Alchemy

The malice of a certain person publishing to the public another’s stolen and corrupted preface.

is my new opinion, I who neither wish to be nor to be called a Paracelsian: although recently certain persons, without my knowledge, have wickedly published a certain corrupted paper under the title of a Book against the opinion of Erastus on potable gold, in which, by changing a denial into an affirmation, it was made to appear as if I were of the flock of Paracelsus. If they object that I am determined to be such a one on account of the Paracelsian materials employed, you should know that I do not publish them as being for the Paracelsians—though they may bear the name of that publisher—but as the inventions of the ancient Chemists, since Paracelsus himself in his Chirurgia Magna says that he made public the commentaries of the ancients, not that he invented them. What does it matter, moreover, if even through an evil man some good has come forth? Can we expostulate with God, who preached even through Judas the traitor and poured forth prophecies through Balaam? Albucasis has many techniques, and also names (such as crocus martis, thiri, cachimiæ, etc.) usurped by Paracelsus, although the latter, in his book on serpents, makes the devil the teacher of men and the inventor of all arts. Chemistry is not the invention of Paracelsus; it ought not to be attributed to him, and this book with its commentaries will show that only the smallest part of this knowledge is owed to him, although there are already in public things far more noble than that impure magus could ever achieve. Chemistry would be in a miserable state if it had to be established from Paracelsus. I have consulted not only Paracelsian works and the published volumes and labors of our own writers, both ancient and modern, but also many manuscripts never seen in public, and compiled even before Paracelsus was in the nature of things.

But enough and more than enough concerning that sewer. I have omitted magical and superstitious matters concerning magnetisms, the effect of imagination, the homunculus, gemmahuijs, etc.; nor have I given instructions on how a man might be manufactured through chemical putrefactions from bread and wine, or seed, in a little furnace of secrets. Nor have I contaminated this honest art with the fiction of the generation of woods and birds from burnt ashes. These are the filths of Paracelsian impiety and lies. I have also omitted other things, especially compositions more arrogant and laborious than they are fruitful, lest anyone take offense. The phantasms of just anyone cannot be brought into the art; and the number of compositions is infinite: let each man rejoice in his own privately, as he pleases. Yet this also must be confessed, that I