What, then, is Evolution? That it is a slow process in the case of humanity,
experience would seem to show; but since Lord Rayleigh calculates the
age of Mother Earth to be 925 million years, the possibility of endless cycles suggests
itself. That, by means of a ceaseless chemical operation, the elements (which we are
constantly and confidently "discovering") become merged in forms variously known
as coal, diamonds, lead, gold, and a host of other commercial practicabilities, would seem
to be a Truth as opposed to a Theory. And since many natural processes can be artificially
reproduced, why not this wedding of atom to atom?
Professor Richardson, speaking of recent experiments relating to the structure of
the nucleus of atoms, declared the artificial transmutation of chemical elements to be now
an established fact. In short, it would almost seem that we find ourselves upon the eve of
"discovering" the Philosopher's Stone of medieval alchemy. Professor
Irving Fisher, of Yale, recently
startled the world by announcing that a German chemist had succeeded in making synthetic
gold from base metals by means of an electric vacuum furnace. Referring to this alleged
experiment, in an interview with a representative of the "Daily Mail," Dr.
Irvine Masson, of University College, London, said: "So far no definite transmutation
of an element by building up heavy atoms of gold from lighter metals has been achieved. On
the other hand, Sir Ernest
Rutherford has disintegrated certain of the lighter elements into one still lighter.
While one cannot say it is impossible, there seems no reason why gold should be specially
singled out by Nature to be the ultimate product of a building-up or breaking-down
process.
"Supposing a certain amount of gold had been found to be a product of change,
the question would arise as to the utility of the process. At present the only
transmutation that has been affected has been, from the productive point of view,
extraordinarily ineffective and extravagant. I think that most scientists are interested
in these alleged discoveries, but are inclined to be somewhat skeptical until definite
proofs are forthcoming, which is my position in the present case."
But whatever the facts may be regarding this modern operation, the attitude of
leading scientists toward the possibilities of the German's vacuum furnace; yet the author
of the present work, whose researches into the subject of Alchemy have been exhaustive,
appears to have found good reason to believe that some of these made synthetic gold! In
the preface to his "Alchemy, Ancient and
Modern." Mr. Stanley Redgrave says: "The number of books in the English
language dealing with the interesting subject of Alchemy, is not sufficiently great to
render an apology necessary for adding thereto. Indeed, at the present time, there is an
actual need for a further contribution on this subject."
The present work is apparently written with a view to rectifying certain
misconceptions which are held by those who have criticized adversely the claims of the old
alchemists. This the author has sought to do by quoting verbatim from the alchemystical
writers themselves. That he has an extensive library dealing with this subject, goes
without saying; and of his deep and wide personal inquiries mention has already been made.
His style betrays a profound belief in alchemy or, as he terms it, "the law of
evolution as applicable to metals and minerals." In this he evidently does not stand
alone, as men eminent in science are to-day holding this view as an hypothesis, and are
making more than tentative experiments to test it.
The "Periodic Table of
Mendeleeff"
points in this direction, at least as certainly as fossils do in the evolution of animal
and vegetable life. Sir Edward Thorpe and others have indicated definite numerical
relations between the members of the halogen group of Fluorine, Chlorine, Bromine, and
Iodine. Also in the case of the nitrogen group of Nitrogen, Phosphorus, Arsenic, Antimony,
and Bismuth. Apparently similar relations can be shown to exist between the members of the
following group: Lithium, Sodium, Copper, Silver and Gold. "These numerical
relations," says the author, "seem to suggest affinity, even if they are far
from proving it, and affinity suggests at least a common parentage.
"Some investigators would appear to find in their study of alchemy, ground for
putting forward an hypothesis that dogmas of religious belief are the foundations on which
alchemic writers have raised a bizarre temple of chemistry. Further, that his chemistry
was never practically achieved, but only used symbolically to veil certain tenets of
religion, such as the trinity. However, considering the testimony on von Helmont and
others, which cannot be lightly set aside, and also the experiments of present-day
scientists, which far from disproving a law of evolution in metals, tend, indeed, to
affirm it, such an hypothesis seems inadequate to account for the existence of alchemic
literature."
Chemistry has been styled "the wise daughter of a foolish mother," but we
see today that the daughter is investigating the maternal fairy tales with the utmost
caution, lest they should be found too true. World-wide interests would be jeopardized by
a discovery of the method of making gold by synthesis; and it is really remarkable that
more fiction has not been written around this fascinating subject.
A cipher manuscript, by Friar Bacon, is now being investigated in America with a
view to decoding it, and perhaps of getting at the truth of gold evolution. One would
imagine it to be almost certain, however, that Bacon omits the names of his ingredients,
or else supplies false names, as do other writers. There are many ciphers in alchemic
literature which have been discovered such names as vitriolum, antimony, saturn (lead),
stannum (tin), etc. each of which is condemned as an ingredient by a consensus of writers
of repute. Doubtless, they are interpolated to distract the attention of the student from
the name of their "proxima materia", which name they have mentioned openly and
in the vulgar tongue.
This name according to the author of the present work is given in order to acquaint
the alchemist's unknown brother adepts with the fact that he knows the material; it is not
written for the information of the tyro. Thus, Sendivogius writes that he "intimated
the art from word to word," but that his hearers "could by no means
understand" him. Basil Valentine named the substance openly. Eirenaeus Philalethes
asserts that he could tell true writers from sophisters "by a secret character."
Therefore, he must have found this word or character in the writers form whom he quotes.
It is, then, for others to find, but probably not in a cipher.
Alchemy, at one time, was undoubtedly under the aegis of the Church. The names of
Flamel, Basil Valentine and Bernard Trevisan may be cited, but without undue stress; in
the cases of Bacon, Ripley and Lully, the evidence is stronger. Ripley had the permission
of the Church to withdraw from his sacerdotal duties, in order to devote himself to
alchemy. It is impossible to conceive of the sanction of the Church being given if the art
were fraudulent in all instances. History places it on record that certain alchemists were
imprisoned by the sovereigns of states, not for fraud, but for refusing to exercise their
art or to impart its secret. This seems to imply that success in the art had been proved
beyond doubt.
These hypotheses, and others which arise out of them, are extraordinarily
fascinating; but after all is said, remains the concrete fact that there has been in the
present day no accredited demonstration of the art perfected, the great work of
transmuting baser metals into silver or gold. Nevertheless, some of the foremost
scientists of Europe and America are turning their eyes in the direction of that star
which beckoned to Raymond Lully.
We are possibly about to witness the phenomenon of the Philosopher's Stone,
"myth" of ancient superstition, emerging, tangible, from an electric vacuum
furnace! Who, now, shall deny the existence of fairies or doubt the birth of the Gods?
SAX ROHMER.
BRUTON STREET.
February 5th, 1923.
Copyright © 1997-2002 Lawrence Knapp. All rights reserved.
