One of the most important salts around 1400 was saltpetre. You can probably guess why.
There were a few more.
Copper sulphate, zinc salt, etc.
You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
Login to view.
[
attachment=9370]
Saltpetre used to be collected in pigsties.
(04-11-2024, 11:55 AM)Aga Tentakulus Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.One of the most important salts around 1400 was saltpetre. You can probably guess why.
Yes, for gunpowder. In Latin alchemy "sal petrae".
(04-11-2024, 10:15 AM)Ruby Novacna Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Perhaps this "salt" existed under another name?
There is also arsenic ("sal arsenicum"). Arsenic may be a cover name, German
Deckname for something else, as usual. In pseudo-Arnaldus de Villa Nova's
Speculum Alchimiae:
Quote:Nostra autem sublimatio est sine fæcibus: quia argentum vivum nostrum est aqua clarissima: & arsenicum nostrum est argentum purum: & sulphur nostrum est aurum purum: & in istis tribus consistit tota perfectio.
Translated by ChatGPT:
Quote:But our sublimation is without dregs; for our living silver is the clearest water; and our arsenic is pure silver; and our sulfur is pure gold; and in these three consists the whole perfection.
My question is: Was there an alchemist before Paracelsus who permanently introduced salt as a basic substance? Paracelsus had probably adopted the "tria prima" doctrine from the book of the Holy Trinity by the Franciscan Ulmannus. As far as I know, however, the book had no widespread effect in his time. It was Paracelsus who first spread the idea that the formless primary substance, the iliaster, was organized according to sulphur, mercury and salt. Is this correct ?
(04-11-2024, 05:38 PM)bi3mw Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.My question is: Was there an alchemist before Paracelsus who permanently introduced salt as a basic substance? Paracelsus had probably adopted the "tria prima" doctrine from the book of the Holy Trinity by the Franciscan Ulmannus. As far as I know, however, the book had no widespread effect in his time. It was Paracelsus who first spread the idea that the formless primary substance, the iliaster, was organized according to sulphur, mercury and salt. Is this correct ?
al-Razi in 925 I believe. I read a great article about salt in alchemy online about its importance to alchemy. At least two years ago! I will dig it up.
Well this isn’t the article, but until I find it, this post cites the same info and sources: You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
Login to view.. It was al-Razi (died 925), who added salt as body to mercury and Sulphur as mind and soul. Paracelsus read him widely, as who wouldn’t, he was a prodigy of brilliant good sense at a time when mysticism obscured anything to do with alchemy-medicine. I remember listening to a full podcast about him and his accomplishments in medicine were immense.
(04-11-2024, 06:56 PM)Barbrey Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.It was al-Razi (died 925), who added salt as body to mercury and Sulphur as mind and soul. Paracelsus read him widely
Maybe but the alleged transmission needed a published European translation and it is not explained in the book that the blog uses as source - John Eberly's
Al-Kimia: The Mystical Islamic Essence of the Sacred Art of Alchemy (2004) how it may have happened.
Most of the Arabic alchemy books available in Europe (through Latin translations) were pseudoepigraphia, written (maybe) by followers of Geber (Jabir) and Rasis (Al-Razi) centuries after their deaths.
(04-11-2024, 07:59 PM)nablator Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Maybe but the alleged transmission needed a published European translation ....
Latin 6514, "Rhazis", Liber de aluminibus et salibus in arte chymica necessariis ( The Book of Alums and Salts )
You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
Login to view.
edit: Is it Pseudo-"Rhazis" ?
(04-11-2024, 08:24 PM)bi3mw Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.edit: Is it Pseudo-"Rhazis" ?
Yes, that's one of the pseudoepigraphia (known Arabic source, not Al-Razi) translated to Latin by Gerard of Cremona in the 12th century.
The source for "Razi added a third principle" (Salt) is not given in John Eberly's book, so it is difficult to check.
I tried to google the other author mentioned, Haage, (I believe this is Bernard Dietrich Haage) that said the same thing but all the results are in German. He might have sourced it.
@bi3mw did you mention it’s used as tria prima in the Book of the Holy Trinity? And by the way, are you able to read the Buch? I’ve only been able to read about it as I don’t read either language and there’s no English translation.
(04-11-2024, 09:23 PM)Barbrey Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.@bi3mw did you mention it’s used as tria prima in the Book of the Holy Trinity? And by the way, are you able to read the Buch? I’ve only been able to read about it as I don’t read either language and there’s no English translation.
I once had the local university print out a page-by-page transcription of the following work:
Das "Buch der Heiligen Dreifaltigkeit" Uwe Junker, Kölner medizinhistorische Beiträge, Cologne 1986
I was able to read that transkription, but I find the original very difficult.