent in it, that they were but extricated\nfrom each other by the _Analysis_; Besides that this Opinion, too,\nascribe [Errata: ascribes] to the Productions of the Fire an\nElementary simplicity, which I have shewn not to belong to them; and\nbesides that this Doctrine is lyable to some of the other\nDifficulties, wherewith That of the _Tria Prima_ is incumber'd;\nBesides all this, I say, this quinary number of Elements, (if you\npardon the Expression) ought at least to have been restrain'd to the\nGenerality of Animal and Vegetable Bodies, since not only among these\nthere are some Bodies (as I formerly argu'd) which, for ought has yet\nbeen made to appear, do consist, either of fewer or more similar\nsubstances then precisely Five. But in the Mineral Kingdom, there is\nscarce one Concrete that has been evinc'd to be adequatly divisible\ninto such five Principles or Elements, and neither more nor less, as\nthis Opinion would have every mixt Body to consist of.\n\nAnd this very thing (continues _Carneades_) may serve to take away or\nlessen your Wonder, that just so many Bodies as five should be found\nupon the Resolution of Concretes. For since we find not that the fire\ncan make any such _Analysis_ (into five Elements) of Metals and other\nMineral Bodies, whose Texture is more strong and permanent, it remains\nthat the Five Substances under consideration be Obtain'd from\nVegetable and Animal Bodies, which (probably by reason of their looser\nContexture) are capable of being Distill'd. And as to such Bodies,\n'tis natural enough, that, whether we suppose that there are, or are\nnot, precisely five Elements, there should ordinarily occurr in the\nDissipated parts a five Fold Diversity of Scheme (if I may so speak.)\nFor if the Parts do not remain all fix'd, as in Gold, Calcin'd Talck,\n&c. nor all ascend, as in the Sublimation of Brimstone, Camphire, &c.\nbut after their Dissipation do associate themselves into new Schemes\nof Matter; it is very likely, that they will by the Fire be divided\ninto fix'd and Volatile (I mean, in Reference to that degree of heat\nby which they are destill'd) and those Volatile parts will, for the\nmost part, ascend either in a dry forme, which Chymists are pleas'd to\ncall, if they be Tastless, Flowers; if Sapid, Volatile Salt; or in a\nLiquid Forme. And this Liquor must be either inflamable, and so pass\nfor oyl, or not inflamable, and yet subtile and pungent, which may be\ncall'd Spirit; or else strengthless or insipid, which may be nam'd\nPhlegme, or Water. And as for the fixt part, or _Caput Mortuum_, it\nwill most commonly consist of Corpuscles, partly Soluble in Water, or\nSapid, (especially if the Saline parts were not so Volatile, as to fly\naway before) which make up its fixt salt; and partly insoluble and\ninsipid, which therefore seems to challenge the name of Earth. But\nalthough upon this ground one might easily enough have foretold, that\nthe differing substances obtain'd from a perfectly mixt Body by the\nFire would for the most part be reducible to the five newly mentioned\nStates of Matter; yet it will not presently follow, that these five\nDistinct substances were simple and primogeneal bodies, so\npre-existent in the Concrete that the fire does but take them asunder.\nBesides that it does not appear, that all Mixt Bodies, (witness,\nGold, Silver, Mercury, &c.) Nay nor perhaps all Vegetables, which may\nappear by what we said above of _Camphire_, _Benzoin_, &c. are\nresoluble by Fire into just such differing Schemes of Matter. Nor will\nthe Experiments formerly alledg'd permit us to look upon these\nseparated Substances as Elementary, or uncompounded. Neither will it\nbe a sufficient Argument of their being Bodies that deserve the Names\nwhich Chymists are pleas'd to give them, that they have an Analogy in\npoint of Consistence, or either Volatility or Fixtness, or else some\nother obvious Quality, with the suppos'd Principles, whose names are\nascrib'd to them. For, as I told you above, notwithstanding this\nResemblance in some one Quality, there may be such a Disparity in\nothers, as may be more fit to give them Differing Appellations, then\nthe Resemblance is to give them one and the same. And indeed it seems\nbut somewhat a gross Way of judging of the Nature of Bodies, to\nconclude without Scruple, that those must be of the same Nature that\nagree in some such General Quality, as Fluidity, Dryness, Volatility,\nand the like: since each of those Qualities, or States of Matter, may\nComprehend a great Variety of Bodies, otherwise of a very differing\nNature; as we may see in the Calxes of Gold, of Vitriol, and of\nVenetian Talck, compar'd with common Ashes, which yet are very dry,\nand fix'd by the vehemence of the Fire, as well as they. And as we may\nlikewise gather from what I have formerly Observ'd, touching the\nSpirit of Box-Wood, which though a Volatile, Sapid, and not inflamable\nLiquor, as well as the Spirits of Harts-horn, of Blood and others,\n(and therefore has been hitherto call'd, the Spirit, and esteem'd for\none of the Principles of the Wood that affords it;) may yet, as I told\nYou, be subdivided into two Liquors, differing from one another, and\none of them at least, from the Generality of other Chymical Spirits.\n\nBut you may your self, if you please, (pursues _Carneades_)\naccommodate to the _Hypothesis_ you propos'd what other particulars\nyou shall think applicable to it, in the foregoing Discourse. For I\nthink it unseasonable for me to meddle now any further with a\nControversie, which since it does not now belong to me, Leaves me at\nLiberty to Take my Own time to Declare my Self about it.\n\n_Eleutherius_ perceiving that _Carneades_ was somewhat unwilling to\nspend any more time upon the debate of this Opinion, and having\nperhaps some thoughts of taking hence a Rise to make him Discourse it\nmore fully another time, thought not fit as then to make any further\nmention to him of the propos'd opinion, but told him;\n\nI presume I need not mind you, _Carneades_, That both the Patrons of\nthe ternary number of Principles, and those that would have five\nElements, endeavour to back their experiments with a specious Reason\nor two; and especially some of those Embracers of the Opinion last\nnam'd (whom I have convers'd with, and found them Learned men) assigne\nthis Reason of the necessity of five distinct Elements; that otherwise\nmixt Bodies could not be so compounded and temper'd as to obtain a due\nconsistence and competent Duration. For Salt (say they) is the\n_Basis_ of Solidity; and Permanency in Compound Bodies, without which\nthe other four Elements might indeed be variously and loosly blended\ntogether, but would remain incompacted; but that Salt might be\ndissolv'd into minute Parts, and convey'd to the other Substances to\nbe compacted by it, and with it, there is a Necessity of Water. And\nthat the mixture may not be too hard and brittle, a Sulphureous or\nOyly Principle must intervene to make the mass more tenacious; to this\na Mercurial spirit must be superadded; which by its activity may for a\nwhile premeate [Transcriber's Note: permeate], and as it were leaven\nthe whole Mass, and thereby promote the more exquisite mixture and\nincorporation of the Ingredients. To all which (lastly) a portion of\nEarth must be added, which by its drinesse and poracity [Errata:\nporosity] may soak up part of that water wherein the Salt was\ndissolv'd, and eminently concurr with the other ingredients to give\nthe whole body the requisite consistence.\n\nI perceive (sayes _Carneades_ smiling) that if it be true, as 'twas\nlately rooted [Errata: noted] from the Proverb, _That good Wits have\nbad Memories_, You have that Title, as well as a better, to a place\namong the good Wits. For you have already more then once forgot, that\nI declar'd to you that I would at this Conference Examine only the\nExperiments of my Adversaries, not their Speculative Reasons. Yet 'tis\nnot (Subjoynes _Carneades_) for fear of medling with the Argument you\nhave propos'd, that I decline the examining it at present. For if when\nwe are more at leasure, you shall have a mind that we may Solemnly\nconsider of it together; I am confident we shall scarce find it\ninsoluble. And in the mean time we may observe, that such a way of\nArguing may, it seems, be speciously accommodated to differing\n_Hypotheses_. For I find that _Beguinus_, and other Assertors of the\n_Tria Prima_, pretend to make out by such a way, the requisiteness of\ntheir Salt, Sulphur and Mercury, to constitute mixt Bodies, without\ntaking notice of any necessity of an Addition of Water and Earth.\n\nAnd indeed neither sort of Chymists seem to have duly consider'd how\ngreat Variety there is in the Textures and Consistences of Compound\nBodie; sand [Errata: Bodies; and] how little the consistence and\nDuration of many of them seem to accommodate and be explicable by the\npropos'd Notion. And not to mention those almost incorruptible\nSubstances obtainable by the Fire, which I have prov'd to be somewhat\ncompounded, and which the Chymists will readily grant not to be\nperfectly mixt Bodies: (Not to mention these, I say) If you will but\nrecall to mind some of those Experiments, whereby I shew'd You that\nout of common Water only mixt Bodies (and even living ones) of very\ndiffering consistences, and resoluble by Fire into as many Principles\nas other bodies acknowledg'd to be perfectly mixt; if you do this, I\nsay, you will not, I suppose, be averse from beleeving, that Nature by\na convenient disposition of the minute parts of a portion of matter\nmay contrive bodies durable enough, and of this, or that, or the other\nConsistence, without being oblig'd to make use of all, much less of\nany Determinate quantity of each of the five Elements, or of the three\nPrinciples to compound such bodies of. And I have (pursues\n_Carneades_) something wonder'd, Chymists should not consider, that\nthere is scarce any body in Nature so permanent and indissoluble as\nGlass; which yet themselves teach us may be made of bare Ashes,\nbrought to fusion by the meer Violence of the Fire; so that, since\nAshes are granted to consist but of pure Salt and simple Earth,\nsequestred from all the other Principles or Elements, they must\nacknowledge, That even Art it self can of two Elements only, or, if\nyou please, one Principle and one Element, compound a Body more\ndurable then almost any in the World. Which being undeniable, how will\nthey prove that Nature cannot compound Mixt Bodies, and even durable\nOnes, under all the five Elements or material Principles.\n\nBut to insist any longer on this Occasional Disquisition, Touching\ntheir Opinion that would Establish five Elements, were to remember as\nlittle as You did before, that the Debate of this matter is no part of\nmy first undertaking; and consequently, that I have already spent time\nenough in what I look back upon but as a digression, or at best an\nExcursion.\n\nAnd thus, _Eleutherius_, (sayes _Carneades_) having at length gone\nthrough the four Considerations I propos'd to Discourse unto you, I\nhold it not unfit, for fear my having insisted so long on each of them\nmay have made you forget their _Series_, briefly to repeat them by\ntelling you, that\n\nSince, in the first place, it may justly be doubted whether or no the\nFire be, as Chymists suppose it, the genuine and Universal Resolver of\nmixt Bodies;\n\nSince we may doubt, in the next place, whether or no all the Distinct\nSubstances that may be obtain'd from a mixt body by the Fire were\npre-existent there in the formes in which they were separated from it;\n\nSince also, though we should grant the Substances separable from mixt\nBodies by the fire to have been their component Ingredients, yet the\nNumber of such substances does not appear the same in all mixt Bodies;\nsome of them being Resoluble into more differing substances than\nthree, and Others not being Resoluble into so many as three.\n\nAnd Since, Lastly, those very substances that are thus separated are\nnot for the most part pure and Elementary bodies, but new kinds of\nmixts;\n\nSince, I say, these things are so, I hope you will allow me to inferr,\nthat the Vulgar Experiments (I might perchance have Added, the\nArguments too) wont to be Alledg'd by Chymists to prove, that their\nthree Hypostatical Principles do adequately compose all mixt Bodies,\nare not so demonstrative as to reduce a wary Person to acquiesce in\ntheir Doctrine, which, till they Explain and prove it better, will by\nits perplexing darkness be more apt to puzzle then satisfy considering\nmen, and will to them appear incumbred with no small Difficulties.\n\nAnd from what has been hitherto deduc'd (continues _Carneades_) we may\nLearn, what to Judge of the common Practice of those Chymists, who\nbecause they have found that Diverse compound Bodies (for it will not\nhold in All) can be resolv'd into, or rather can be brought to afford\ntwo or three differing Substances more then the Soot and Ashes,\nwhereinto the naked fire commonly divides them in our Chymnies, cry up\ntheir own Sect for the Invention of a New Philosophy, some of them, as\n_Helmont, &c._ styling themselves Philosophers by the Fire; and the\nmost part not only ascribing, but as far as in them lies, engrossing\nto those of their Sect the Title of PHILOSOPHERS.\n\nBut alas, how narrow is this Philosophy, that reaches but to some of\nthose compound Bodies, which we find but upon, or in the crust or\noutside of our terrestrial Globe, which is it self but a point in\ncomparison of the vast extended Universe, of whose other and greater\nparts the Doctrine of the _Tria Prima_ does not give us an Account!\nFor what does it teach us, either of the Nature of the Sun, which\nAstronomers affirme to be eight-score and odd times bigger then the\nwhole Earth? or of that of those numerous fixt Starrs, which, for\nought we know, would very few, if any of them, appear inferiour in\nbulke and brightness to the Sun, if they were as neer us as He? What\ndoes the knowing that Salt, sulphur and Mercury, are the Principles of\nMixt Bodies, informe us of the Nature of that vast, fluid, and\nAEtherial Substance, that seemes to make up the interstellar, and\nconsequently much the greatest part of the World? for as for the\nopinion commonly ascrib'd to _Paracelsus_, as if he would have not\nonly the four Peripatetick Elements, but even the Celestial parts of\nthe Universe to consist of his three Principles, since the modern\nChymists themselves have not thought so groundless a conceit worth\ntheir owning, I shall not think it Worth my confuting.\n\nBut I should perchance forgive the Hypothesis I have been all this\nwhile examining, if, though it reaches but to a very little part of\nthe World, it did at least give us a satisfactory account of those\nthings to which 'tis said to reach. But I find not, that it gives us\nany other then a very imperfect information even about mixt Bodies\nthemselves: For how will the knowledge of the _Tria Prima_ discover to\nus the Reason, why the Loadstone drawes a Needle and disposes it to\nrespect the Poles, and yet seldom precisely points at them? how will\nthis Hypothesis teach Us how a Chick is formed in the Egge, or how the\nSeminal Principles of Mint, Pompions, and other Vegitables, that I\nmention'd to You above, can fashion Water into Various Plants, each of\nthem endow'd with its peculiar and determinate shape, and with divers\nspecifick and discriminating Qualities? How does this Hypothesis shew\nus, how much Salt, how much Sulphur, and how much Mercury must be\ntaken to make a Chick or a Pompion? and if We know that, what\nPrinciple is it, that manages these Ingredients, and contrives (for\ninstance) such Liquors as the White and Yelk of an Egge into such a\nvariety of Textures as is requisite to fashion the Bones, Veines,\nArteries, Nerves, Tendons, Feathers, Blood, and other parts of a\nChick; and not only to fashion each Limbe, but to connect them\naltogether, after that manner that is most congruous to the perfection\nof the Animal which is to Consist of Them? For to say, that some more\nfine and subtile part of either or all the Hypostatical Principles is\nthe Director in all this business, and the Architect of all this\nElaborate structure, is to give one occasion to demand again, what\nproportion and way of mixture of the _Tria Prima_ afforded this\n_Architectonick_ Spirit, and what Agent made so skilful and happy a\nmixture? And the Answer to this Question, if the Chymists will keep\nthemselves within their three Principles, will be lyable to the same\nInconvenience, that the Answer to the former was. And if it were not\nto intrench upon the Theame of a Friend of ours here present, I could\neasily prosecute the Imperfections of the Vulgar Chymists Philosophy,\nand shew you, that by going about to explicate by their three\nPrinciples, I say not, all the abstruse Properties of mixt Bodies, but\neven such Obvious and more familiar _Phaenomena_ as _Fluidity_ and\n_Firmness_, The Colours and Figures of Stones, Minerals, and other\ncompound Bodies, The Nutrition of either Plants or Animals, the\nGravity of Gold or Quicksilver compar'd with Wine or Spirit of Wine;\nBy attempting, I say, to render a reason of these (to omit a thousand\nothers as difficult to account for) from any proportion of the three\nsimple Ingredients, Chymists will be much more likely to discredit\nthemselves and their _Hypothesis_, then satisfy an intelligent\nInquirer after Truth.\n\nBut (interposes _Eleutherus_) [Transcriber's Note: Eleutherius] This\nObjection seems no more then may be made against the four Peripatetick\nElements. And indeed almost against any other _Hypothesis_, that\npretends by any Determinate Number of Material Ingredients to render a\nreason of the _Phaenomena_ of Nature. And as for the use of the\nChymical Doctrine of the three Principles, I suppose you need not be\ntold by me, that The great Champion of it, The Learned _Sennertus_,[23]\nassignes this noble use of the _Tria Prima_, That from Them, as the\nneerest and most Proper Principles, may be Deduc'd and Demonstrated\nthe Properties which are in Mixt Bodies, and which cannot be\nProximately (as They speak) deduc'd from the Elements. And This, sayes\nhe, is chiefly Apparent, when we Inquire into the Properties and\nFaculties of Medecines. And I know (continues _Eleutherius_) That the\nPerson You have assum'd, of an Opponent of the _Hermetick Doctrine_,\nwill not so far prevaile against your Native and wonted Equity, as To\nkeep You from acknowledging that Philosophy is much beholden to the\nNotions and Discoveries of Chymists.\n\n[Footnote 23: _Senn. de Cons. & Dissen. p. 165._]\n\nIf the Chymists You speak of (Replyes _Carneades_) had been so modest,\nor so Discreet, as to propose their Opinion of the _Tria Prima_, but\nas a Notion useful among Others, to increase Humane knowledge, they\nhad deserv'd more of our thanks; and less of our Opposition; but since\nthe Thing that they pretend is not so much to contribute a Notion\ntoward the Improvement of Philosophy, as to make this Notion attended\n[Errata: (attended] by a few lesse considerable ones) pass for a New\nPhilosophy itself. Nay, since they boast so much of this phancie of\ntheirs, that the famous _Quercetanus_ scruples not to write, that if\nhis most certain Doctrine of the three Principles were sufficiently\nLearned, Examin'd, and Cultivated, it would easily Dispel all the\nDarkness that benights our minds, and bring in a Clear Light, that\nwould remove all Difficulties. This School affording Theorems and\nAxiomes irrefragable, and to be admitted without Dispute by impartial\nJudges; and so useful withal, as to exempt us from the necessity of\nhaving recourse, for want of the knowledg of causes, to that Sanctuary\nof the igorant [Transcriber's Note: ignorant], Occult Qualities;\nsince, I say, this Domestick Notion of the Chymists is so much\novervalued by them, I cannot think it unfit, they should be made\nsensible of their mistake; and be admonish'd to take in more fruitful\nand comprehensive Principles, if they mean to give us an account of\nthe _Phaenomena_ of Nature; and not confine themselves and (as far as\nthey can) others to such narrow Principles, as I fear will scarce\ninable them to give an account (I mean an intelligible one) of the\ntenth part (I say not) of all the _Phaenomena_ of Nature; but even of\nall such as by the _Leucippian_ or some of the other sorts of\nPrinciples may be plausibly enough explicated. And though I be not\nunwilling to grant, that the incompetency I impute to the Chymical\n_Hypothesis_ is but the same which may be Objected against that of the\nfour Elements, and divers other Doctrines that have been maintain'd by\nLearned men; yet since 'tis the Chymical _Hypothesis_ only which I am\nnow examining, I see not why, if what I impute to it be a real\ninconvenience, either it should cease to be so, or I should scruple to\nobject it, because either Theories are lyable thereunto, as well as\nthe Hermetical. For I know not why a Truth should be thought lesse a\nTruth for the being fit to overthrow variety of Errors.\n\nI am oblig'd to You (continues _Carneades_, a little smiling) for the\nfavourable Opinion You are pleas'd to express of my Equity, if there\nbe no design in it. But I need not be tempted by an Artifice, or\ninvited by a Complement, to acknowledge the great service that the\nLabours of Chymists have done the Lovers of useful Learning; nor even\non this occasion shall their Arrogance hinder my Gratitude. But since\nwe are as well examining to [Errata: delete \"to\"] the truth of their\nDoctrine as the merit of their industry, I must in order to the\ninvestigation of the first, continue a reply, to talk at the rate of\nthe part I have assum'd; And tell you, that when I acknowledg the\nusefulness of the Labours of _Spagyrists_ to Natural Philosophy, I do\nit upon the score of their experiments, not upon that of Their\nSpeculations; for it seems to me, that their Writings, as their\nFurnaces, afford as well smoke as light; and do little lesse obscure\nsome subjects, then they illustrate others. And though I am unwilling\nto deny, that 'tis difficult for a man to be an Accomplisht\nNaturalist, that is a stranger to Chymistry, yet I look upon the\ncommon Operations and practices of Chymists, almost as I do on the\nLetters of the Alphabet, without whose knowledge 'tis very hard for a\nman to become a Philosopher; and yet that knowledge is very far from\nbeing sufficient to make him One.\n\nBut (sayes _Carneades_, resuming a more serious Look) to consider a\nlittle more particularly what you alledg in favour of the Chymical\nDoctrine of the _Tria Prima_, though I shall readily acknowledge it\nnot to be unuseful, and that the Divisers [Errata: devisers] and\nEmbracers of it have done the Common-Wealth of Learning some service,\nby helping to destroy that excessive esteem, or rather veneration,\nwherewith the Doctrine of the four Elements was almost as generally as\nundeservedly entertain'd; yet what has been alledg'd concerning the\nusefulness of the _Tria Prima_, seems to me liable to no contemptible\nDifficulties.\n\nAnd first, as for the very way of Probation, which the more Learned\nand more Sober Champions of the Chymical cause employ to evince the\nChymical Principles in Mixt Bodies, it seems to me to be farr enough\nfrom being convincing. This grand and leading Argument, your\n_Sennertus_ Himself, who layes Great weight upon it, and tells us,\nthat the most Learned Philosophers employ this way of Reasoning to\nprove the most important things, proposes thus: _Ubicunque_ (sayes he)\n_pluribus eaedem affectiones & qualitates insunt, per commune quoddam\nPrincipium insint necesse est, sicut omnia sunt Gravia propter terram,\ncalida propter Ignem. At Colores, Odores, Sapores, esse_ [Greek:\nphlogiston] _& similia alia, mineralibus, Metallis, Gemmis, Lapidibus,\nPlantis, Animalibus insunt. Ergo per commune aliquod principium, &\nsubiectum, insunt. At tale principium non sunt Elementa. Nullam enim\nhabent ad tales qualitates producendas potentiam. Ergo alia principia,\nunde fluant, inquirenda sunt._\n\nIn the Recital of this Argument, (sayes _Carneades_) I therefore\nthought fit to retain the Language wherein the Author proposes it,\nthat I might also retain the propriety of some Latine Termes, to which\nI do not readily remember any that fully answer in English. But as for\nthe Argumentation it self, 'tis built upon a precarious supposition,\nthat seems to me neither Demonstrable nor true; for, how does it\nappear, that where the same Quality is to be met with in many Bodies,\nit must belong to them upon the Account of some one Body whereof they\nall partake? (For that the Major of our Authors Argument is to be\nUnderstood of the Material Ingredients of bodies, appears by the\nInstances of Earth and Fire he annexes to explain it.) For to begin\nwith that very Example which he is pleas'd to alledge for himself; how\ncan he prove, that the Gravity of all Bodies proceeds from what they\nparticipate of the Element of Earth? Since we see, that not only\ncommon Water, but the more pure Distill'd Rain Water is heavy; and\nQuicksilver is much heavier than Earth it self; though none of my\nAdversaries has yet prov'd, that it contains any of that Element. And\nI the Rather make use of this Example of Quicksilver, because I see\nnot how the Assertors of the Elements will give any better Account of\nit then the Chymists. For if it be demanded how it comes to be Fluid,\nthey will answer, that it participates much of the Nature of Water.\nAnd indeed, according to them, Water may be the Predominant Element\nin it, since we see, that several Bodies which by Distillation afford\nLiquors that weigh more then their _Caput Mortuum_ do not yet consist\nof Liquor enough to be Fluid. Yet if it be demanded how Quicksilver\ncomes to be so heavy, then 'tis reply'd, that 'tis by reason of the\nEarth that abounds in it; but since, according to them, it must\nconsist also of air, and partly of Fire, which they affirm to be light\nElements, how comes it that it should be so much heavier then Earth of\nthe same bulk, though to fill up the porosities and other Cavities it\nbe made up into a mass or paste with Water, which it self they allow\nto be a heavy Element. But to returne to our _Spagyrists_, we see that\nChymical Oyles and fixt Salts, though never so exquisitely purify'd\nand freed from terrestrial parts, do yet remain ponderous enough. And\nExperience has inform'd me, that a pound, for instance, of some of the\nheaviest Woods, as _Guajacum_ that will sink in Water, being burnt to\nAshes will yield a much less weight of them (whereof I found but a\nsmall part to be Alcalyzate) then much lighter Vegetables: As also\nthat the black Charcoal of it will not sink as did the wood, but swim;\nwhich argues that the Differing Gravity of Bodies proceeds chiefly\nfrom their particular Texture, as is manifest in Gold, the closest and\nCompactest of Bodies, which is many times heavier then we can possibly\nmake any parcell of Earth of the same Bulk. I will not examine, what\nmay be argu'd touching the Gravity or Quality Analagous thereunto, of\neven Celestial bodies, from the motion of the spots about the Sun, d\n[Errata: and] from the appearing equality of the suppos'd Seas in the\nMoon; nor consider how little those _Phaemonea_ [Transcriber's Note:\nPhaenomena] would agree with what _Sennertus_ presumes concerning\nGravity. But further to invalidate his supposition, I shall demand,\nupon what Chymical Principle Fluidity depends? And yet Fluidity is,\ntwo or three perhaps excepted, the most diffused quality of the\nuniverse, and far more General then almost any other of those that are\nto be met with in any of the Chymicall Principles, or _Aristotelian_\nElements; since not only the Air, but that vast expansion we call\nHeaven, in comparison of which our Terrestrial Globe (supposing it\nwere all Solid) is but a point; and perhaps to [Errata: too] the Sun\nand the fixt Stars are fluid bodies. I demand also, from which of the\nChymical Principles Motion flowes; which yet is an affection of matter\nmuch more General then any that can be deduc'd from any of the three\nChymical Principles. I might ask the like Question concerning Light,\nwhich is not only to be found in the Kindl'd Sulphur of mixt Bodis\n[Transcriber's Note: Bodies], but (not to mention those sorts of\nrotten Woods, and rotten Fish that shine in the Dark) in the tails of\nliving Glow-wormes, and in the Vast bodies of the Sun and Stars. I\nwould gladly also know, in which of the three Principles the Quality,\nwe call Sound, resides as in its proper Subject; since either Oyl\nfalling upon Oyle, or Spirit upon Spirit, or Salt upon Salt, in a\ngreat quantity, and from a considerable height, will make a noise, or\nif you please, create a sound, and (that the objection may reach the\n_Aristotelians_) so will also water upon water, and Earth upon Earth.\nAnd I could name other qualities to be met within divers bodies, of\nwhich I suppose my Adversaries will not in haste assign any Subject,\nupon whose Account it must needs be, that the quality belongs to all\nthe other several bodies.\n\nAnd, before I proceed any further, I must here invite you to compare\nthe supposition we are examining, with some other of the Chymical\nTenents. For, first they do in effect teach that more then one quality\nmay belong to, and be deduc'd from, one Principle. For, they ascribe\nto Salt Tasts, and the power of Coagulation; to sulphur, as well\nOdours as inflamableness; And some of them ascribe to Mercury,\nColours; as all of them do effumability, as they speak. And on the\nother side, it is evident that Volatility belongs in common to all the\nthree Principles, and to Water too. For 'tis manifest, that Chymical\nOyles are Volatile; That also divers Salts Emerging, upon the Analysis\nof many Concretes, are very Volatile, is plain from the figitiveness\n[Errata: fugitivenesse] of Salt, of Harts-horne, flesh, &c. ascending\nin the Distillation of those bodies. How easily water may be made to\nascend in Vapours, there is scarce any body that has not observ'd. And\nas for what they call the Mercuriall Principle of bodies, that is so\napt to be rais'd in the form of Steam, that _Paracelsus_ and others\ndefine it by that aptness to fly up; so that (to draw that inference\nby the way) it seems not that Chymists have been accurate in their\nDoctrine of qualities, and their respective Principles, since they\nboth derive several qualities from the same Principle, and must\nascribe the same quality to almost all their Principles and other\nbodies besides. And thus much for the first thing taken for granted,\nwithout sufficient proof, by your _Sennertus_: And to add that upon\nthe Bye (continues _Carneades_) we may hence learn what to judge of\nthe way of Argumentation, which that fierce Champion of the\n_Aristotelians_ against the Chymists, _Anthonius Guntherus\nBillichius_[24] employes, where he pretends to prove against\n_Beguinus_, that not only the four Elements do immediately concur to\nConstitute every mixt body, and are both present in it, and obtainable\nfrom it upon its Dissolution; but that in the _Tria Prima_ themselves,\nwhereinto Chymists are wont to resolve mixt Bodies, each of them\nclearly discovers it self to consist of four Elements. The\nRatiocination it self (pursues _Carneades_) being somewhat unusual, I\ndid the other Day Transcribe it, and (sayes He, pulling a Paper out of\nhis Pocket) it is this. _Ordiamur, cum Beguino, a ligno viridi, quod\nsi concremetur, videbis in sudore Aquam, in fumo Aerem, in flamma &\nPrunis Ignem, Terram in cineribus: Quod si Beguino placuerit ex eo\ncolligere humidum aquosum, cohibere humidum oleaginosum, extrahere ex\ncineribus salem; Ego ipsi in unoquoque horum seorsim quatuor Elementa\nad oculum demonstrabo, eodem artificio quo in ligno viridi ea\ndemonstravi. Humorem aquosum admovebo Igni. Ipse Aquam Ebullire\nvidebit, in Vapore Aerem conspiciet, Ignem sentiet in aestu, plus minus\nTerrae in sedimento apparebit. Humor porro Oleaginosus aquam humiditate\n& fluiditate per se, accensus vero Ignem flamma prodit, fumo Aerem,\nfuligine, nidore & amurca terram. Salem denique ipse Beguinus siccum\nvocat & Terrestrem, qui tamen nec fusus Aquam, nec caustica vi ignem\ncelare potest; ignis vero Violentia in halitus versus nec ab Aere se\nalienum esse demonstrat; Idem de Lacte, de Ovis, de semine Lini, de\nGaryophyllis, de Nitro, de sale Marino, denique de Antimonio, quod\nfuit de Ligno viridi Judicium; eadem de illorum partibus, quas_\nBeguinus _adducit, sententia, quae de viridis ligni humore aquoso, quae\nde liquore ejusdem oleoso, quae de sale fuit._\n\n[Footnote 24: _In Thessalo redivivo. Cap. 10. pag. 73. & 74._]\n\nThis bold Discourse (resumes _Carneades_, putting up again his Paper,)\nI think it were not very difficult to confute, if his Arguments were\nas considerable as our time will probably prove short for the\nremaining and more necessary Part of my Discourse; wherefore referring\nYou for an Answer to what was said concerning the Dissipated Parts of\na burnt piece of green Wood, to what I told _Themistius_ on the like\noccasion, I might easily shew You, how sleightly and superficially our\n_Guntherus_ talks of the dividing the flame of Green Wood into his\nfour Elements; _When_ he makes that vapour to be air, which being\ncaught in Glasses and condens'd, presently discovers it self to have\nbeen but an Aggregate of innumerable very minute drops of Liquor; and\n_When_ he would prove the Phlegmes being compos'd of Fire by that Heat\nwhich is adventitious to the Liquor, and ceases upon the absence of\nwhat produc'd it (whether that be an Agitation proceeding from the\nmotion of the External Fire, or the presence of a Multitude of igneous\nAtomes pervading the pores of the Vessel, and nimbly permeating the\nwhole Body of the Water) I might, I say, urge these and divers other\nWeaknesses of His Discourse. But I will rather take Notice of what is\nmore pertinent to the Occasion of this Digression, namely, that Taking\nit for Granted, that Fluidity (with which he unwarily seems to\nconfound Humidity) must proceed from the Element of Water, he makes a\nChymical Oyle to Consist of that Elementary Liquor; and yet in the\nvery next Words proves, that it consists also of Fire, by its\nInflamability; not remembring that exquisitely pure Spirit of Wine is\nboth more Fluid then Water it self, and yet will Flame all away\nwithout leaving the Least Aqueous Moisture behind it; and without such\nan _Amurca_ and Soot as he would Deduce the presence of Earth from. So\nthat the same Liquor may according to his Doctrine be concluded by its\ngreat Fluidity to be almost all Water; and by its burning all away to\nbe all disguised Fire. And by the like way of Probation our Author\nwould shew that the fixt salt of Wood is compounded of the four\nElements. For (sayes he) being turn'd by the violence of the Fire into\nsteames, it shews it self to be of kin to Air; whereas I doubt whether\nhe ever saw a true fixt Salt (which to become so, must have already\nendur'd the violence of an Incinerating Fire) brought by the Fire\nalone to ascend in the Forme of Exhalations; but I do not doubt that\nif he did, and had caught those Exhalations in convenient Vessels, he\nwould have found them as well as the Steames of common Salt, &c. of a\nSaline and not an Aereal Nature. And whereas our Authour takes it also\nfor Granted, that the Fusibility of Salt must be Deduc'd from Water,\nit is indeed so much the Effect of heat variously agitating the Minute\nParts of a Body, without regard to Water, that Gold (which by its\nbeing the heavyest and fixtest of Bodies, should be the most Earthy)\nwill be brought to Fusion by a strong Fire; which sure is more likely\nto drive away then increase its Aqueous Ingredient, if it have any;\nand on the other side, for want of a sufficient agitation of its\nminute parts, Ice is not Fluid, but Solid; though he presumes also\nthat the Mordicant Quality of Bodies must proceed from a fiery\ningredient; whereas, not to urge that the Light and inflamable parts,\nwhich are the most likely to belong to the Element of Fire, must\nprobably be driven away by that time the violence of the Fire has\nreduc'd the Body to ashes; Not to urge this, I I [Transcriber's Note:\nextra \"I\" in original] say, nor that Oyle of Vitriol which quenches\nFire, burnes the Tongue and flesh of those that Unwarily tast or apply\nit, as a caustick doth, it is precarious to prove the Presence of Fire\nin fixt salts from their Caustick power, unlesse it were first shewn,\nthat all the Qualities ascribed to salts must be deduc'd from those of\nthe Elements; which, had I Time, I could easily manifest to be no easy\ntalk. And not to mention that our Authour makes a Body as Homogeneous\nas any he can produce for Elementary, belong both to Water and Fire,\nThough it be neither Fluid nor Insipid, like Water; nor light and\nVolatile, like Fire; he seems to omit in this Anatomy the Element of\nEarth, save That he intimates, That the salt may pass for that; But\nsince a few lines before, he takes Ashes for Earth, I see not how he\nwill avoid an Inconsistency either betwixt the Parts of his Discourse\nor betwixt some of them and his Doctrine. For since There is a\nmanifest Difference betwixt the Saline and the insipid Parts of Ashes,\nI see not how substances That Disagree in such Notable Qualities can\nbe both said to be Portions of an Element, whose Nature requires that\nit be Homogeneous, especially in this case where an _Analysis_ by the\nFire is suppos'd to have separated it from the admixture of other\nElements, which are confess'd by most _Aristotelians_ to be Generally\nfound in common Earth, and to render it impure. And sure if when we\nhave consider'd for how little a Disparities sake the Peripateticks\nmake these Symbolizing Bodies Aire and Fire to be two Distinct\nElements, we shall also consider that the Saline part of Ashes is very\nstrongly Tasted, and easily soluble in Water; whereas the other part\nof the same Ashes is insipid and indissoluble in the same Liquor: Not\nto add, that the one substance is Opacous, and the other somewhat\nDiaphanous, nor that they differ in Divers other Particulars; If we\nconsider those things, I say, we shall hardly think that both these\nSubstances are Elementary Earth; And as to what is sometimes objected,\nthat their Saline Tast is only an Effect of Incineration and Adustion,\nit has been elsewhere fully reply'd to, when propos'd by _Themistius_,\nand where it has been prov'd against him, that however insipid Earth\nmay perhaps by Additaments be turn'd into Salt, yet 'tis not like it\nshould be so by the Fire alone: For we see that when we refine Gold\nand Silver, the violentest Fires We can Employ on them give them not\nthe least Rellish of Saltness. And I think _Philoponus_ has rightly\nobserv'd, that the Ashes of some Concretes contain very little salt if\nany at all; For Refiners suppose that bone-ashes are free from it, and\ntherefore make use of them for Tests and Cuppels, which ought to be\nDestitute of Salt, lest the Violence of the Fire should bring them to\nVitrification; And having purposely and heedfully tasted a Cuppel made\nof only bone-ashes and fair water, which I had caus'd to be expos'd\nto a Very Violent Fire, acuated by the Blast of a large pair of Double\nBellows, I could not perceive that the force of the Fire had imparted\nto it the least Saltness, or so much as made it less Insipid.\n\nBut (sayes _Carneades_) since neither You nor I love Repetitions, I\nshall not now make any of what else was urg'd against _Themistius_ but\nrather invite You to take notice with me that when our Authour, though\na Learned Man, and one that pretends skill enough in Chymistry to\nreforme the whole Art, comes to make good his confident Undertaking,\nto give us an occular Demonstration of the immediate Presence of the\nfour Elements in the resolution of Green Wood, He is fain to say\nthings that agree very little with one another. For about the\nbeginning of that passage of His lately recited to you, he makes the\nsweat as he calls it of the green Wood to be Water, the smoke Aire,\nthe shining Matter Fire, and the Ashes Earth; whereas a few lines\nafter, he will in each of these, nay (as I just now noted) in one\nDistinct Part of the Ashes, shew the four Elements. So that either the\nformer _Analysis_ must be incompetent to prove that Number of\nElements, since by it the burnt Concrete is not reduc'd into\nElementary Bodies, but into such as are yet each of them compounded of\nthe four Elements; or else these Qualities from which he endeavours to\ndeduce the presence of all the Elements, in the fixt salt, and each of\nthe other separated substances, will be but a precarious way of\nprobation: especially if you consider, that the extracted _Alcali_ of\nWood, being for ought appears at least as similar a Body as any that\nthe Peripateticks can shew us, if its differing Qualities must argue\nthe presence of Distinct Elements, it will scarce be possible for them\nby any way they know of employing the fire upon a Body, to shew that\nany Body is a Portion of a true Element: And this recals to my mind,\nthat I am now but in an occasional excussion, which aiming only to\nshew that the Peripateticks as well as the Chymists take in our\npresent Controversie something for granted which they ought to prove,\nI shall returne to my exceptions, where I ended the first of them, and\nfurther tell you, that neither is that the only precarious thing that\nI take notice of in _Sennertus_ his Argumentation; for when he\ninferrs, that because the Qualities he Mentions as Colours, Smels, and\nthe like, belong not to the Elements; they therefore must to the\nChymical Principles, he takes that for granted, which will not in\nhaste be prov'd; as I might here manifest, but that I may by and by\nhave a fitter opportunity to take notice of it. And thus much at\npresent may suffice to have Discours'd against the Supposition, that\nalmost every Quality must have some [Greek: dektikon proton], as they\nspeak, some Native receptacle, wherein as in its proper Subject of\ninhesion it peculiarly resides, and on whose account that quality\nbelongs to the other Bodies, Wherein it is to be met with. Now this\nFundamental supposition being once Destroy'd, whatsoever is built upon\nit, must fall to ruine of it self.\n\nBut I consider further, that Chymists are (for ought I have found) far\nfrom being able to explicate by any of the _Tria Prima_, those\nqualities which they pretend to belong primarily unto it, and in mixt\nBodies to Deduce from it. Tis true indeed, that such qualities are\nnot explicable by the four Elements; but it will not therefore follow,\nthat they are so by the three hermetical Principles; and this is it\nthat seems to have deceiv'd the Chymists, and is indeed a very common\nmistake amongst most Disputants, who argue as if there could be but\ntwo Opinions concerning the Difficulty about which they contend; and\nconsequently they inferr, that if their Adversaries Opinion be\nErroneous, Their's must needs be the Truth; whereas many questions,\nand especially in matters Physiological, may admit of so many\nDiffering _Hypotheses_, that 'twill be very inconsiderate and\nfallacious to conclude (except where the Opinions are precisely\nContradictory) the Truth of one from the falsity of another. And in\nour particular case 'tis no way necessary, that the Properties of mixt\nBodies must be explicable either by the Hermetical, or the\n_Aristotelian Hypothesis_, there being divers other and more plausible\nwayes of explaining them, and especially that, which deduces qualities\nfrom the motion, figure, and contrivance of the small parts of Bodies;\nas I think might be shewn, if the attempt were as seasonable, as I\nfear it would be Tedious.\n\nI will allow then, that the Chymists do not causelessly accuse the\nDoctrine of the four elements of incompetency to explain the\nProperties of Compound bodies. And for this Rejection of a Vulgar\nError, they ought not to be deny'd what praise men may deserve for\nexploding a Doctrine whose Imperfections are so conspicuous, that men\nneeded but not to shut their Eyes, to discover them. But I am\nmistaken, if our Hermetical Philosophers Themselves need not, as well\nas the Peripateticks, have Recourse to more Fruitfull and\nComprehensive Principles then the _tria Prima_, to make out the\nProperties of the Bodies they converse with. Not to accumulate\nExamples to this purpose, (because I hope for a fitter opportunity to\nprosecute this Subject) let us at present only point at Colour, that\nyou may guess by what they say of so obvious and familiar a Quality,\nhow little Instruction we are to expect from the _Tria Prima_ in those\nmore abstruse ones, which they with the _Aristotelians_ stile Occult.\nFor about Colours, neither do they at all agree among themselves, nor\nhave I met with any one, of which of the three Perswasions soever,\nthat does intelligibly explicate Them. The Vulgar Chymists are wont to\nascribe Colours to Mercury; _Paracelsus_ in divers places attributes\nthem to Salt; and _Sennertus_,[25] having recited their differing\nOpinions, Dissents from both, and referrs Colours rather unto Sulphur.\nBut how Colours do, nay, how they may, arise from either of these\nPrinciples, I think you will scarce say that any has yet intelligibly\nexplicated. And if Mr. _Boyle_ will allow me to shew you the\nExperiments which he has collected about Colours, you will, I doubt\nnot, confess that bodies exhibite colours, not upon the Account of the\nPredominancy of this or that Principle in them, but upon that of their\nTexture, and especially the Disposition of their superficial parts,\nwhereby the Light rebounding thence to the Eye is so modifi'd, as by\ndiffering Impressions variously to affect the Organs of Sight. I might\nhere take notice of the pleasing variety of Colours exhibited by the\nTriangular glass, (as 'tis wont to be call'd) and demand, what\naddition or decrement of either Salt, Sulphur, or Mercury, befalls the\nBody of the Glass by being Prismatically figur'd; and yet 'tis known,\nthat without that shape it would not affor'd those colours as it does.\nBut because it may be objected, that these are not real, but apparent\nColours; that I may not lose time in examing the Distinction, I will\nalledge against the Chymists, a couple of examples of Real and\nPermanent Colours Drawn from Metalline Bodies, and represent, that\nwithout the addition of any extraneous body, Quicksilver may by the\nFire alone, and that in glass Vessels, be depriv'd of its silver-like\nColour, and be turn'd into a Red Body; and from this Red Body without\nAddition likewise may be obtain'd a Mercury Bright and Specular as it\nwas before; So that I have here a lasting Colour Generated and\nDestroy'd (as I have seen) at pleasure, without adding or taking away\neither Mercury, Salt, or Sulphur; and if you take a clean and slender\npiece of harden'd steel, and apply to it the flame of a candle at some\nlittle distance short of the point, You shall not have held the Steel\nlong in the flame, but You shall perceive divers Colours, as Yellow,\nRed and Blew, to appear upon the Surface of the metal, and as it were\nrun along in chase of one another towards the point; So that the same\nbody, and that in one and the same part, may not only have a new\ncolour produc'd in it, but exhibite successively divers Colours within\na minute of an hour, or thereabouts, and any of these Colours may by\nRemoving the Steel from the Fire, become Permanent, and last many\nyears. And this Production and Variety of Colours cannot reasonably be\nsuppos'd to proceed from the Accession of any of the three Principles,\nto which of them soever Chymists will be pleas'd to ascribe Colours;\nespecially considering, that if you but suddenly Refrigerate that\nIron, First made Red hot, it will be harden'd and Colourless again;\nand not only by the Flame of a Candle, but by any other equivalent\nheat Conveniently appli'd, the like Colours will again be made to\nappear and succeed one another, as at the First. But I must not any\nfurther prosecute an Occasional Discourse, though that were not so\nDifficult for me to do, as I fear it would be for the Chymists to give\na better Account of the other Qualities, by their Principles, then\nthey have done of Colours. And your _Sennertus_ Himself (though an\nAuthor I much value) would I fear have been exceedingly puzl'd to\nresolve, by the _Tria Prima_, halfe that Catalogue of Problems, which\nhe challenges the Vulgar Peripateticks to explicate by their four\nElements.[26] And supposing it were true, that Salt or Sulphur were\nthe Principle to which this or that Quality may be peculiarly\nreferr'd, yet though he that teaches us this teaches us something\nconcerning That quality, yet he Teaches us but something. For indeed\nhe does not Teach us That which can in any Tollerable measure satisfie\nan inquisitive Searcher after Truth. For what is it to me to know,\nthat such a quality resides in such a Principle or Element, whilst I\nremain altogether ignorant of the Cause of that quality, and the\nmanner of its production and Operation? How little do I know more then\nany Ordinary Man of Gravity, if I know but that the Heaviness of mixt\nbodies proceeds from that of the Earth they are compos'd of, if I know\nnot the reason why the Earth is Heavy? And how little does the Chymist\nteach the Philosopher of the Nature of Purgatition, if he only tells\nhim that the Purgative Vertue of Medicines resides in their Salt? For,\nbesides that this must not be conceded without Limitation, since the\npurging parts of many Vegetables Extracted by the Water wherein they\nare infus'd, are at most but such compounded Salts, (I mean mingl'd\nwith Oyle, and Spirit, and Earth, as Tartar and divers other Subjects\nof the Vegetable Kingdom afford;) And since too that Quicksilver\nprecipitated either with Gold, or without Addition, into a powder, is\nwont to be strongly enough Cathartical, though the Chymists have not\nyet prov'd, that either Gold or Mercury have any Salt at all, much\nless any that is Purgative; Besides this, I say, how little is it to\nme, to know That 'tis the Salt of the Rhubarb (for Instance) that\npurges, if I find That it does not purge as Salt; since scarce any\nElementary Salt is in small quantity cathartical. And if I know not\nhow Purgation in general is effected in a Humane Body? In a word, as\n'tis one thing to know a mans Lodging, and another, to be acquainted\nwith him; so it may be one thing to know the subject wherein a Quality\nprincipally resides, and another thing to have a right notion and\nknowledg of the quality its self. Now that which I take to be the\nreason of this Chymical Deficiency, is the same upon whose account I\nthink the _Aristotelian_ and divers other Theories incompetent to\nexplicate the Origen [Errata: origine] of Qualities. For I am apt to\nthink, that men will never be able to explain the _Phaenomena_ of\nNature, while they endeavour to deduce them only from the Presence and\nProportion of such or such material Ingredients, and consider such\ningredients or Elements as Bodies in a state of rest; whereas indeed\nthe greatest part of the affections of matter, and consequently of the\n_Phaenomena_ of nature, seems to depend upon the motion and the\ncontinuance [Errata: contrivance] of the small parts of Bodies. For\n'tis by motion that one part of matter acts upon another; and 'tis,\nfor the most part, the texture of the Body upon which the moving parts\nstrike, that modifies to motion or Impression, and concurrs with it\nto the production of those Effects which make up the chief part of the\nNaturalists Theme.\n\n[Footnote 25: _De Cons. & dissen. cap. 11. pag. 186._]\n\n[Footnote 26: _Sennert. de Con. seus. [Transcriber's Note: Consens.] &\nDissens. pag. 165. 166._]\n\nBut (sayes _Eleutherius_) me thinks for all this, you have left some\npart of what I alledg'd in behalf of the three principles, unanswer'd.\nFor all that you have said will not keep this from being a useful\nDiscovery, that since in the Salt of one Concrete, in the Sulphur of\nanother and the Mercury of a third, the Medicinal vertue of it\nresides, that Principle ought to be separated from the rest, and there\nthe desired faculty must be sought for.\n\nI never denyed (Replyes _Carneades_) that the Notion of the _Tria\nPrima_ may be of some use, but (continues he laughing) by what you now\nalledg for it, it will but appear That it is useful to Apothecaries,\nrather than to Philosophers, The being able to make things Operative\nbeing sufficient to those, whereas the Knowledge of Causes is the\nThing looked after by These. And let me Tell You, _Eleutherius_, even\nthis it self will need to be entertained with some caution.\n\nFor first, it will not presently follow, That if the Purgative or\nother vertue of a simple may be easily extracted by Water or Spirit of\nWine, it Resides in the Salt or Sulphur of the Concrete; Since unlesse\nthe Body have before been resolved by the Fire, or some Other Powerful\nAgent, it will, for the most part, afford in the Liquors I have named,\nrather the finer compounded parts of it self, Than the Elementary\nones. As I noted before, That Water will dissolve not only pure Salts,\nbut Crystals of Tartar, Gumme Arabick, Myrr'h, and Other Compound\nBodies. As also Spirit of Wine will Dissolve not only the pure Sulphur\nof Concretes, but likewise the whole Substance of divers Resinous\nBodies, as Benzoin, the Gummous parts of Jallap, Gumme Lacca, and\nOther bodies that are counted perfectly Mixt. And we see that the\nExtracts made either with Water or Spirit of Wine are not of a simple\nand Elementary Nature, but Masses consisting of the looser Corpuscles,\nand finer parts of the Concretes whence they are Drawn; since by\nDistillation they may be Divided into more Elementary substances.\n\nNext, we may consider That even when there intervenes a Chymical\nresolution by he [Transcriber's Note: the] Fire, 'tis seldom in the\nSaline or Sulphureous principle, as such, that the desir'd Faculty of\nthe Concrete Resides; But, as that Titular Salt or Sulphur is yet a\nmixt body, though the Saline or Sulphureous Nature be predominant in\nit. For, if in Chymical Resolutions the separated Substances were pure\nand simple Bodies, and of a perfect Elementary Nature; no one would be\nindued with more Specifick Vertues, than another; and their qualities\nwould Differ as Little as do those of Water. And let me add this upon\nthe bye, That even Eminent Chymists have suffer'd themselves to be\nreprehended by me for their over great Diligence in purifying some of\nthe things they obtain by Fire from mixt Bodies. For though such\ncompleatly purifyed Ingredients of Bodies might perhaps be more\nsatisfactory to our Understanding; yet others are often more useful to\nour Lives, the efficacy of such Chymical Productions depending most\nupon what they retain of the Bodies whence they are separated, or gain\nby the new associations of the Dissipated among themselves; whereas\nif they were meerly Elementary, their uses would be comparatively very\nsmall; and the vertues of Sulphurs, Salts, or Other such Substances of\none denomination, would be the very same.\n\nAnd by the Way (_Eleutherius_) I am inclin'd upon this ground to\nThink, That the artificial resolution of compound bodies by Fire does\nnot so much enrich mankind, as it divides them into their supposed\nPrinciples; as upon the score of its making new compounds by now\n[Transcriber's Note: new] combinations of the dissipated parts of the\nresolv'd Body. For by this means the Number of mixt Bodies is\nconsiderably increased. And many of those new productions are indow'd\nwith useful qualities, divers of which they owe not to the body from\nwhich they were obtein'd, but to Their newly Acquired Texture.\n\nBut thirdly, that which is principally to be Noted is this, that as\nthere are divers Concretes whose Faculties reside in some one or other\nof those differing Substances that Chymists call their Sulphurs,\nSalts, and Mercuries, and consequently may be best obtain'd, by\nanalyzing the Concrete whereby the desired Principles may be had\nsever'd or freed from the rest; So there are other wherein the noblest\nproperties lodge not in the Salt, or Sulphur, or Mercury, but depend\nimmediately upon the form (or if you will) result from the determinate\nstructure of the Whole Concrete; and consequently they that go about\nto extract the Vertues of such bodies, by exposing them to the\nViolence of the Fire, do exceedingly mistake, and take the way to\nDestroy what they would obtain.\n\nI remmember that _Helmont_ himself somewhere confesses, That as the\nFire betters some things and improves their Vertues, so it spoyles\nothers and makes them degenerate. And elsewhere he judiciously\naffirmes, that there may be sometimes greater vertue in a simple, such\nas Nature has made it, than in any thing that can by the fire be\nseparated from it. And lest you should doubt whether he means by the\nvertues of things those that are Medical; he has in one place[27] this\ningenuous confession; _Credo_ (sayes he) _simplicia in sua\nsimplicitate esse sufficientia pro sanatione omnium morborum._ Nag.\n[Errata: Nay,] Barthias, even in a Comment upon _Beguinus_,[28]\nscruples not to make this acknowledgment; _Valde absurdum est_ (sayes\nhe) _ex omnibus rebus extracta facere, salia, quintas essentias;\npraesertim ex substantiis per se plane vel subtilibus vel homogeneis,\nquales sunt uniones, Corallia, Moscus, Ambra, &c._ Consonantly\nwhereunto he also tells Us (and Vouches the famous _Platerus_, for\nhaving candidly given the same Advertisement to his Auditors,) that\nsome things have greater vertues, and better suited to our humane\nnature, when unprepar'd, than when they have past the Chymists Fire;\nas we see, sayes my Author, in Pepper; of which some grains swallowed\nperform more towards the relief of a Distempered stomack, than a great\nquantity of the Oyle of the same spice.\n\n[Footnote 27: Helmont Pharm. & Dispens. Nov. p. 458.]\n\n[Footnote 28: Vide Jer. ad Begu. Lib. 1. Cap. 17.]\n\nIt has been (pursues _Carneades_) by our Friend here present observ'd\nconcerning Salt-petre, that none of the substances into which the Fire\nis wont to divide it, retaines either the Tast, the cooling vertue, or\nsome other of the properties of the Concrete; and that each of those\nSubstances acquires new qualities, not to be found in the Salt-Petre\nit self. The shining property of the tayls of gloworms does survive\nbut so short a time the little animal made conspicuous by it, that\ninquisitive men have not scrupled publickly to deride _Baptista Porta_\nand others; who deluded perhaps with some Chymical surmises have\nventur'd to prescribe the distillation of a Water from the tayles of\nGlowormes, as a sure way to obtain a liquor shining in the Dark. To\nwhich I shall now add no other example than that afforded us by Amber;\nwhich, whilst it remains an intire body, is endow'd with an Electrical\nfaculty of drawing to it self fethers, strawes, and such like Bodies;\nwhich I never could observe either in its Salt, its Spirit, its Oyle,\nor in the Body I remember I once made by the reunion of its divided\nElements; none of these having such a Texture as the intire Concrete.\nAnd however Chymists boldly deduce such and such properties from this\nor that proportion of their component Principles; yet in Concretes\nthat abound with this or that Ingredient, 'tis not alwayes so much by\nvertue of its presence, nor its plenty, that the Concrete is qualify'd\nto perform such and such Effects; as upon the account of the\nparticular texture of that and the other Ingredients, associated after\na determinate Manner into one Concrete (though possibly such a\nproportion of that ingredient may be more convenient than an other for\nthe constituting of such a body.) Thus in a clock the hand is mov'd\nupon the dyal, the bell is struck, and the other actions belonging to\nthe engine are perform'd, not because the Wheeles are of brass or\niron, or part of one metal and part of another, or because the weights\nare of Lead, but by Vertue of the size, shape, bigness, and\nco-aptation of the several parts; which would performe the same things\nthough the wheels were of Silver, or Lead, or Wood, and the Weights of\nStone or Clay; provided the Fabrick or Contrivance of the engine were\nthe same: though it be not to be deny'd, that Brasse and Steel are\nmore convenient materials to make clock-wheels of than Lead, or Wood.\nAnd to let you see, _Eleutherius_, that 'tis sometimes at least, upon\nthe Texture of the small parts of a body, and not alwaies upon the\npresence, or recesse, or increase, or Decrement of any one of its\nPrinciple, that it may lose some such Qualities, and acquire some\nsuch others as are thought very strongly inherent to the bodies they\nReside in. [Errata: in;] I will add to what may from my past discourse\nbe refer'd to this purpose, this Notable Example, from my Own\nexperience; That Lead may without any additament, and only by various\napplications of the Fire, lose its colour, and acquire sometimes a\ngray, sometimes a yellowish, sometimes a red, sometimes an\n_amethihstine_ [Transcriber's Note: amethistine] colour; and after\nhaving past through these, and perhaps divers others, again recover\nits leaden colour, and be made a bright body. That also this Lead,\nwhich is so flexible a metal, may be made as brittle as Glasse, and\npresently be brought to be again flexible and Malleable as before. And\nbesides, that the same lead, which I find by _Microscopes_ to be one\nof the most opacous bodies in the World, may be reduced to a fine\ntransparent glasse; whence yet it may returne to an opacous Nature\nagain; and all this, as I said, without the addition of any extraneous\nbody, and meerly by the manner and Method of exposing it to the Fire.\n\nBut (sayes _Carneades_) after having already put you to so prolix a\ntrouble, it is time for me to relieve you with a promise of putting\nspeedily a period to it; And to make good that promise, I shall from\nall that I have hitherto discoursed with you, deduce but this one\nproposition by way of Corollary. [_That it may as yet be doubted,\nwhether or no there be any determinate Number of Elements; Or, if you\nplease, whether or no all compound bodies, do consist of the same\nnumber of Elementary ingredients or material Principles._]\n\nThis being but an inference from the foregoing Discourse, it will not\nbe requisite to insist at large on the proofs of it; But only to point\nat the chief of Them, and Referr You for Particulars to what has been\nalready Delivered.\n\nIn the First place then, from what has been so largely discours'd, it\nmay appear, that the Experiments wont to be brought, whether by the\ncommon Peripateticks, or by the vulgar Chymists, to demonstrate that\nall mixt bodies are made up precisely either of the four Elements, or\nthe three Hypostatical Principles, do not evince what they are\nalledg'd to prove. And as for the other common arguments, pretended to\nbe drawn from Reason in favour of _Aristotelian Hypothesis_ (for the\nChymists are wont to rely almost altogether upon Experiments) they are\nCommonly grounded upon such unreasonable or precarious Suppositions,\nthat 'tis altogether as easie and as just for any man to reject them,\nas for those that take them for granted to assert them, being indeed\nall of them as indemonstrable as the conclusion to be inferr'd from\nthem; and some of them so manifestly weak and prooflesse; that he must\nbe a very courteous adversary, that can be willing to grant them; and\nas unskilful a one, that can be compelled to do so.\n\nIn the next place, it may be considered, if what those Patriarchs of\nthe _Spagyrists_, _Paracelsus_ and _Helmont_, do on divers occasions\npositively deliver, be true; namely that the _Alkahest_ does Resolve\nall mixt Bodies into other Principles than the fire, it must be\ndecided which of the two resolutions (that made by the _Alkahest_, or\nthat made by the fire) shall determine the number of the Elements,\nbefore we can be certain how many there are.\n\nAnd in the mean time, we may take notice in the last place, that as\nthe distinct substances whereinto the _Alkahest_ divides bodies, are\naffirm'd to be differing in nature from those whereunto they are wont\nto be reduc'd by fire, and to be obtain'd from some bodies more in\nNumber than from some others; since he tells us, he could totally\nreduce all sorts of Stones into Salt only, whereas of a coal he had\ntwo distinct Liquors.[29] So, although we should acquiesce in that\nresolution which is made by fire, we find not that all mixt bodies are\nthereby divided into the same number of Elements and Principles; some\nConcretes affordding more of them than others do; Nay and sometimes\nthis or that Body affording a greater number of Differing substances\nby one way of management, than the same yields by another. And they\nthat out of Gold, or Mercury, or Muscovy-glasse, will draw me as many\ndistinct substances as I can separate from Vitriol, or from the juice\nof Grapes variously orderd, may teach me that which I shall very\nThankfully learn. Nor does it appear more congruous to that variety\nthat so much conduceth to the perfection of the Universe, that all\nelemented bodies be compounded of the same number of Elements, then it\nwould be for a language, that all its words should consist of the same\nnumber of Letters.\n\n[Footnote 29: _Novi saxum & lapides omnes in merum salem suo saxo aut\nlapidi & aequiponderantem reducere absque omni prorsus sulphure aut\nMercurio._ Helmont. pag. 409.]\n\n\n\n\nTHE\n\nSCEPTICAL CHYMIST\n\nOR,\n\n_A Paradoxical Appendix to the Foregoing Treatise._\n\n_The Sixth Part._\n\n\nHere _Carneades_ Having Dispach't what he Thought Requisite to oppose\nagainst what the Chymists are wont to alledge for Proof of their three\nPrinciples, Paus'd awhile, and look'd about him, to discover whether\nit were Time for him and his Friend to Rejoyne the Rest of the\nCompany. But _Eleutherius_ perceiving nothing yet to forbid Them to\nProsecute their Discourse a little further, said to his Friend, (who\nhad likewise taken Notice of the same thing) I halfe expected,\n_Carneades_, that after you had so freely declar'd Your doubting,\nwhether there be any Determinate Number of Elements, You would have\nproceeded to question whether there be any Elements at all. And I\nconfess it will be a Trouble to me if You defeat me of my Expectation;\nespecially since you see the leasure we have allow'd us may probably\nsuffice to examine that Paradox; because you have so largly Deduc'd\nalready many Things pertinent to it, that you need but intimate how\nyou would have them Apply'd, and what you would inferr from them.\n\n_Carneades_ having in Vain represented that their leasure could be but\nvery short, that he had already prated very long, that he was\nunprepared to maintain so great and so invidious a Paradox, was at\nlength prevail'd with to tell his Friend; Since, _Eleutherius_, you\nwill have me Discourse _Ex Tempore_ of the Paradox you mention, I am\ncontent, (though more perhaps to express my Obedience, then my\nOpinion) to tell you that (supposing the Truth of _Helmonts_ and\n_Paracelsus's_ Alkahestical Experiments, if I may so call them) though\nit may seem extravagant, yet it is not absurd to doubt, whether, for\nought has been prov'd, there be a necessity to admit any Elements, or\nHypostatical Principles, at all.\n\nAnd, as formerly, so now, to avoid the needless trouble of Disputing\nseverally with the _Aristotelians_ and the Chymists, I will address my\nself to oppose them I have last nam'd, Because their Doctrine about\nthe Elements is more applauded by the Moderns, as pretending highly to\nbe grounded upon Experience. And, to deal not only fairly but\nfavourably with them, I will allow them to take in Earth and Water to\ntheir other Principles. Which I consent to, the rather that my\nDiscourse may the better reach the Tenents of the Peripateticks; who\ncannot plead for any so probably as for those two Elements; that of\nfire above the Air being Generally by Judicious Men exploded as an\nImaginary thing; And the Air not concurring to compose Mixt Bodies as\none of their Elements, but only lodging in their pores, or Rather\nreplenishing, by reason of its Weight and Fluidity, all those Cavities\nof bodies here below, whether compounded or not, that are big enough\nto admit it, and are not fill'd up with any grosser substance.\n\nAnd, to prevent mistakes, I must advertize You, that I now mean by\nElements, as those Chymists that speak plainest do by their\nPrinciples, certain Primitive and Simple, or perfectly unmingled\nbodies; which not being made of any other bodies, or of one another,\nare the Ingredients of which all those call'd perfectly mixt Bodies\nare immediately compounded, and into which they are ultimately\nresolved: now whether there be any one such body to be constantly met\nwith in all, and each, of those that are said to be Elemented bodies,\nis the thing I now question.\n\nBy this State of the controversie you will, I suppose, Guess, that I\nneed not be so absur'd [Errata: absurd] as to deny that there are such\nbodies as Earth, and Water, and Quicksilver, and Sulphur: But I look\nupon Earth and Water, as component parts of the Universe, or rather\nof the Terrestrial Globe, not of all mixt bodies. And though I will\nnot peremptorily deny that there may sometimes either a running\nMercury, or a Combustible Substance be obtain'd from a Mineral, or\neven a Metal; yet I need not Concede either of them to be an Element\nin the sence above declar'd; as I shall have occasion to shew you by\nand by.\n\nTo give you then a brief account of the grounds I intend to proceed\nupon, I must tell you, that in matters of Philosophy, this seems to me\na sufficient reason to doubt of a known and important proposition,\nthat the Truth of it is not yet by any competent proof made to appear.\nAnd congruously herunto, if I shew that the grounds upon which men are\nperswaded that there are Elements are unable to satisfie a considering\nman, I suppose my doubts will appear rational.\n\nNow the Considerations that induce men to think that there are\nElements, may be conveniently enough referr'd to two heads. Namely,\nthe one, that it is necessary that Nature make use of Elements to\nconstitute the bodies that are reputed Mixt. And the other, That the\nResolution of such bodies manifests that nature had compounded them of\nElementary ones.\n\nIn reference to the former of these Considerations, there are two or\nthree things that I have to Represent.\n\nAnd I will begin with reminding you of the Experiments I not long\nsince related to you concerning the growth of pompions, mint, and\nother vegetables, out of fair water. For by those experiments its\nseems evident, that Water may be Transmuted into all the other\nElements; from whence it may be inferr'd, both, That 'tis not every\nThing Chymists will call Salt, Sulphur, or Spirit, that needs alwayes\nbe a Primordiate and Ingenerable body. And that Nature may contex a\nPlant (though that be a perfectly mixt Concrete) without having all\nthe Elements previously presented to her to compound it of. And, if\nyou will allow the relation I mention'd out of _Mounsieur De Rochas_\nto be True; then may not only plants, but Animals and Minerals too, be\nproduced out of Water, And however there is little doubt to be made,\nbut that the plants my tryals afforded me as they were like in so\nmany other respects to the rest of the plants of the same\nDenomination; so they would, in case I had reduc'd them to\nputrefaction, have likewise produc'd Wormes or other insects, as well\nas the resembling Vegetables are wont to do; so that Water may, by\nVarious Seminal Principles, be successively Transmuted into both\nplants and Animals. And if we consider that not only Men, but even\nsucking Children are, but too often, Tormented with Solid Stones, but\nthat divers sorts of Beasts themselves, (whatever _Helmont_ against\nExperience think to the contrary) may be Troubled with great and Heavy\nstones in their Kidneys and Bladders, though they Feed but upon Grass\nand other Vegetables, that are perhaps but Disguised Water, it will\nnot seem improbable that even some Concretes of a mineral Nature, may\nLikewise be form'd of Water.\n\nWe may further Take notice, that as a Plant may be nourisht, and\nconsequently may Consist of Common water; so may both plants and\nAnimals, (perhaps even from their Seminal Rudiments) consist of\ncompound Bodies, without having any thing meerly Elementary brought\nthem by nature to be compounded by them: This is evident in divers\nmen, who whilst they were Infants were fed only with Milk, afterwards\nLive altogether upon Flesh, Fish, wine, and other perfectly mixt\nBodies. It may be seen also in sheep, who on some of our English Downs\nor Plains, grow very fat by feeding upon the grasse, without scarce\ndrinking at all. And yet more manifestly in the magots that breed and\ngrow up to their full bignesse within the pulps of Apples, Pears, or\nthe like Fruit. We see also, that Dungs that abound with a mixt Salt\ngive a much more speedy increment to corn and other Vegetables than\nWater alone would do: And it hath been assur'd me, by a man\nexperienc'd in such matters, that sometimes when to bring up roots\nvery early, the Mould they were planted in was made over-rich, the\nvery substance of the Plant has tasted of the Dung. And let us also\nconsider a Graft of one kind of Fruit upon the upper bough of a Tree\nof another kind. As for instance, the Ciens of a Pear upon a\nWhite-thorne; for there the ascending Liquor is already alter'd,\neither by the root, or in its ascent by the bark, or both wayes, and\nbecomes a new mixt body: as may appear by the differing qualities to\nbe met with in the saps of several trees; as particularly, the\nmedicinal vertue of the Birch-Water (which I have sometimes drunk upon\n_Helmonts_ great and not undeserved commendation) Now the graft, being\nfasten'd to the stock must necessarily nourish its self, and produce\nits Fruit, only out of this compound Juice prepared for it by the\nStock, being unable to come at any other aliment. And if we consider,\nhow much of the Vegetable he feeds upon may (as we noted above) remain\nin an Animal; we may easily suppose, That the blood of that Animal who\nFeeds upon this, though it be a Well constituted Liquor, and have all\nthe differing Corpuscles that make it up kept in order by one\npraesiding form, may be a strangely Decompounded Body, many of its\nparts being themselves decompounded. So little is it Necessary that\neven in the mixtures which nature her self makes in Animal and\nVegetable Bodies, she should have pure Elements at hand to make her\ncompositions of.\n\nHaving said thus much touching the constitution of Plants and Animals,\nI might perhaps be able to say as much touching that of Minerals, and\neven Metalls, if it were as easy for us to make experiment in Order to\nthe production of these, as of those. But the growth or increment of\nMinerals being usually a work of excessively long time, and for the\nmost part perform'd in the bowels of the Earth, where we cannot see\nit, I must instead of Experiments make use, on this occasion, of\nObservations.\n\nThat stones were not all made at once, but that are some of them now\nadayes generated, may (though it be deny'd by some) be fully prov'd by\nseveral examples, of which I shall now scarce alledg any other, then\nthat famous place in _France_ known by the name of _Les Caves\nGentieres_ [Errata: Goutieres], where the Water falling from the upper\nParts of the cave to the ground does presently there condense into\nlittle stones, of such figures as the drops, falling either severally\nor upon one another, and coagulating presently into stone, chance to\nexhibit. Of these stones some Ingenuous Friends of ours, that went a\nwhile since to visit that place, did me the favour to present me with\nsome that they brought thence. And I remember that both that sober\nRelator of his Voyages, _Van Linschoten_, and another good Author,\ninform us that in the Diamond Mines (as they call them) in the\n_East-Indies_, when having dig'd the Earth, though to no great depth,\nthey find Diamonds and take them quite away; Yet in a very few years\nthey find in the same place new Diamonds produc'd there since. From\nboth which Relations, especially the first, it seems probable that\nNature does not alwayes stay for divers Elementary Bodies, when she is\nto produce stones. And as for Metals themselves, Authors of good note\nassure us, that even they were not in the beginning produc'd at once\naltogether, but have been observ'd to grow; so that what was not a\nMineral or Metal before became one afterwards. Of this it were easie\nto alledg many testimonies of professed Chymists. But that they may\nhave the greater authority, I shall rather present you with a few\nborrowed from more unsuspected writers. _Sulphuris Mineram_ (as the\ninquisitive _P. Fallopius_ notes) _quae nutrix est caloris subterranei\nfabri seu Archaei fontium & mineralium, Infra terram citissime renasci\ntestantur Historiae Metallicae. Sunt enim loca e quibus si hoc anno\nsulphur effossum fuerit; intermissa fossione per quadriennium redeunt\nfossores & omnia sulphure, ut autea [Errata: antea], rursus inveniunt\nplena._ _Pliny_ Relates, _In Italiae Insula Ilva, gigni ferri\nmetallum._ Strabo _multo expressius; effossum ibi metallum semper\nregenerari. Nam si effossio spatio centum annorum intermittebatur, &\niterum illuc revertebantur, fossores reperisse maximam copiam ferri\nregeneratam._ Which history not only is countenanced by _Fallopius_,\nfrom the Incom which the Iron of that Island yielded the Duke of\n_Florence_ in his time; but is mention'd more expressely to our\npurpose, by the Learned _Cesalpinus_. _Vena_ (sayes he) _ferri\ncopiosissima est in Italia; ob eam nobilitata Ilva Tirrheni maris\nInsula incredibili copia, etiam nostris temporibus eam gignens: Nam\nterra quae eruitur dum vena effoditur tota, procedente tempore in venam\nconvertitur._ Which last clause is therefore very notable, because\nfrom thence we may deduce, that earth, by a Metalline plastick\nprinciple latent in it, may be in processe of time chang'd into a\nmetal. And even _Agricola_ himself, though the Chymists complain of\nhim as their adversary, acknowledges thus much and more; by telling us\nthat at a Town called _Saga_ in _Germany_,[30] they dig up Iron in the\nFields, by sinking ditches two foot deep; And adding, that within the\nspace of ten years the Ditches are digged again for Iron since\nproduced, As the same Metal is wont to be obtain'd in _Elva_. Also\nconcerning Lead, not to mention what even _Galen_ notes, that it will\nincrease both in bulk and Weight if it be long kept in Vaults or\nSellars, where the Air is gross and thick, as he collects from the\nsmelling of those pieces of Lead that were imploy'd to fasten together\nthe parts of old Statues. Not to mention this, I say, _Boccacius\nCertaldus_, as I find him Quoted by a Diligent Writer, has this\nPassage touching the Growth of Lead. _Fessularum mons_ (sayes he) _in\nHetruria, Florentiae civitati imminens, lapides plumbarios habet; qui\nsi excidantur, brevi temporis spatio, novis incrementis instaurantur;\nut_ (annexes my Author) _tradit Boccacius Certaldus, qui id\ncompotissimum [Errata: compertissimum] esse scribit. Nihil hoc novi\nest; sed de eadem Plinius, lib. 34. Hist. Natur. cap. 17. dudum\nprodidit, Inquiens, mirum in his solis plumbi metallis, quod derelicta\nfertilius reviviscunt. In plumbariis secundo Lapide ab Amberga dictis\nad Asylum recrementa congesta in cumulos, exposita solibus pluviisque\npaucis annis, redunt suum metallum cum fenore._ I might Add to these,\ncontinues _Carneades_, many things that I have met with concerning the\nGeneration of Gold and Silver. But, for fear of wanting time, I shall\nmention but two or three Narratives. The First you may find Recorded\nby _Gerhardus_ the Physick Professor, in these Words. _In valle_\n(sayes he) _Joachimaca [Errata: Joachimica] argentum gramini [Errata:\ngraminis] modo & more e Lapidibus minerae velut e radice excrevisse\ndigiti Longitudine, testis est Dr. Schreterus, qui ejusmodi venas\naspectu jucundas & admirabiles Domi sua aliis saepe monstravit &\nDonavit. Item Aqua caerulea Inventa est Annebergae, ubi argentum erat\nadhuc in primo ente, quae coagulata redacta est in calcem fixi & boni\nargenti._\n\n[Footnote 30: _In Lygiis, ad Sagam opidum; in pratis eruitur ferrum,\nfossis ad altitudinem bipedaneam actis. Id decennio renatum denuo\nfoditur non aliter ac Ilvae ferrum._]\n\nThe other two Relations I have not met with in Latine Authours, and\nyet they are both very memorable in themselves, and as pertinent to\nour present purpose.\n\nThe first I meet with in the Commentary of _Johannes Valehius_ upon\nthe _Kleine Baur_, In which that Industrious Chymist Relates, with\nmany circumstances, that at a Mine-Town (If I may so English the\nGerman _Bergstat_) eight miles or Leagues distant from _Strasburg_\ncall'd _Mariakirch_, a Workman came to the Overseer, and desired\nemployment; but he telling him that there was not any of the best sort\nat present for him, added that till he could be preferr'd to some\nsuch, he might in the mean time, to avoid idleness, work in a Grove or\nMine-pit thereabouts, which at that time was little esteem'd. This\nWorkman after some weeks Labour, had by a Crack appearing in the Stone\nupon a Stroak given near the wall, an Invitation Given him to Work his\nWay through, which as soon as he had done, his Eyes were saluted by a\nmighty stone or Lump which stood in the middle of the Cleft (that had\na hollow place behind it) upright, and in shew like an armed-man; but\nconsisted of pure fine Silver having no Vein or Ore by it, or any\nother Additament, but stood there free, having only underfoot\nsomething like a burnt matter; and yet this one Lump held in Weight\nabove a 1000 marks, which, according to the Dutch, Account [Errata:\nDutch account] makes 500 pound weight of fine silver. From which and\nother Circumstances my Author gathers; That by the warmth of the\nplace, the Noble Metalline Spirits, (Sulphureous and Mercurial) were\ncarri'd from the neighbouring Galleries or Vaults, through other\nsmaller Cracks and Clefts, into that Cavity, and there collected as in\na close Chamber or Cellar; whereinto when they were gotten, they did\nin process of time settle into the forementioned precious mass of\nMetal.\n\nThe other Germane Relation is of That great Traveller and Laborious\nChymist _Johannes_ (not _Georgus_) _Agricola_; who in his notes upon\nwhat _Poppius_ has written of Antimony, Relates, that when he was\namong the _Hungarian_ Mines in the deep Groves, he observ'd that there\nwould often arise in them a warm Steam (not of that malignant sort\nwhich the Germains call _Shwadt_, which (sayes he) is a meer poyson,\nand often suffocates the Diggers [Errata: diggers)], which fasten'd it\nself to the Walls; and that coming again to review it after a couple\nof dayes, he discern'd that it was all very fast, and glistering;\nwhereupon having collected it and Distill'd it _per Retortam_, he\nobtain'd from it a fine Spirit, adding, that the Mine-Men inform'd\nhim, that this Steam or Damp of the English Mine [Errata: damp as the\nEnglishmen also call it] (retaining the dutch Term) would at last have\nbecome a Metal, as Gold or Silver.\n\nI referr (sayes _Carneades_) to another Occasion, the Use that may be\nmade of these Narratives towards the explicating the Nature of\nMetalls; and that of Fixtness, Malleableness, and some other Qualities\nconspicuous in them. And in the mean time, this I may at present\ndeduce from these Observations, That 'tis not very probable, that,\nwhensoever a Mineral, or even a Metall, is to be Generated in the\nBowels of the Earth, Nature needs to have at hand both Salt, and\nSulphur, and Mercury to Compound it of; for, not to urge that the two\nlast Relations seem less to favour the Chymists than _Aristotle_, who\nwould have Metals Generated of certain _Halitus_ or steams, the\nforemention'd Observations together, make it seem more Likely that the\nmineral Earths or those Metalline steams (wherewith probably such\nEarths are plentifully imbu'd) do contain in them some seminal\nRudiment, or some thing Equivalent thereunto; by whose plastick power\nthe rest of the matter, though perhaps Terrestrial and heavy, is in\nTract of time fashion'd into this or That metalline Ore; almost as I\nformerly noted, that fair water was by the seminal Principle of Mint,\nPompions, and other Vegetables, contriv'd into Bodies answerable to\nsuch Seeds. And that such Alterations of Terrestrial matter are not\nimpossible, seems evident from that notable Practice of the Boylers of\nSalt-Petre, who unanimously observe, as well here in _England_ as in\nother Countries; That if an Earth pregnant with Nitre be depriv'd, by\nthe affusion of water, of all its true and dissoluble Salt, yet the\nEarth will after some years yield them Salt-Petre again; For which\nreason some of the eminent and skillfullest of them keep it in heaps\nas a perpetual Mine of Salt Petre; whence it may appear, that the\nSeminal Principle of Nitre latent in the Earth does by degrees\nTransforme the neighbouring matter into a Nitrous Body; for though I\ndeny that some Volatile Nitre may by such Earths be attracted (as they\nspeak) out of the Air, yet that the innermost parts of such great\nheaps that lye so remote from the Air should borrow from it all the\nNitre they abound with, is not probable, for other reasons besides the\nremoteness of the Air, though I have not the Leasure to mention them.\n\nAnd I remember, that a person of Great Credit, and well acquainted\nwith the wayes of making Vitriol, affirm'd to me, that he had\nobserv'd, that a kind of mineral which abounds in that Salt, being\nkept within Doors and not expos'd (as is usual) to the free Air and\nRains, did of it self in no very long time turn into Vitriol, not only\nin the outward or superficial, but even in the internal and most\nCentral parts.\n\nAnd I also remember, that I met with a certain kind of Merkasite that\nlay together in great Quantities under ground, which did, even in my\nchamber, in so few hours begin of it self to turne into Vitriol, that\nwe need not distrust the newly recited narrative. But to return to\nwhat I was saying of Nitre; as Nature made this Salt-Petre out of the\nonce almost and inodorous Earth it was bred in, and did not find a\nvery stinking and corrosive Acid Liquor, and a sharp Alcalyzate Salt\nto compound it of, though these be the Bodies into which the Fire\ndissolves it; so it were not necessary that Nature should make up all\nMetals and other Minerals of Pre-existent Salt, and Sulphur, and\nMercury, though such Bodies might by Fire be obtained from it. Which\none consideration duly weigh'd is very considerable in the present\ncontroversy: And to this agree well the Relations of our two German\nChymists; for besides that it cannot be convincingly prov'd, it is not\nso much as likely that so languid and moderate a heat as that within\nthe Mines, should carry up to so great a heat [Errata: height], though\nin the forme of fumes, Salt, Sulphur and Mercury; since we find in our\nDistillations, that it requires a considerable Degree of Fire to raise\nso much as to the height of one foot not only Salt, but even Mercury\nit self, in close Vessels. And if it be objected, that it seems by the\nstink that is sometimes observ'd when Lightening falls down here\nbelow, that sulphureous steams may ascend very high without any\nextraordinary Degree of heat; It may be answer'd, among other things,\nthat the Sulphur of Silver is by Chymists said to be a fixt Sulphur,\nthough not altogether so well Digested as that of Gold.\n\nBut, proceeds _Carneades_, If it had not been to afford You some hints\nconcerning the Origine of Metals, I need not have deduc'd any thing\nfrom these Observations; It not being necessary to the Validity of my\nArgument that my Deductions from them should be irrefragable, because\nmy Adversaries the _Aristotelians_ and Vulgar Chymists do not, I\npresume, know any better then I, _a priori_, of what ingredients\nNature compounds Metals and Minerals. For their Argument to prove that\nthose Bodies are made up of such Principles, is drawn _a posteriori_;\nI mean from this, that upon the _Analysis_ of Mineral bodies they are\nresolv'd into those differing substances. That we may therefore\nexamine this Argument, Let us proceed to consider what can be alledg'd\nin behalf of the Elements from the Resolutions of Bodies by the fire;\nwhich you remember was the second Tophick [Transcriber's Note: Topick]\nwhence I told you the Arguments of my Adversaries were desum'd.\n\nAnd that I may first dispatch what I have to say concerning Minerals,\nI will begin the remaining part of my discourse with considering how\nthe fire divides them.\n\nAnd first, I have partly noted above, that though Chymists pretend\nfrom some to draw salt, from others running Mercury, and from others a\nSulphur; Yet they have not hitherto taught us by any way in us\n[Errata: use] among them to separate any one principle, whether Salt,\nSulphur, or Mercury, from all sorts of Minerals without exception. And\nthence I may be allow'd to conclude that there is not any of the\nElements that is an Ingredient of all Bodies, since there are some of\nwhich it is not so.\n\nIn the next place, supposing that either Sulphur or Mercury were\nobtainable from all sorts of Minerals. Yet still this Sulphur or\nMercury would be but a compounded, not an Elementary body, as I told\nyou already on another occasion. And certainly he that takes notice of\nthe wonderful Operations of Quicksilver, whether it be common, or\ndrawn from Mineral Bodies, can scarce be so inconsiderate as to think\nit of the very same nature with that immature and fugitive substance\nwhich in Vegetables and Animals Chymists have been pleas'd to call\ntheir Mercury. So that when Mercury is got by the help of the fire out\nof a metal or other Mineral Body, if we will not suppose that it was\nnot pre-existent in it, but produc'd by the action of the fire upon\nthe Concrete, we may at least suppose this Quicksilver to have been a\nperfect Body of its own kind (though perhaps lesse heterogeneous then\nmore secundary mixts) which happen'd to be mingl'd _per minima_, and\ncoagulated with the other substances, whereof the Metal or Mineral\nconsisted. As may be exemplyfied partly by Native Vermillion wherein\nthe Quicksilver and Sulphur being exquisitely blended both with one\nanother, and that other course Mineral stuff (what ever it be) that\nharbours them, make up a red body differing enough from both; and yet\nfrom which part of the Quicksilver, and of the Sulphur, may be easily\nenough obtain'd; Partly by those Mines wherein nature has so curiously\nincorporated Silver with Lead, that 'tis extreamly difficult, and yet\npossible, to separate the former out of the Latter. [Errata: latter;]\nAnd partly too by native Vitriol, wherein the Metalline Corpuscles are\nby skill and industry separable from the saline ones, though they be\nso con-coagulated with them, that the whole Concrete is reckon'd among\nSalts.\n\nAnd here I further observe, that I never could see any Earth or Water,\nproperly so call'd, separated from either Gold or Silver (to name now\nno other Metalline Bodies) and therefore to retort the argument upon\nmy Adversaries, I may conclude, that since there are some bodies in\nwhich, for ought appears, there is neither Earth nor Water. [Errata:\nWater;] I may be allow'd to conclude that neither of those two is an\nUniversal Ingredient of all those Bodies that are counted perfectly\nmixt, which I desire you would remember against Anon.\n\nIt may indeed be objected, that the reason why from Gold or Silver we\ncannot separate any moisture, is, because that when it is melted out\nof the Oare, the vehement Fire requisite to its Fusion forc'd away all\nthe aqueous and fugitive moisture; and the like fire may do from the\nmaterials of Glass. To which I shall Answer, that I Remember I read\nnot long since in the Learned _Josephus Acosta_,[31] who relates it\nupon his own observation; that in _America_, (where he long lived)\nthere is a kind of Silver which the _Indians_ call _Papas_, and\nsometimes (sayes he) they find pieces very fine and pure like to small\nround roots, the which is rare in that metal, but usuall in Gold;\nConcerning which metal he tells us, that besides this they find some\nwhich they call Gold in grains, which he tells us are small morsels of\nGold that they find whole without mixture of any other metal, which\nhath no need of melting or Refining in the fire.\n\n[Footnote 31: _Acosta_ Natural and Moral history of the Indies, L. 3.\nc. 5, p. 212.]\n\nI remember that a very skilful and credible person affirmed to me,\nthat being in the _Hungarian_ mines he had the good fortune to see a\nmineral that was there digg'd up, wherein pieces of Gold of the\nlength, and also almost of the bigness of a humane Finger, grew in the\nOar, as if they had been parts and Branches of Trees.\n\nAnd I have my self seen a Lump of whitish Mineral, that was brought as\na Rarity to a Great and knowing Prince, wherein there grew here and\nthere in the Stone, which looked like a kind of sparr, divers little\nLumps of fine Gold, (for such I was assured that Tryal had manifested\nit to be) some of them Seeming to be about the Bigness of pease.\n\nBut that is nothing to what our _Acosta_ subjoynes, which is indeed\nvery memorable, namely, that of the morsels of Native and pure Gold,\nwhich we lately heard him mentioning he had now and then seen some\nthat weighed many pounds;[32] to which I shall add, that I my self\nhave seen a Lump of Oar not long since digged up, in whose stony part\nthere grew, almost like Trees, divers parcels though not of Gold, yet\nof (what perhaps Mineralists will more wonder at) another Metal which\nseemed to be very pure or unmixt with any Heterogeneous Substances,\nand were some of them as big as my Finger, if not bigger. But upon\nObservations of this kind, though perhaps I could, yet I must not at\npresent dwell any longer.\n\n[Footnote 32: See _Acosta_ in the fore-cited Place, and the passage of\n_Pliny_ quoted by him.]\n\nTo proceed Therefore now (sayes _Carneades_) to the Consideration of\nthe _Analysis_ of Vegetables, although my Tryals give me no cause to\ndoubt but that out of most of them five differing Substances may be\nobtain'd by the fire, yet I think it will not be so easily\nDemonstrated that these deserve to be call'd Elements in the Notion\nabove explain'd.\n\nAnd before I descend to particulars, I shall repeat and premise this\nGeneral Consideration, that these differing substances that are call'd\nElements or Principles, differ not from each other as Metals, Plants\nand Animals, or as such Creatures as are immediately produc'd each by\nits peculiar Seed, and Constitutes a distinct propagable sort of\nCreatures in the Universe; but these are only Various Schemes of\nmatter or Substances that differ from each other, but in consistence\n(as Running Mercury and the same Metal congeal'd by the Vapor of\nLead) and some very few other accidents, as Tast, or Smel, or\nInflamability, or the want of them. So that by a change of Texture not\nimpossible to be wrought by the Fire and other Agents that have the\nFaculty not only to dissociate the smal parts of Bodies, but\nafterwards to connect them after a new manner, the same parcell of\nmatter may acquire or lose such accidents as may suffice to Denominate\nit Salt, or Sulphur, or Earth. If I were fully to clear to you my\napprehensions concerning this matter, I should perhaps be obliged to\nacquaint you with divers of the Conjectures (for I must yet call them\nno more) I have had Concerning the Principles of things purely\nCorporeal: For though because I seem not satisfi'd with the Vulgar\nDoctrines, either of the Peripatetick or Paracelsian Schools, many of\nthose that know me, (and perhaps, among Them, _Eleutherius_ himself)\nhave thought me wedded to the Epicurean _Hypotheses_, (as others have\nmistaken me for an _Helmontian_;) yet if you knew how little\nConversant I have been with _Epicurean_ Authors, and how great a part\nof _Lucretius_ himself I never yet had the Curiosity to read, you\nwould perchance be of another mind; especially if I were to entertain\nyou at large, I say not, of my present Notions; but of my former\nthoughts concerning the Principles of things. But, as I said above,\nfully to clear my Apprehensions would require a Longer Discourse than\nwe can now have.\n\nFor, I should tell you that I have sometimes thought it not unfit,\nthat to the Principles which may be assign'd to things, as the World\nis now Constituted, we should, if we consider the Great Mass of matter\nas it was whilst the Universe was in making, add another, which may\nConveniently enough be call'd an Architectonick Principle or power; by\nwhich I mean those Various Determinations, and that Skilfull Guidance\nof the motions of the small parts of the Universal matter by the most\nwise Author of things, which were necessary at the beginning to turn\nthat confus'd _Chaos_ into this Orderly and beautifull World; and\nEspecially, to contrive the Bodies of Animals and Plants, and the\nSeeds of those things whose kinds were to be propagated. For I confess\nI cannot well Conceive, how from matter, Barely put into Motion, and\nthen left to it self, there could Emerge such Curious Fabricks as the\nBodies of men and perfect Animals, and such yet more admirably\nContriv'd parcels of matter, as the seeds of living Creatures.\n\nI should likewise tell you upon what grounds, and in what sence, I\nsuspected the Principles of the World, as it now is, to be Three,\n_Matter_, _Motion_ and _Rest_. I say, _as the World now is_, because\nthe present Fabrick of the Universe, and especially the seeds of\nthings, together with the establisht Course of Nature, is a Requisite\nor Condition, upon whose account divers things may be made out by our\nthree Principles, which otherwise would be very hard, if possible, to\nexplicate.\n\nI should moreover declare in general (for I pretend not to be able to\ndo it otherwise) not only why I Conceive that Colours, Odors, Tasts,\nFluidness and Solidity, and those other qualities that Diversifie and\nDenominate Bodies may Intelligibly be Deduced from these three; _but\nhow two of the Three_ Epicurean Principles (which, I need not tell,\nyou [Transcriber's Note: tell you,] are Magnitude, Figure and Weight)\nare Themselves Deducible from Matter and Motion; since the Latter of\nthese Variously Agitating, and, as it were, Distracting the Former,\nmust needs disjoyne its parts; which being Actually separated must\nEach of them necessarily both be of some Size, and obtain some shape\nor other. Nor did I add to our Principles the _Aristotelean\nPrivation_, partly for other Reasons, which I must not now stay to\ninsist on; and partly because it seems to be rather an Antecedent, or\na _Terminus a quo_, then a True Principle, as the starting-Post is\nnone of the Horses Legs or Limbs.\n\nI should also explain why and how I made rest [Errata: Rest] to be,\nthough not so considerable a Principle of things, as Motion, yet a\nPrinciple of them; partly because it is (for ought we know [Errata:\nknow)] as Ancient at least as it, and depends not upon Motion, nor any\nother quality of matter; and partly, because it may enable the Body in\nwhich it happens to be, both to continue in a State of Rest till some\nexternal force put it out of that state, and to concur to the\nproduction of divers Changes in the bodies that hit against it, by\neither quite stopping or lessning their Motion (whilst the body\nformerly at Rest Receives all or part of it into it self) or else by\ngiving a new Byass, or some other Modification, to Motion, that is, To\nthe Grand and Primary instrument whereby Nature produces all the\nChanges and other Qualities that are to be met with in the World.\n\nI should likewise, after all this, explain to you how, although\nMatter, Motion and Rest, seem'd to me to be the Catholick Principles\nof the Universe, I thought the Principles of Particular bodies might\nbe Commodiously enough reduc'd to two, namely _Matter_, and (what\nComprehends the two other, and their effects) the result or Aggregate\n[Errata: Aggregate or complex] of those Accidents, which are the\nMotion or Rest, (for in some Bodies both are not to be found) the\nBigness, Figure, Texture) [Errata: delete )] and the thence resulting\nQualities of the small parts) [Errata: delete )] which are necessary\nto intitle the Body whereto they belong to this or that Peculiar\nDenomination; and discriminating it from others to appropriate it to a\nDeterminate Kind of Things, as [Errata: (as] Yellowness, Fixtness,\nsuch a Degree of Weight, and of Ductility, do make the Portion of\nmatter wherein they Concur, to be reckon'd among perfect metals, and\nobtain the name of Gold.) Which [Errata: This] Aggregate or result of\nAccidents you may, if You please, call either _Structure_ or Texture.\n\n[Errata: no paragraph break] Though [Errata: (Though] indeed, that do\nnot so properly Comprehend the motion of the constituent parts\nespecially in case some of them be Fluid [Errata: Fluid)], or what\nother appellation shall appear most Expressive. Or if, retaining the\nVulgar Terme, You will call it the _Forme_ of the thing it\ndenominates, I shall not much oppose it; Provided the word be\ninterpreted to mean but what I have express'd, and not a Scholastick\n_Substantial Forme_, which so many intelligent men profess to be to\nthem altogether Un-intelligible.\n\nBut, sayes _Carneades_, if you remember that 'tis a Sceptick speaks to\nyou, and that 'tis not so much my present Talk to make assertions as\nto suggest doubts, I hope you will look upon what I have propos'd,\nrather as a Narrative of my former conjectures touching the principles\nof things, then as a Resolute Declaration of my present opinions of\nthem; especially since although they cannot but appear Very much to\ntheir Disadvantage, If you Consider Them as they are propos'd without\nthose Reasons and Explanations by which I could perhaps make them\nappear much lesse extravagant; yet I want time to offer you what may\nbe alledg'd to clear and countenance these notions; my design in\nmentioning them unto you at present being, _partly_, to bring some\nLight and Confirmation to divers passages of my discourse to you;\n_partly_ to shew you, that I do not (as you seem to have suspected)\nembrace all _Epicurus_ his principles; but Dissent from him in some\nmain things, as well as from _Aristotle_ and the Chymists, in others;\n& _partly_ also, or rather chiefly, to intimate to you the grounds\nupon which I likewise differ from _Helmont_ in this, that whereas he\nascribes almost all things, and even diseases themselves, to their\ndeterminate Seeds; I am of opinion, that besides the peculiar\nFabricks of the Bodies of Plants and Animals (and perhaps also of some\nMetals and Minerals) which I take to be the Effects of seminal\nprinciples, there are many other bodies in nature which have and\ndeserve distinct and Proper names, but yet do but result from such\ncontextures of the matter they are made of, as may without determinate\nseeds be effected by heat, cold, artificial mixtures and compositions,\nand divers other causes which sometimes nature imployes of her own\naccord; and oftentimes man by his power and skill makes use of to\nfashion the matter according to his Intentions. This may be\nexemplified both in the productions of Nature, and in those of Art; of\nthe first sort I might name multitudes; but to shew how sleight a\nvariation of Textures without addition of new ingredients may procure\na parcel of matter divers names, and make it be Lookt upon as\nDifferent Things;\n\nI shall invite you to observe with me, That Clouds, Rain, Hail, Snow,\nFroth, and Ice, may be but water, having its parts varyed as to their\nsize and distance in respect of each other, and as to motion and\nrest. And among Artificial Productions we may take notice (to skip the\nCrystals of Tartar) of Glass, Regulus, Martis-Stellatus [Errata:\nRegulus Martis Stellatus], and particularly of the Sugar of Lead,\nwhich though made of that insipid Metal and sour salt of Vinager, has\nin it a sweetnesse surpassing that of common Sugar, and divers other\nqualities, which being not to be found in either of its two\ningredients, must be confess'd to belong to the Concrete it self, upon\nthe account of its Texture.\n\nThis Consideration premis'd, it will be, I hope, the more easie to\nperswade you that the Fire may as well produce some new textures in a\nparcel of matter, as destroy the old.\n\nWherefore hoping that you have not forgot the Arguments formerly\nimploy'd against the Doctrine of the _Tria prima_; namely that the\nSalt, Sulphur and Mercury, into which the Fire seems to resolve\nVegetable and Animal Bodies, are yet compounded, not simple and\nElementary Substances; And that (as appeared by the Experiment of\nPompions) the _Tria prima_ may be made out of Water; hoping I say,\nthat you remember These and the other Things that I formerly\nrepresented to the same purpose, I shall now add only, that if we\ndoubt not the Truth of some of _Helmonts_ Relation [Errata:\nRelations], We may well doubt whether any of these Heterogeneities be\n(I say not pre-existent, so as to convene together, when a plant or\nAnimal is to be constituted but) so much as in-existent in the\nConcrete whence they are obtain'd, when the Chymists [Errata: Chymist]\nfirst goes about to resolve it; For not to insist upon the\nun-inflamable Spirit of such Concretes, because that may be pretended\nto be but a mixture of Phlegme and Salt; the Oyle or Sulphur of\nVegetables or Animals is, according to him, reducible by the help of\nLixiviate Salts into Sope; as that Sope is by the help of repeated\nDistillations from a _Caput Mortuum_ of Chalk into insipid Water. And\nas for the saline substance that seems separable from mixt bodies; the\nsame _Helmonts_ tryals[33] give us cause to think, That it may be a\nproduction of the Fire, which by transporting and otherwise altering\nthe particles of the matter, does bring it to a Saline nature.\n\n[Footnote 33: _Omne autem Alcali addita pinguedine in aqueum liquorem,\nqui tandem mera & simplex aqua fit, reducitur, (ut videre est in\nSapone, Lazurio lapide, &c.) quoties per adjuncta fixa semen\nPinguedinis deponit._ Helmont.]\n\nFor I know (sayes he, in the place formerly alledg'd to another\npurpose) a way to reduce all stones into a meer Salt of equal weight\nwith the stone whence it was produc'd, and that without any of the\nleast either Sulphur or Mercury; which asseveration of my Author would\nperhaps seem less incredible to You, if I durst acquaint You with all\nI could say upon that subject. And hence by the way you may also\nconclude that the Sulphur and Mercury, as they call them, that\nChymists are wont to obtain from compound Bodies by the Fire, may\npossibly in many Cases be the productions of it; since if the same\nbodies had been wrought upon by the Agents employ'd by _Helmont_, they\nwould have yielded neither Sulphur nor Mercury; and those portions of\nthem which the Fire would have presented Us in the forme of\nSulphureous and Mercurial Bodies would have, by _Helmonts_ method,\nbeen exhibited to us in the form of Salt.\n\nBut though (sayes _Eleutherius_) You have alledg'd very plausible\nArguments against the _tria Prima_, yet I see not how it will be\npossible for you to avoid acknowledging that Earth and Water are\nElementary Ingredients, though not of Mineral Concretes, yet of all\nAnimal and Vegetable Bodies; Since if any of these of what sort soever\nbe committed to Distillation, there is regularly and constantly\nseparated from it a phlegme or aqueous part and a _Caput Mortuum_ or\nEarth.\n\nI readily acknowledged (answers _Carneades_) it is not so easy to\nreject Water and Earth (and especially the former) as 'tis to reject\nthe _Tria Prima_, from being the Elements of mixt Bodies; but 'tis not\nevery difficult thing that is impossible.\n\nI consider then, as to Water, that the chief Qualities which make men\ngive that name to any visible Substance, are, that it is Fluid or\nLiquid, and that it is insipid and inodorous. Now as for the tast of\nthese qualities, I think you have never seen any of those separated\nsubstances that the Chymists call Phlegme which was perfectly devoyd\nboth of Tast and Smell: and if you object, that yet it may be\nreasonably suppos'd, that since the whole Body is Liquid, the mass is\nnothing but Elementary Water faintly imbu'd with some of the Saline or\nSulphureous parts of the same Concrete, which it retain'd with it\nupon its Separation from the Other Ingredients. To this I answer, That\nthis Objection would not appear so stong [Transcriber's Note: strong]\nas it is plausible, if Chymists understood the Nature of Fluidity and\nCompactnesse; and that, as I formerly observ'd, to a Bodies being\nFluid there is nothing necessary, but that it be divided into parts\nsmall enough; and that these parts be put into such a motion among\nthemselves as to glide some this way and some that way, along each\nothers Surfaces. So that, although a Concrete were never so dry, and\nhad not any Water or other Liquor in-existent in it, yet such a\nComminution of its parts may be made, by the fire or other Agents, as\nto turn a great portion of them into Liquor. Of this Truth I will give\nan instance, employ'd by our friend here present as one of the most\nconducive of his experiments to Illustrate the nature of Salts. If you\nTake, then, sea salt and melt it in the Fire to free it from the\naqueous parts, and afterward distill it with a vehement Fire from\nburnt Clay, or any other, as dry a _Caput mortuum_ as you please, you\nwill, as Chymists confess, [Errata: confesse (delete comma)] by\nteaching it drive over a good part of the Salt in the form of a\nLiquor. And to satisfy some ingenious men, That a great part of this\nLiquor was still true sea salt brought by the Operation of the Fire\ninto Corpuscles so small, and perhaps so advantageously shap'd, as to\nbe capable of the forme of a Fluid Body, He did in my presence poure\nto such spiritual salts a due proportion of the spirit (or salt and\nPhlegme) of Urine, whereby having evaporated the superfluous moisture,\nhe soon obtain'd such another Concrete, both as to tast and smell, and\neasie sublimableness as common Salt _Armoniack_, which you know is\nmade up of grosse and undistill'd sea salt united with the salts of\nUrine and of Soot, which two are very neer of kin to each other. And\nfurther, to manifest that the Corpuscles of sea salt and the Saline\nones of Urine retain their several Natures in this Concrete, He mixt\nit with a convenient quantity of Salt of Tartar, and committing it to\nDistillation soon regain'd his spirit of Urine in a liquid form by its\nself, the Sea salt staying behind with the Salt of Tartar. Wherefore\nit is very possible that dry Bodies may by the Fire be reduc'd to\nLiquors without any separation of Elements, but barely by a certain\nkind of Dissipation and Comminution of the matter, whereby its parts\nare brought into a new state. And if it be still objected, that the\nPhlegme of mixt Bodies must be reputed water, because so weak a tast\nneeds but a very small proportion of Salt to impart it; It may be\nreply'd, that for ought appears, common Salt and divers other bodies,\nthough they be distill'd never so dry, and in never so close Vessels,\nwill yield each of them pretty store of a Liquor, wherein though (as I\nlately noted) Saline Corpuscles abound, Yet there is besides a large\nproportion of Phlegme, as may easily be discovered by coagulating the\nSaline Corpuscles with any convenient Body; as I lately told you, our\nFriend coagulated part of the Spirit of Salt with Spirit of Urine: and\nas I have divers times separated a salt from Oyle of Vitriol it self\n(though a very ponderous Liquor and drawn from a saline body) by\nboyling it with a just quantity of Mercury, and then washing the newly\ncoagulated salt from the Precipitate with fair Water. Now to what can\nwe more probably ascribe this plenty of aqueous Substance afforded us\nby the Distillation of such bodies, than unto this, That among the\nvarious operations of the Fire upon the matter of a Concrete, divers\nparticles of that matter are reduc'd to such a shape and bignesse as\nis requisite to compose such a Liquor as Chymists are wont to call\nPhlegme or Water. How I conjecture this change may be effected, 'tis\nneither necessary for me to tell you, nor possible to do so without a\nmuch longer discourse then were now seasonable. But I desire you would\nwith me reflect upon what I formerly told you concerning the change of\nQuicksilver into Water; For that Water having but a very faint tast,\nif any whit more than divers of those liquors that Chymists referr to\nPhlegme; By that experiment it seems evident, that even a metalline\nbody, and therefore much more such as are but Vegetable or Animal, may\nby a simple operation of the Fire be turn'd in great part into Water.\nAnd since those I dispute with are not yet able out of Gold, or\nSilver, or divers other Concretes to separate any thing like Water; I\nhope I may be allow'd to conclude against Them, that water it self is\nnot an Universal and pre-existent Ingredient of Mixt Bodies.\n\nBut as for those Chymists that, Supposing with me the Truth of what\n_Helmont_ relates of the _Alkahest's_ wonderful Effects, have a right\nto press me with his Authority concerning them, and to alledge that he\ncould Transmute all reputedly mixt Bodies into insipid and meer Water;\nTo those I shall represent, That though his Affirmations conclude\nstrongly against the Vulgar Chymists (against whom I have not\ntherefore scrupl'd to Employ Them) since they Evince that the Commonly\nreputed Principles or Ingredients of Things are not Permanent and\nindestructible, since they may be further reduc'd into Insipid Phlegme\ndiffering from them all; Yet till we can be allow'd to examine this\nLiquor, I think it not unreasonable to doubt whether it be not\nsomething else then meer Water. For I find not any other reason given\nby _Helmont_ of his Pronouncing it so, then that it is insipid. Now\nSapour being an Accident or an Affection of matter that relates to our\nTongue, Palate, and other Organs of Tast, it may very possibly be,\nthat the small Parts of a Body may be of such a Size and Shape, as\neither by their extream Littleness, or by their slenderness, or by\ntheir Figure, to be unable to pierce into and make a perceptible\nImpression upon the Nerves or Membranous parts of the Organs of Tast,\nand what [Errata: yet] may be fit to work otherwise upon divers other\nBodies than meer Water can, and consequently to Disclose it self to be\nof a Nature farr enough from Elementary. In Silke dyed Red or of any\nother Colour, whilst many Contiguous Threads makes up a skein, the\nColour of the Silke is conspicuous; but if only a very few of them be\nlookt upon, the Colour will appear much fainter then before. But if\nYou take out one simple Thread, you shall not easily be able to\ndiscern any Colour at all; So subtile an Object having not the Force\nto make upon the Optick Nerve an Impression great enough to be taken\nNotice of. It is also observ'd, that the best sort of Oyl-Olive is\nalmost tastless, and yet I need not tell you how exceedingly distant\nin Nature Oyle is from Water. The Liquor into which I told you, upon\nthe Relation of _Lully_, and [Errata: an] Eye-witness that Mercury\nmight be Transmuted, has sometimes but a very Languid, if any Tast,\nand yet its Operations even upon some Mineral Bodies are very\npeculiar. Quicksilver it self also, though the Corpuscles it consists\nof be so very small as to get into the Pores of that Closest and\ncompactest of Bodies, Gold, is yet (you know) altogether Tastless. And\nour _Helmont_ several times tells us, that fair Water wherein a little\nQuantity f [Errata: of] Quicksilver has lain for some time, though it\nacquire no certain Tast or other sensible Quality from the\nQuicksilver; Yet it has a power to destroy wormes in humane Bodies;\nwhich he does much, but not causelessly extoll. And I remember, a\ngreat Lady, that had been Eminent for her Beauty in Divers Courts,\nconfess'd to me, that this insipid Liquor was of all innocent washes\nfor the Face the best that she ever met with.\n\nAnd here let me conclude my Discourse, concerning such waters or\nLiquors as I have hitherto been examining, with these two\nConsiderations. Whereof the first is, That by reason of our being wont\nto drink nothing but Wine, Bear, Cyder, or other strongly tasted\nLiquors, there may be in several of these Liquors, that are wont to\npass for insipid Phlegme, very peculiar and Distinct, Tasts [Errata:\ndistinct Tasts] though unheeded (and perhaps not to be perceiv'd) by\nUs. For to omit what Naturalists affirm of Apes, (and which probably\nmay be true of divers other Animals) that they have a more exquisite\npalate than Men: among Men themselves, those that are wont to drink\nnothing but water may (as I have try'd in my self) Discern very\nsensibly a great Difference of Tasts in several waters, which one\nun-accustomed to drink water would take to be all alike insipid. And\nthis is the _first_ of my two Considerations; the _Other_ is, That it\nis not impossible that the Corpuscles into which a body is dissipated\nby the Fire may by the Operation of the same fire have their figures\nso altered, or may be by associations with one another brought into\nlittle Masses of such a Size and Shape, as not to be fit to make\nsensible Impressions on the Tongue. And that you may not think such\nalterations impossible, be pleased to consider with me, that not only\nthe sharpest Spirit of Vinager having dissolved as much Corall as it\ncan, will Coagulate with it into a Substance, which though soluble in\nwater, like salt, is incomparably less strongly Tasted then the\nVinager was before; but (what is more considerable) though the Acid\nsalts that are carried up with Quicksilver in the preparation of\ncommon sublimate are so sharp, that being moistened with water it will\nCorrode some of the Metals themselves; yet this Corrosive Sublimate\nbeing twice or thrice re-sublim'd with a full proportion of insipid\nQuicksilver, Constitutes (as you know) that Factitious Concrete, which\nthe Chymists call _Mercurius dulcis_; not because it is sweet, but\nbecause the sharpness of the Corrosive Salts is so taken away by their\nCombination with the Mercurial Corpuscles, that the whole mixture when\nit is prepar'd is judg'd to be insipid.\n\nAnd thus (continues _Carneades_) having given you some Reasons why I\nrefuse to admit Elementary water for a constant Ingredient of Mixt\nBodies, It will be easie for me to give you an Account why I also\nreject Earth.\n\nFor first, it may well be suspected that many Substances pass among\nChymists under the name of Earth, because, like it, they are Dry, and\nHeavy, and Fixt, which yet are very farr from an Elementary Nature.\nThis you will not think improbable, If you recall to mind what I\nformerly told you concerning what Chymists call the Dead Earth of\nthings, and especially touching the copper to be drawn from the _Caput\nMortuum_ of Vitriol; And if also you allow me to subjoyn a casual but\nmemorable Experiment made by _Johannes Agricola_ upon the _Terra\nDamnata_ of Brimstone. Our Author then tells us (in his notes upon\n_Popius_ [Transcriber's Note: Poppius],) that in the year 1621 he made\nan Oyle of Sulphur; the remaining _Faeces_ he reverberated in a\nmoderate Fire fourteen dayes; afterwards he put them well luted up in\na Wind Oven, and gave them a strong Fire for six hours, purposing to\ncalcine the _Faeces_ to a perfect Whiteness, that he might make\nsometing [Transcriber's Note: something] else out of them. But coming\nto break the pot, he found above but very little _Faeces_, and those\nGrey and not White; but beneath there lay a fine Red _Regulus_ which\nhe first marvell'd at and knew not what to make of, being well assured\nthat not the least thing, besides the _Faeces_ of the Sulphur, came\ninto the pot; and that the Sulphur it self had only been dissolv'd in\nLinseed Oyle; this _Regulus_ he found heavy and malleable almost as\nLead; having caus'd a Goldsmith to draw him a Wire of it, he found it\nto be of the Fairest copper, and so rightly colour'd, that a Jew of\n_Prague_ offer'd him a great price for it. And of this Metal he sayes\nhe had 12 _loth_ (or six ounces) out of one pound of Ashes or _Faeces_.\nAnd this Story may well incline us to suspect that since the _Caput\nMortuum_ of the Sulphur was kept so long in the fire before it was\nfound to be any thing else then a _Terra damnata_, there may be divers\nother Residences of Bodies which are wont to pass only for the\nTerrestrial _Faeces_ of things, and therefore to be thrown away as soon\nas the Distillation or Calcination of the Body that yielded them is\nended; which yet if they were long and Skilfully examin'd by the fire\nwould appear to be differing from Elementary Earth. And I have taken\nnotice of the unwarrantable forwardness of common Chymists to\npronounce things useless _Faeces_, by observing how often they reject\nthe _Caput Mortuum_ of Verdegrease; which is yet so farr from\ndeserving that Name, that not only by strong fires and convenient\nAdditaments it may in some hours be reduc'd into copper, but with a\ncertain Flux Powder I sometimes make for Recreation, I have in two or\nthree minutes obtain'd that Metal from it. To which I may add, that\nhaving for tryall sake kept Venetian Taclk [Errata: Talck] in no less\na heat than that of a glass Furnace, I found after all the Brunt of\nthe fire it had indur'd, the remaining Body though brittle and\ndiscolour'd, had not lost very much of its former Bulke, and seem'd\nstill to be nearer of kin to Talck than to meer Earth. And I remember\ntoo, that a candid Mineralist, famous for his Skill in trying of Oars,\nrequesting me one day to procure him a certain _American_ Mineral\nEarth of a _Virtuoso_, who he thought would not refuse me; I enquir'd\nof him why he seem'd so greedy of it: he confess'd to me that this\nGentleman having brought that Earth to the publick Say-Masters; and\nthey upon their being unable by any means to bring it to fusion or\nmake it fly away, he (the Relator) had procur'd a little of it; and\nhaving try'd it with a peculiar Flux separated from it neer a third\npart of pure Gold; so great mistakes may be committed in hastily\nconcluding things to be Uselesse Earth.\n\nNext, it may be suppos'd, That as in the Resolution of Bodies by the\nFire some of the dissipated Parts may, by their various occursion\noccasion'd by the heat, be brought to stick together so closely as to\nconstitute Corpuscles too heavy for the Fire to carry away; the\naggregate of which Corpuscles is wont to be call'd Ashes or Earrh\n[Errata: Earth]; So other Agents may resolve the Concrete into Minute\nParts, after so differing a manner as not to produce any _Caput\nmortuum_, or dry and heavy Body. As you may remember _Helmont_ above\ninform'd us, that with his great Dissolvent he divided a Coal into two\nliquid and volatile Bodies, aequiponderant to the Coal, without any dry\nor fixt Residence at all.\n\nAnd indeed, I see not why it should be necessary that all Agents that\nresolve Bodies into portions of differingly qualifi'd matter must\nwork on them the same way, and divide them into just such parts, both\nfor nature and Number, as the Fire dissipates them into. For since, as\nI noted before, the Bulk and shape of the small Parts of bodies,\ntogether with their Fitness and Unfitness to be easily put into\nMotion, may make the liquors or other substances such Corpuscles\ncompose, as much to differ from each other as do some of the Chymical\nprinciples: Why may not something happen in this case, not unlike what\nis usuall in the grosser divisions of bodies by Mechanical\nInstruments? Where we see that some Tools reduce Wood, for Instance,\ninto darts [Errata: parts] of several shapes, bignesse, and other\nqualities, as Hatchets and Wedges divide it into grosser parts; some\nmore long and slender, as splinters; and some more thick and\nirregular, as chips; but all of considerable bulk; but Files and Saws\nmakes a Comminution of it into Dust; which, as all the others, is of\nthe more solid sort of parts; whereas others divide it into long and\nbroad, but thin and flexible parts, as do _Planes_: And of this kind\nof parts it self there is also a variety according to the Difference\nof the Tools employ'd to work on the Wood; the shavings made by the\n_plane_ being in some things differing from those shives or thin and\nflexible pieces of wood that are obtain'd by _Borers_, and these from\nsome others obtainable by other Tools. Some Chymical Examples\napplicable to this purpose I have elsewhere given you. To which I may\nadd, that whereas in a mixture of Sulphur and Salt of Tartar well\nmelted and incorporated together, the action of pure spirit of wine\ndigested on it is to separate the sulphureous from the Alcalizate\nParts, by dissolving the former and leaving the latter, the action of\nWine (probably upon the score of its copious Phlegme) upon the same\nmixture is to divide it into Corpuscles consisting of both Alcalizate\nand Sulphureous Parts united. And if it be objected, that this is but\na Factitious Concrete; I answer, that however the instance may serve\nto illustrate what I propos'd, if not to prove it; and that Nature her\nself doth in the bowels of the Earth make Decompounded Bodies, as we\nsee in Vitriol, Cinnaber, and even in Sulphur it self; I will not urge\nthat the Fire divides new Milk into five differing Substances; but\nRunnet and Acid Liquors divide it into a Coagulated matter and a thin\nWhey: And on the other side churning divides it into Butter and\nButter-milk, which may either of them be yet reduc'd to other\nsubstances differing from the former. I will not presse this, I say,\nnor other instances of this Nature, because I cannot in few words\nanswer what may be objected, that these Concretes sequestred without\nthe help of the Fire may by it be further divided into Hypostatical\nPrinciples. But I will rather represent, That whereas the same spirit\nof Wine will dissociare [Transcriber's Note: dissociate] the Parts of\nCamphire, and make them one Liquor with it self; _Aqua Fortis_ will\nalso disjoyn them, and put them into motion; but so as to keep them\ntogether, and yet alter their Texture into the form of an Oyle. I know\nalso an uncompounded Liquor, that an extraordinary Chymist would not\nallow to be so much as Saline, which doth (as I have try'd) from Coral\nit self (as fixt as divers judicious writers assert that Concrete to\nbe) not only obtain a noble Tincture, Without the Intervention of\nNitre or other Salts; but will carry over the Tincture in\nDistillation. And if some reasons did not forbid me, I could now tell\nyou of a _Menstruum_ I make my self, that doth more odly dissociate\nthe parts of Minerals very fixt in the fire. So that it seems not\nincredible, that there may be some Agent or way of Operation found,\nwhereby this or that Concrete, if not all Firme Bodies, may be\nresolv'd into parts so very minute and so unapt to stick close to one\nanother, that none of them may be fixt enough to stay behind in a\nstrong Fire, and to be incapable of Distillation; nor consequently to\nbe look'd upon as Earth. But to return to _Helmont_, the same Authour\nsomewhere supply's me with another Argument against the Earth's being\nsuch an Element as my Adversaries would have it. For he somewhere\naffirms, that he can reduce all the Terrestrial parts of mixt bodies\ninto insipid water; whence we may argue against the Earths being one\nof their Elements, even from that Notion of Elements which you may\nremember _Philoponus_ recited out of _Aristotle_ himself, when he\nlately disputed for his Chymists against _Themistius_. And here we\nmay on this occasion consider, that since a Body from which the Fire\nhath driven away its looser parts is wont to be look'd upon as Earth,\nupon the Account of its being endow'd with both these qualities,\nTastlessenesse and Fixtnesse, (for Salt of Tartar though Fixt passes\nnot among the Chymists for Earth, because 'tis strongly Tasted) if it\nbe in the power of Natural Agents to deprive the _Caput Mortuum_ of a\nbody of either of those two Qualities, or to give them both to a\nportion of matter that had them not both before, the Chymists will not\neasily define what part of a resolv'd Concrete is earth, and make out,\nthat that Earth is a primary, simple, and indestructible Body. Now\nthere are some cases wherein the more skilful of the Vulgar Chymists\nthemselves pretend to be able, by repeated Cohobations and other fit\nOperations, to make the Distilled parts of a Concrete bring its own\n_Caput Mortuum_ over the Helme, in the forme of a Liquor; in which\nstate being both Fluid and Volatile, you will easily believe it would\nnot be taken for Earth. And indeed by a skilful, but not Vulgar, way\nof managing some Concretes, there may be more effected in this kind,\nthen you perhaps would easily think. And on the other side, that\neither Earth may be Generated, or at least Bodies that did not before\nappear to be neer Totally Earth, may be so alter'd as to pass for it,\nseems very possible, if _Helmont_[34] have done that by Art which he\nmentions in several places; especially where He sayes that he knowes\nwayes whereby Sulphur once dissolv'd is all of it fix'd into a\nTerrestrial Powder; and the whole Bodie of Salt-Petre may be turn'd\ninto Earth: Which last he elsewhere sayes is Done by the Odour only of\na certain Sulphureous Fire. And in another place He mentions one way\nof doing this, which I cannot give you an Account of; because the\nMaterialls I had prepar'd for Trying it, were by a Servants mistake\nunhappily thrown away.\n\n[Footnote 34: _Novi item modos quibus totum Salpetiae [Errata:\nsal-petrae] in terram convertitur, totumque Sulphur semel dissolutum\nfixetur in Pulvearem terreum. Helmont in Compl. atque Mist. Elementor.\nSect. 24._]\n\nAnd these Last Arguments may be confirm'd by the Experiment I have\noften had occasion to mention concerning the Mint I produc'd out of\nWater. And partly by an Observation of _Rondeletius_ concerning the\nGrowth of Animals also, Nourish'd but by Water, which I remember'd not\nto mention, when I discours'd to you about the Production of things\nout of Water. This Diligent Writer then in his instructive book of\nfishes,[35] affirmes That his Wife kept a fish in a Glass of water\nwithout any other Food for three years; in which space it was\nconstantly augmented, till at last it could not come out of the Place\nat which it was put in, and at length was too big for the glass it\nself though that were of a large capacity. And because there is no\njust reason to doubt, that this Fish, if Distill'd, would have yielded\nthe like differing substances with other Animals: And However, because\nthe Mint which I had out of water afforded me upon Distillation a good\nquantity of Charcoal, I think I may from thence inferr, that Earth it\nself may be produc'd out of Water; or if you please, that water may be\ntransmuted into Earth; and consequently, that though it could be\nprov'd that Earth is an Ingredient actually in-existent in the\nVegetable and Animal Bodies whence it may be obtain'd by Fire: yet it\nwould not necessarily follow, that Earth as a pre-existent Element\nDoes with other Principles convene to make up those Bodies whence it\nseems to have been separated.\n\n[Footnote 35: _Lib. 1. cap. 2._]\n\nAfter all is said (sayes _Eleutherius_) I have yet something to\nObject, that I cannot but think considerable, since _Carneades_\nHimself alledg'd it as such; for, (continues _Eleutherius_ smiling) I\nmust make bold to try whether you can as luckily answer your own\nArguments, as those of your Antagonists, I mean (pursues he) that part\nof your Concessions, wherein you cannot but remember that you supply'd\nyour Adversaries with an Example to prove that there may be Elementary\nBodies, by taking Notice that Gold may be an Ingredient in a multitude\nof differing Mixtures, and yet retain its Nature, notwithstanding all\nthat the Chymists by their Fires and Corrosive Waters are able to do\nto Destroy it.\n\nI sufficiently intimated to you at that time (replies _Carneades_)\nthat I propos'd this Example, chiefly to shew you how Nature may be\nConceived to have made Elements, not to prove that she actually has\nmade any; And you know, that _a posse ad esse_ the Inference will not\nhold. But (continues _Carneades_) to answer more directly to the\nObjection drawn from Gold, I must tell You, that though I know very\nwell that divers of the more sober Chymists have complain'd of the\nVulgar Chymists, as of Mountebanks or Cheats, for pretending so\nvainly, as hitherto they have done, to Destroy Gold; Yet I know a\ncertain _Menstruum_ (which our Friend has made, and intends shortly to\ncommunicate to the Ingenious) of so piercing and powerfull a Quality,\nThat if notwithstanding much care, and some skill, I did not much\ndeceive myself, I have with it really destroy'd even refin'd Gold, and\nbrought it into a Metalline Body of another colour and Nature, as I\nfound by Tryals purposely made. And if some just Considerations did\nnot for the present Forbid it, I could Perchance here shew you by\nanother Experiment or Two of my own Trying, that such _Menstruums_ may\nbe made as to entice away and retain divers parts, from Bodies, which\neven the more Judicious and Experienc'd _Spagyrists_ have pronounc'd\nirresoluble by the Fire. Though (which I Desire you would mark) in\nneither of these Instances, the Gold or Precious Stones be Analys'd\ninto any of the _Tria Prima_, but only Reduc'd to new Concretes. And\nindeed there is a great Disparity betwixt the Operations of the\nseveral Agents whereby the Parts of a Body come to be Dissipated. As\nif (for Instance) you dissolve the purer sort of Vitriol in common\nWater, the Liquor will swallow up the Mineral, and so Dissociate its\nCorpuscles, that they will seem to make up but one Liquor with those\nof the water; and yet each of these Corpuscles retains its Nature and\nTexture, and remains a Vitriolate and Compounded Body. But if the same\nVitriol be exposed to a strong Fire, it will then be divided not only,\nas before, into smaller parts, but into Heterogeneous Substances, each\nof the Vitriolate Corpuscles that remain'd entire in the water, being\nit self upon the Destruction of its former Texture dissipated or\ndivided into new Particles of differing Qualities. But Instances more\nfitly applicable to this purpose, I have already given you. Wherefore\nto return to what I told you about the Destruction of Gold, that\nExperiment Invites me to Represent to you, that Though there were\neither Saline, or Sulphureous, or Terrestrial Portions of Matter,\nwhose parts were so small, so firmly united together, or of a figure\nso fit to make them cohere to one another, (as we see that in\nquicksilver broken into little Globes, the Parts brought to touch one\nanother do immediately re-imbody) that neither the Fire, nor the usual\nAgents employ'd by Chymists, are pierceing enough to divide their\nParts, so as to destroy the Texture of the single Corpuscles; yet it\nwould not necessarily follow, That such Permanent Bodies were\nElementary, since tis possible there may be Agents found in Nature,\nsome of whose parts may be of such a Size and Figure as to take better\nHold of some parts of these seemingly Elementary Corpuscles than these\nparts do of the rest, and Consequently may carry away such parts with\nthem, and so dissolve the Texture of the Corpuscle by pulling its\nparts asunder. And if it be said, that at least we may this way\ndiscover the Elementary Ingredients of Things, by observing into what\nSubstances these Corpuscles that were reputed pure are divided; I\nanswer, that it is not necessary that such a Discovery should be\npracticable. For if the Particles of the Dissolvent do take such firme\nhold of those of the Dissolved Body, they must constitute together new\nBodies, as well as Destroy the Old; and the strickt Union, which\naccording to this _Hypothesis_ may well be suppos'd betwixt the Parts\nof the Emergent Body, will make it as Little to be Expected that they\nshould be pull'd asunder, but by little Parts of matter, that to\nDivide them Associate Themselves and stick extreamly close to those of\nthem which they sever from their Former Adherents. Besides that it is\nnot impossible, that a Corpuscle suppos'd to be Elementary may have\nits Nature changed, without suffering a Divorce of its parts, barely\nby a new Texture Effected by some powerfull Agent; as I formerly told\nyou, the same portion of matter may easily by the Operation of the\nFire be turn'd at pleasure into the form of a Brittle and Transparent,\nor an Opacous and Malleable Body.\n\nAnd indeed, if you consider how farr the bare Change of Texture,\nwhether made by Art or Nature (or rather by Nature with or without the\nassistance of man) can go in producing such New Qualities in the same\nparcel of matter, and how many inanimate Bodies (such as are all the\nChymical productions of the Fire) we know are Denominated and\nDistinguish'd not so much by any Imaginary Substantial Form, as by the\naggregate of these Qualities. If you consider these Things, I say, and\nthat the varying of either the figure, or the Size, or the Motion, or\nthe Situation, or Connexion of the Corpuscles whereof any of these\nBodies is compos'd, may alter the Fabrick of it, you will possibly be\ninvited to suspect, with me, that there is no great need that Nature\nshould alwayes have Elements before hand, whereof to make such Bodies\nas we call mixts. And that it is not so easie as Chymists and others\nhave hitherto Imagin'd, to discern, among the many differing\nSubstances that may without any extraordinary skill be obtain'd from\nthe same portion of matter, Which ought to be esteemed exclusively to\nall the rest, its in-existent Elementary Ingredients; much lesse to\ndetermine what Primogeneal and Simple Bodies convened together to\ncompose it. To exemplify this, I shall add to what I have already on\nseveral occasions Represented, but this single instance.\n\nYou may remember (_Eleutherius_) that I formerly intimated to you,\nthat besides Mint and Pompions, I produced divers other Vegetables of\nvery differing Natures out of Water. Wherefore you will not, I\npresume, think it incongruous to suppose, that when a slender\nVine-slip is set into the ground, and takes root, there it may\nlikewise receive its Nutriment from the water attracted out of the\nearth by his roots, or impell'd by the warm'th of the sun, or pressure\nof the ambient air into the pores of them. And this you will the more\neasily believe, if you ever observ'd what a strange quantity of Water\nwill Drop out of a wound given to the Vine, in a convenient place, at\na seasonable time in the Spring; and how little of Tast or Smell this\n_Aqua Vitis_, as Physitians call it, is endow'd with, notwithstanding\nwhat concoction or alteration it may receive in its passage through\nthe Vine, to discriminate it from common Water. Supposing then this\nLiquor, at its first entrance into the roots of the Vine, to be common\nWater; Let Us a little consider how many various Substances may be\nobtain'd from it; though to do so, I must repeat somewhat that I had a\nformer occasion to touch upon. And first, this Liquor being Digested\nin the plant, and assimilated by the several parts of it, is turn'd\ninto the Wood, Bark, Pith, Leaves, &c. of the Vine; The same Liquor\nmay be further dry'd, and fashon'd into Vine-buds, and these a while\nafter are advanced unto sour Grapes, which express'd yield Verjuice, a\nLiquor very differing in several qualities both from Wine and other\nLiquors obtainable from the Vine: These soure Grapes being by the heat\nof the Sun concocted and ripened, turne to well tasted Grapes; These\nif dry'd in the Sun and Distill'd, afford a faetid Oyle and a piercing\n_Empyreumatical_ Spirit, but not a Vinous Spirit; These dry'd Grapes\nor Raisins boyl'd in a convenient proportion of Water make a sweet\nLiquor, which being betimes distill'd afford an Oyle and Spirit much\nlike those of the Raisins themselves; If the juice of the Grapes be\nsqueez'd out and put to Ferment, it first becomes a sweet and turbid\nLiquor, then grows lesse sweet and more clear, and then affords in\ncommon Distillations not an Oyle but a Spirit, which, though\ninflamable like Oyle, differs much from it, in that it is not fat, and\nthat it will readily mingle with Water. I have likewise without\nAddition obtain'd in processe of time (and by an easie way which I am\nready to teach you) from one of the noblest sorts of Wine, pretty\nstore of pure and curiously figured Crystals of Salt, together with a\ngreat proportion of a Liquor as sweet almost as Hony; and these I\nobtained not from Must, but True and sprightly Wine; besides the\nVinous Liquor, the fermented Juice of Grapes is partly turned into\nliquid Dregs or Leeze, and partly into that crust or dry feculancy\nthat is commonly called Tartar; and this Tartar may by the Fire be\neasily divided into five differing substances; four of which are not\nAcid, and the other not so manifestly Acid as the Tartar it self; The\nsame Vinous Juice after some time, especially if it be not carefully\nkept, Degenerates into that very sour Liquor called Vinegar; from\nwhich you may obtain by the Fire a Spirit and a Crystalline Salt\ndiffering enough from the Spirit and Lixiviate Salt of Tartar. And if\nyou pour the Dephlegm'd Spirit of the Vinegar upon the Salt of Tartar,\nthere will be produc'd such a Conflict or Ebullition as if there were\nscarce two more contrary Bodies in Nature; and oftentimes in this\nVinager you may observe part of the matter to be turned into an\ninnumerable company of swimming Animals, which our Friend having\ndivers years ago observed, hath in one of his Papers taught us how to\ndiscover clearly without the help of a _Microscope_.\n\nInto all these various Schemes of matter, or differingly Qualifyed\nBodies, besides divers others that I purposely forbear to mention, may\nthe Water that is imbib'd by the roots of the Vine be brought, partly\nby the formative power of the plant, and partly by supervenient Agents\nor Causes, without the visible concurrence of any extraneous\nIngredient; but if we be allowed to add to the Productions of this\ntransmuted Water a few other substances, we may much encrease the\nVariety of such Bodies; although in this second sort of Productions,\nthe Vinous parts seem scarce to retain any thing of the much more\nfix'd Bodies wherewith they were mingl'd; but only to have by their\nMixture with them acquir'd such a Disposition, that in their recess\noccasion'd by the Fire they came to be alter'd as to shape, or\nBigness, or both, and associated after a New manner. Thus, as I\nformerly told you, I did by the Addition of a _Caput Mortuum_ of\nAntimony, and some other Bodies unfit for Distillation, obtain from\ncrude Tartar, store of a very Volatile and Crystalline Salt, differing\nvery much in smell and other Qualities from the usuall salts of\nTartar.\n\nBut (sayes _Eleutherius_, interrupting him at these Words) if you have\nno restraint upon you, I would very gladly before you go any further,\nbe more particularly inform'd, how you make this Volatile Salt,\nbecause (you know) that such Multitudes of Chymists have by a scarce\nimaginable Variety of wayes, attempted in Vain the Volatilization of\nthe Salt of Tartar, that divers learned _Spagyrists_ speak as if it\nwere impossible, to make any thing out of Tartar, that shall be\nVolatile in a Saline Forme, or as some of them express it, _in forma\nsicca_. I am very farr from thinking (answers _Carneades_) that the\nSalt I have mention'd is that which _Paracelsus_ and _Helmont_ mean\nwhen they speak of _Sal Tartari Volatile_, and ascribe such great\nthings to it. For the Salt I speak of falls extreamly short of those\nVirtues, not seeming in its Tast, Smel, and other Obvious Qualities,\nto differ very much (though something it do differ) from Salt of\nHarts-horn, and other Volatile Salts drawn from the Distill'd Parts of\nAnimals. Nor have I yet made Tryals enough to be sure, that it is a\npure Salt of Tartar without participating any thing at all of the\nNitre, or Antimony. But because it seems more likely to proceed from\nthe Tartar, than from any of the other Ingredients, and because the\nExperiment is in it self not Ignoble, and Luciferous enough (as\nshewing a new way to produce a Volatile Salt contrary to Acid Salts\nfrom Bodies that otherwise are Observ'd to yield no such Liquor, but\neither only, or chiefly, Acid ones,) I shall, to satisfie you,\nacquaint you before any of my other Friends with the way I now use\n(for I have formerly us'd some others) to make it.\n\nTake then of good Antimony, Salt-Petre and Tartar, of each an equal\nweight, and of Quicklime Halfe the Weight of any one of them; let\nthese be powder'd and well mingl'd; this done, you must have in\nreadiness a long neck or Retort of Earth, which must be plac'd in a\nFurnace for a naked Fire, and have at the top of it a hole of a\nconvenient Bigness, at which you may cast in the Mixture, and\npresently stop it up again; this Vessel being fitted with a large\nReceiver must have Fire made under it, till the bottom of the sides be\nred hot, and then you must cast in the above prepar'd Mixture, by\nabout halfe a spoonfull (more or less) at a time, at the hole made for\nthat purpose; which being nimbly stopt, the Fumes will pass into the\nReceiver and condense there into a Liquor, that being rectifi'd will\nbe of a pure golden Colour, and carry up that colour to a great\nheight; this Spirit abounds in the Salt I told you of, part of which\nmay easily enough be separated by the way I use in such cases, which\nis, to put the Liquor into a glass Egg, or bolthead with a long and\nnarrow Neck. For if this be plac'd a little inclining in hot sand,\nthere will sublime up a fine Salt, which, as I told you, I find to be\nmuch of kin to the Volatile Salts of Animals: For like them it has a\nSaltish, not an Acid Salt; it hisses upon the Affusion of Spirit of\nNitre, or Oyle of Vitriol; it precipitates Corals Dissolv'd in Spirit\nof Vinager; it turnes the blew Syrup of Violets immediately green; it\npresently turnes the Solution of Sublimate into a Milkie whiteness;\nand in summ, has divers Operations like those that I have observ'd in\nthat sort of Salts to which I have resembled it: and is so Volatile,\nthat for Distinction sake, I call it _Tartari Fugitivus_ [Errata: Sal\nTartari Fugitivus]. What virtues it may have in Physick I have not yet\nhad the opportunity to Try; but I am apt to think they will not be\ndespicable. And besides that a very Ingenious Friend of mine tells me\nhe hath done great matters against the stone, with a Preparation not\nvery much Differing from ours, a very Experienc'd Germane Chymist\nfinding that I was unacquainted with the wayes of making this salt,\ntold me that in a great City in his Country, a noted Chymist prizes it\nso highly, that he had a while since procur'd a Priviledge from the\nMagistrates, that none but He, or by his Licence, should vent a Spirit\nmade almost after the same Way with mine, save that he leaves out one\nof the Ingredients, namely the Quick-lime. But, continues _Carneades_,\nto resume my Former Discourse where your Curiosity interrupted it;\n\nTis also a common practice in _France_ to bury thin Plates of Copper\nin the Marc (as the French call it) or Husks of Grapes, whence the\nJuice has been squeez'd out in the Wine-press, and by this means the\nmore saline parts of those Husks working by little and little upon the\nCopper, Coagulate Themselves with it into that Blewish Green Substance\nwe in English call Verdigrease. Of which I therefore take Notice,\nbecause having Distill'd it in a Naked Fire, I found as I expected,\nthat by the Association of the Saline with the Metalline parts, the\nformer were so alter'd, that the Distill'd Liquor, even without\nRectification, seem'd by smell and Tast, strong almost like _Aqua\nFortis_, and very much surpassed the purest and most Rectifi'd Spirit\nof Vinager that ever I made. And this Spirit I therefore ascribe to\nthe salt of the Husks alter'd by their Co-Mixture with the copper\n(though the Fire afterwards Divorce and Transmute them) because I\nfound this later in the bottom of the Retort in the Forme of a\n_Crocus_ or redish powder: And because Copper is of too sluggish a\nNature to be forc'd over in close Vessels by no stronger a heat. And\nthat which is also somewhat Remarkable in the Destillation of good\nVerdigrease, (or at least of that sort that I us'd) is this, that I\nNever could observe that it yielded me any oyl, (unless a little black\nslime which was separated in Rectification may pass for Oyle) though\nboth Tartar and Vinager, (especially the former) will by Destillation\nyield a Moderate proportion of it. If likewise you pour Spirit of\nVinager upon Calcin'd Lead, the Acid Salt of the Liquor will by its\nCommixture with the Metalline parts, though Insipid, acquire in a few\nhours a more than Saccharine sweetness; and these Saline parts being\nby a strong Fire Destill'd from the Lead wherewith they were imbody'd,\nwill, as I formerly also noted to a Different purpose, leave the Metal\nbehind them alter'd in some qualities from what it was, and will\nthemselves ascend, partly in the Forme of an unctuous Body or Oyle,\npartly in that of Phlegme; but for the greatest part in the Forme of a\nsubtile Spirit, indow'd, besides divers new Qualities which I am not\nnow willing to take notice of, with a strong smell very much other\nthan that of Vinager, and a piercing tast quite differing both from\nthe Sowerness of the Spirit of Vinager, and the Sweetness of the Sugar\nof Lead.\n\nTo be short, As the difference of Bodies may depend meerly upon that\nof the schemes whereinto their Common matter is put; So the seeds of\nThings, the Fire and the other Agents are able to alter the minute\nparts of a Body (either by breaking them into smaller ones of\ndiffering shapes, or by Uniting together these Fragments with the\nunbroken Corpuscles, or such Corpuscles among Themselves) and the same\nAgents partly by Altering the shape or bigness of the Constituent\nCorpuscles of a Body, partly by driving away some of them, partly by\nblending others with them, and partly by some new manner of connecting\nthem, may give the whole portion of matter a new Texture of its minute\nparts; and thereby make it deserve a new and Distinct name. So that\naccording as the small parts of matter recede from each other, or work\nupon each other, or are connected together after this or that\ndeterminate manner, a Body of this or that denomination is produced,\nas some other Body happens thereby to be alter'd or destroy'd.\n\nSince then those things which Chymists produce by the help of the Fire\nare but inanimate Bodies; since such fruits of the Chymists skill\ndiffer from one another but in so few qualities that we see plainly\nthat by fire and other Agents we can employ, we can easily enough work\nas great alterations upon matter, as those that are requisite to\nchange one of these Chymical Productions into another; Since the same\nportion of matter may without being Compounded with any extraneous\nBody, or at least Element, be made to put on such a variety of\nformes, and consequently to be (successively) turn'd into so many\ndiffering Bodies. And since the matter cloath'd with so many differing\nformes was originally but water, and that in its passage thorow so\nmany transformations, it was never reduc'd into any of those\nsubstances which are reputed to be the Principles or Elements of mixt\nBodies, except by the violence of the fire, which it self divides not\nBodies into perfectly simple or Elementary substances, but into new\nCompounds; Since, I say, these things are so, I see not why we must\nneeds believe that there are any Primogeneal and simple Bodies, of\nwhich as of Pre-exsistent Elements Nature is obliged to compound all\nothers. Nor do I see why we may not conceive that she may produce the\nBodies accounted mixt out of one another by Variously altering and\ncontriving their minute parts, without resolving the matter into any\nsuch simple or Homogeneous substances as are pretended. Neither, to\ndispatch, do I see why it should be counted absur'd [Transcriber's\nNote: absurd] to think, that when a Body is resolv'd by the Fire into\nits suppos'd simple Ingredients, those substances are not true and\nproper Elements, but rather were, as it were, Accidentally produc'd by\nthe fire, which by Dissipating a Body into minute Parts does, if those\nparts be shut up in Close Vessels, for the most part necessarily bring\nthem to Associate Themselves after another manner than before, and so\nbring Them into Bodies of such Different Consistences as the Former\nTexture of the Body, and Concurrent Circumstances make such disbanded\nparticles apt to Constitute; as experience shews us (and I have both\nnoted it, and prov'd it already) that as there are some Concretes\nwhose parts when dissipated by fire are fitted to be put into such\nSchemes of matter as we call Oyle, and Salt, and Spirit; So there are\nothers, such as are especially the greatest part of Minerals, whose\nCorpuscles being of another Size or figure, or perhaps contriv'd\nanother Way, will not in the Fire yield Bodies of the like\nConsistences, but rather others of differing Textures; Not to mention,\nthat from Gold and some other Bodies, we see not that the Fire\nseparates any Distinct Substances at all; nor That even those Similar\nParts of Bodies which the Chymists Obtain by the Fire, are the\nElements whose names they bear, but Compound Bodies, upon which, for\ntheir resemblance to them in consistence, or some other obvious\nQuality, Chymists have been pleas'd to bestow such Appellations.\n\n\n\n\nTHE CONCLUSION.\n\n\nThese last Words of _Carneades_ being soon after follow'd by a noise\nwhich seem'd to come from the place where the rest of the Company was,\nhe took it for a warning, that it was time for him to conclude or\nbreak off his Discourse; and told his Friend; By this time I hope you\nsee, _Eleutherius_, that if _Helmonts_ Experiments be true, it is no\nabsurdity to question whether that Doctrine be one, that doth not\nassert Any Elements in the sence before explain'd. But because that,\nas divers of my Arguments suppose the marvellous power of the\n_Alkahest_ in the Analyzing of Bodies, so the Effects ascrib'd to that\npower are so unparallell'd and stupendious, that though I am not sure\nbut that there _may be_ such an Agent, yet little less than [Greek:\nautopsia] seems requisite to make a man sure there _is_. And\nconsequently I leave it to you to judge, how farre those of my\nArguments that are built upon _Alkahestical_ Operations are weakned by\nthat Liquors being Matchless; and shall therefore desire you not to\nthink that I propose this Paradox that rejects all Elements, as an\nOpinion equally probable with the former part of my discourse. For by\nthat, I hope, you are satisfied, that the Arguments wont to be brought\nby Chymists, to prove That all Bodies consist of either Three\nPrinciples, or Five, are far from being so strong as those that I have\nemploy'd to prove, that there is not any certain and Determinate\nnumber of such Principles or Elements to be met with Universally in\nall mixt Bodies. And I suppose I need not tell you, that these\n_Anti-Chymical_ Paradoxes might have been manag'd more to their\nAdvantage; but that having not confin'd my Curiosity to Chymical\nExperiments, I who am but a young Man, and younger Chymist, can yet be\nbut slenderly furnished with them, in reference to so great and\ndifficult a Task as you impos'd upon me; Besides that, to tell you the\nTruth, I durst not employ some even of the best Experiments I am\nacquainted with, because I must not yet disclose them; but however, I\nthink I may presume that what I have hitherto Discoursed will induce\nyou to think, that Chymists have been much more happy in finding\nExperiments than the Causes of them; or in assigning the Principles by\nwhich they may best be explain'd. And indeed, when in the writings of\n_Paracelsus_ I meet with such Phantastick and Un-intelligible\nDiscourses as that Writer often puzzels and tyres his Reader with,\nfather'd upon such excellent Experiments, as though he seldom clearly\nteaches, I often find he knew; me thinks the Chymists, in their\nsearches after truth, are not unlike the Navigators of _Solomons\nTarshish_ Fleet, who brought home from their long and tedious Voyages,\nnot only Gold, and Silver, and Ivory, but Apes and Peacocks too; For\nso the Writings of several (for I say not, all) of your Hermetick\nPhilosophers present us, together with divers Substantial and noble\nExperiments, Theories, which either like Peacocks feathers make a\ngreat shew, but are neither solid nor useful; or else like Apes, if\nthey have some appearance of being rational, are blemish'd with some\nabsurdity or other, that when they are _Attentively_ consider'd, makes\nthem appear Ridiculous.\n\n_Carneades_ having thus finish'd his Discourse against the received\nDoctrines of the _Elements_; _Eleutherius_ judging he should not have\ntime to say much to him before their separation, made some haste to\ntell him; I confess, _Carneades_, that you have said more in favour of\nyour Paradoxes then I expected. For though divers of the Experiments\nyou have mention'd are no secrets, and were not unknown to me, yet\nbesides that you have added many of your own unto them, you have laid\nthem together in such a way, and apply'd them to such purposes, and\nmade such Deductions From them, as I have not Hitherto met with.\n\nBut though I be therefore inclin'd to think, that _Philoponus_, had he\nheard you, would scarce have been able in all points to defend the\nChymical _Hypothesis_ against the arguments wherewith you have oppos'd\nit; yet me thinks that however your Objections seem to evince a great\npart of what they pretend to, yet they evince it not all; and the\nnumerous tryals of those you call the vulgar Chymists, may be allow'd\nto prove something too.\n\nWherefore, if it be granted you that you have made it probable,\n\nFirst, that the differing substances into which mixt Bodies are wont\nto be resolved by the Fire are not of a pure and an Elementary nature,\nespecially for this Reason, that they yet retain so much of the nature\nof the Concrete that afforded them, as to appear to be yet somewhat\ncompounded, and oftentimes to differ in one Concrete from Principles\nof the same denomination in another:\n\nNext, that as to the number of these differing substances, neither is\nit precisely three, because in most Vegetable and Animal bodies Earth\nand Phlegme are also to be found among their Ingredients; nor is there\nany one determinate number into which the Fire (as it is wont to be\nemploy'd) does precisely and universally resolve all compound Bodies\nwhatsoever, as well Minerals as others that are reputed perfectly\nmixt.\n\nLastly, that there are divers Qualities which cannot well be refer'd\nto any of these Substances, as if they primarily resided in it and\nbelong'd to it; and some other qualities, which though they seem to\nhave their chief and most ordinary residence in some one of these\nPrinciples or Elements of mixt Bodies, are not yet so deducible from\nit, but that also some more general Principles must be taken in to\nexplicate them.\n\nIf, I say, the Chymists (continues _Eleutherius_) be so Liberall as to\nmake you these three Concessions, I hope you will, on your part, be so\ncivil and Equitable as to grant them these three other propositions,\nnamely;\n\nFirst, that divers Mineral Bodies, and therefore probably all the\nrest, may be resolv'd into a Saline, a Sulphureous, and a Mercurial\npart; And that almost all Vegetable and Animal Concretes may, if not\nby the Fire alone, yet, by a skilfull Artist Employing the Fire as\nhis chief Instrument, be divided into five differing Substances, Salt,\nSpirit, Oyle, Phlegme and Earth; of which the three former by reason\nof their being so much more Operative than the Two Later, deserve to\nbe Lookt upon as the Three active Principles, and by way of Eminence\nto be call'd the three principles of mixt bodies.\n\nNext, that these Principles, Though they be not perfectly Devoid of\nall Mixture, yet may without inconvenience be stil'd the Elements of\nCompounded bodies, and bear the Names of those Substances which they\nmost Resemble, and which are manifestly predominant in them; and that\nespecially for this reason, that none of these Elements is Divisible\nby the Fire into Four or Five differing substances, like the Concrete\nwhence it was separated.\n\nLastly, That Divers of the Qualities of a mixt Body, and especially\nthe Medical Virtues, do for the most part lodge in some One or Other\nof its principles, and may Therefore usefully be sought for in That\nPrinciple sever'd from the others.\n\nAnd in this also (pursues _Eleutherius_) methinks both you and the\nChymists may easily agree, that the surest way is to Learn by\nparticular Experiments, what differing parts particular Bodies do\nconsist of, and by what wayes (either Actual or potential fire) they\nmay best and most Conveniently be Separated, as without relying too\nmuch upon the Fire alone, for the resolving of Bodies, so without\nfruitlessly contending to force them into more Elements than Nature\nmade Them up of, or strip the sever'd Principles so naked, as by\nmaking Them Exquisitely Elementary to make them almost useless,\n\nThese things (subjoynes _Eleu._) I propose, without despairing to see\nthem granted by you; not only because I know that you so much preferr\nthe Reputation of _Candor_ before that of subtility, that your having\nonce suppos'd a truth would not hinder you from imbracing it when\nclearly made out to you; but because, upon the present occasion, it\nwill be no disparagement to you to recede from some of your Paradoxes,\nsince the nature and occasion of your past Discourse did not oblige\nyou to declare your own opinions, but only to personate an Antagonist\nof the Chymists. So that (concludes he, with a smile) you may now by\ngranting what I propose, add the Reputation of Loving the truth\nsincerely to that of having been able to oppose it subtilly.\n\n_Carneades's_ haste forbidding him to answer this crafty piece of\nflattery; Till I shal (sayes he) have an opportunity to acquaint you\nwith my own Opinions about the controversies I have been discoursing\nof, you will not, I hope, expect I should declare my own sence of the\nArguments I have employ'd. Wherefore I shall only tell you thus much\nat present; that though not only an acute Naturalist, but even I my\nself could take plausible Exceptions at some of them; yet divers of\nthem too are such as will not perhaps be readily answer'd, and will\nReduce my Adversaries, at least, to alter and Reform their\n_Hypothesis_. I perceive I need not minde you that the Objections I\nmade against the Quaternary of Elements and Ternary of Principles\nneeded not to be oppos'd so much against the Doctrines Themselves\n(either of which, especially the latter, may be much more probably\nmaintain'd than hitherto it seems to have been, by those Writers for\nit I have met with) as against the unaccurateness and the\nunconcludingness of the _Analytical_ Experiments vulgarly Relyed On to\nDemonstrate them.\n\nAnd therefore, if either of the two examin'd Opinions, or any other\nTheory of Elements, shall upon rational and Experimental grounds be\nclearly made out to me; 'Tis Obliging, but not irrational, in you to\nExpect, that I shall not be so farr in Love with my Disquieting\nDoubts, as not to be content to change them for undoubted truths. And\n(concludes _Carneades_ smiling) it were no great disparagement for a\nSceptick to confesse to you, that as unsatisfy'd as the past discourse\nmay have made you think me with the Doctrines of the Peripateticks,\nand the Chymists, about the Elements and Principles, I can yet so\nlittle discover what to acquiesce in, that perchance the Enquiries of\nothers have scarce been more unsatisfactory to me, than my own have\nbeen to my self.\n\n\n_FINIS._\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nThe Authors constant Absence from the Presse, whilst the former\nTreatise was Printing, and the Nature of the Subject it self,\nwherewith ordinary Composers are not wont to be at all acquainted,\nwill, 'tis hop'd, procure the Readers Excuse, till the next Edition,\nif the _Errata_ be somewhat numerous, and if among them there want not\nsome grosser mistakes, which yet are not the only Blemishes these\nlines must take notice of and acknowledg; For the Author now perceives\nthat through the fault of those to whom he had committed the former\nTreatise in loose Sheets, some Papers that belonged to it, have\naltogether miscarryed. And though it have luckily enough happen'd, for\nthe most part, that the Omission of them does not marr the Cohaerence\nof the rest; yet till the next design'd Edition afford an\n_opportunity_ of inserting them, it is thought fit that the Printer\ngive notice of one Omission at the End of the first Dialogue; and that\nto these _Errata_ there be annex'd the ensuing sheet of Paper, that\nwas casually lost, or forgotten by him that should have put it into\nthe Presse; where it ought to have been inserted, in the 187. printed\nPage, at the break, betwixt the words, [_Nature_] in the 13th. line,\nand [_But_] in the next line after. Though it is to be noted here,\nthat by the mistake of the Printer, in some Books, the number of 187\nis placed at the top of two somewhat distant pages; and in such copies\nthe following addition ought to be inserted in the latter of the two,\nas followeth.\n\n     And on this occasion I cannot but take notice, that whereas\n     the great Argument which the Chymists are wont to employ to\n     vilify Earth and Water, and make them be look'd upon as\n     useless and unworthy to be reckon'd among the Principles of\n     Mixt Bodies, is, that they are not endow'd with Specifick\n     Properties, but only with Elementary qualities; of which\n     they use to speak very sleightingly, as of qualities\n     contemptible and unactive: I see no sufficient Reason for\n     this Practice of the Chymists: For 'tis confess'd that Heat\n     is an Elementary Quality, and yet that an almost innumerable\n     company of considerable Things are perform'd by Heat, is\n     manifest to them that duly consider the various _Phaenomena_\n     wherein it intervenes as a principall Actor; and none ought\n     less to ignore or distrust this Truth then a Chymist. Since\n     almost all the operations and Productions of his Art are\n     performed chiefly by the means of Heat. And as for Cold it\n     self, upon whose account they so despise the Earth and\n     Water, if they please to read in the Voyages of our English\n     and Dutch Navigators in _Nova Zembla_ and other Northern\n     Regions what stupendious Things may be effected by Cold,\n     they would not perhaps think it so despicable. And not to\n     repeat what I lately recited to You out of _Paracelsus_\n     himself, who by the help of an intense Cold teaches to\n     separate the Quintessence of Wine; I will only now observe\n     to You, that the Conservation of the Texture of many Bodies\n     both animate and inanimate do's so much depend upon the\n     convenient motion both of their own Fluid and Looser Parts,\n     and of the ambient Bodies, whether Air, Water, &c. that not\n     only in humane Bodies we see that the immoderate or\n     unseasonable coldness of the Air (especially when it finds\n     such Bodies overheated) do's very frequently discompose the\n     _Oeconomie_ of them, and occasion variety of Diseases; but\n     in the solid and durable Body of Iron it self, in which one\n     would not expect that suddain Cold should produce any\n     notable change, it may have so great an operation, that if\n     you take a Wire, or other slender piece of steel, and having\n     brought it in the fire to a white heat, You suffer it\n     afterwards to cool leasurely in the Air, it will when it is\n     cold be much of the same hardnesse it was of before: Whereas\n     if as soon as You remove it from the fire, you plunge it\n     into cold water, it will upon the sudden Refrigeration\n     acquire a very much greater hardness then it had before;\n     Nay, and will become manifestly brittle. And that you may\n     not impute this to any peculiar Quality in the Water, or\n     other Liquor, or Unctuous matter, wherein such heated steel\n     is wont to be quenched that it may be temper'd; I know a\n     very skillful Tradesman, that divers times hardens steel by\n     suddenly cooling it in a Body that is neither a liquor, nor\n     so much as moist. A tryal of that Nature I remember I have\n     seen made. And however by the operation that Water has upon\n     steel quenched in it, whether upon the Account of its\n     coldness and moisture, or upon that of any other of its\n     qualities, it appears, that water is not alwaies so\n     inefficacious and contemptible a Body, as our Chymists would\n     have it passe for. And what I have said of the Efficacy of\n     Cold and Heat, might perhaps be easily enough carried\n     further by other considerations and experiments; were it not\n     that having been mention'd only upon the Bye, I must not\n     insist on it, but proceed to another Subject.\n\n\n\n\n_ERRATA._\n\n\nPag. 5. line. 6. read _so qualify'd_, 15. 19. _Ratiocinations_, 25.\n15. _for a_, 33. 17. in a parenth. (_that is no more_), 51. 24.\n_besides another Caput_, 79. 10. _employ_, 86. 13. _structure_, 97.\n13. _Sack_, ibid. 22. _Sack_, 104. 29. instead of _appear it, will_,\nleg. _appear, it will_, 118. 20. _leasure_, ibid. _principal_, 126.\n20. _and till it suffer_, 129. 3. leg. in parenth. (_notwithstanding,\n&c._ 131. 15. _so_, 144. 15. [Greek: Synchysis], 151. 5. _nor have\nbeen resolved_, 180. 25. _Magistram_, 185. 15. _lately_, 188. 15.\n_tunned_, 200. 1. _intolerable_, ibid. 2. _in_, 209. 21. _tegularum_,\n210. 7. _distill'd from_, 215. 25. dele _the_, 220. 1. _bodies_, 228.\n11. [Transcriber's Note: 21.] _fugitive_, 231. 17. instead of _all_\nlege _a pound_, 237. 6. _Chymist_, 248. 18. _Ashes off_, 251. 23.\n_Deopilative)_, 259. 6. _it self_, 269. 10. [Greek: ousia analogos],\n_ibid._ [Greek: astron stoicheio], 276. 25. make a parenth. at the\nwords, _by the_, and shut it after the words in the 27. line _at all_,\n280. 11. _Corals_, 288. 6. _ascribes_, 294. 22. _porosity_, ibid. 28.\n_noted_, 296. 1. _Bodies_, 305. 8. _(attended_, 307. 12. dele _to_,\n308. 12. _devisers_, 312. 14. _and_, 313. 3. _too_, 314. 24.\n_fugitivenesse_, 333. 13. _origine_, ibid. 24. _contrivance of_, 339.\n1. _Nay, Barthias_, 142. [Transcriber's Note: 342.] 3. _in; I will_,\n350. 26. _absurd_, 356. 11. [Transcriber's Note: 21.] _Goutieres_,\n358. 6. _antea_, 360. 1. _compertissimum_, ibid. 18. _Joachimica_,\nibid. 19 _graminis_, ibid. 23. _sua_ [Transcriber's Note: this appears\nto be correct on the original page 360], 362. 6. _Dutch account_, 363.\n2. _diggers)_, ibid. 11. and 12. lin. read _damp as the Englishmen\nalso call it_, 366. 25. _a height_, 368. 19. _in use_, 370. 9.\n_latter; And_, ibid. 24. _Water; I_, 377. 22. _Rest_, ibid. 25.\n_know)_, 378. 23. after _Aggregate_ insert _or complex_, ibid. 27.\ndele ), ibid. 28. dele ), 379. 4. before _as_ begin a parenth. which\nends lin. 9. at _Gold_, ibid. instead of _Which_, put _This_, ibid.\n12. with the word _Texture_ should be connected the next line,\n_Though_, and this word _Though_ is to have put before it a\nparenthesis, which is to end at the word _Fluid_ in the 16th. line,\n383. 3. _Regulus Martis Stellatus_, 382. 3. _Relations_, ibid. 9.\n_Chymist_, 386. 29. _confesse by teaching it_, 391. 8. _and yet may_,\n392. 1. _an_, ibid. 12. _of_, 393. [Transcriber's Note: line 5]\n_distinct Tasts_, 397. 13. _Talck_, 398. 18. _Earth_, 399. 18.\n_parts_, 404. 8. _sal-petrae_, 419. 20. after _it_ put in _Sal_.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\n_The Publisher doth advertise the Redaer [Transcriber's Note: Reader],\nthat seeing there are divers Experiments related in this Treatise,\nwhich the Author is not unwilling to submit to the consideration also\nof Forraign Philosophers, he believes this piece will be very soon\ntranslated into Latin._\n\n\nEND.","title":"The Sceptical Chymist: or Chymico-Physical Doubts & Paradoxes, Touching the Spagyrist's Principles Commonly call'd Hypostatical; As they are wont to be Propos'd and Defended by the Generality of Alchymists. Whereunto is pr\u00e6mis'd Part of another Discourse relating to the same Subject.","tradition":"philosophy-ethics","translated_text":null,"word_count":88742}