Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
www.brill.com/esm
Abstract
Continental authors and editors often sought to ground alchemical writing within a
long-established, coherent and pan-European tradition, appealing to the authority of
adepts from different times and places. Greek, Latin and Islamic alchemists met both
in person and between the covers of books, in actual, fictional or coincidental encounters: a trope utilised in Michael Maiers Symbola aureae mensae duodecim nationum
(1617). This essay examines how works attributed to an English authority, George
Ripley (d. c. 1490), were received in central Europe and incorporated into continental
compendia. Placed alongside works by the philosophers of other nations, Ripleys
writings helped affirm the unity and truth of alchemy in defiance of its critics. His
continental editors were therefore concerned not only with the provenance of manuscripts and high-quality exemplars, but by a range of other factors, including the desire
to suppress controversial material, intervene in contemporary polemics, and defend
their art. In the resulting compilations, the vertical axis of alchemys long, diachronic
tradition may be compared to the horizontal plane of pan-European alchemy.
Keywords
George Ripley, alchemy, peregrinatio academica, translation, Michael Maier, Andreas
Libavius, Ludwig Combach
DOI: 10.1163/15733823-175000A2
478
Introduction
Alchemy, like other branches of natural knowledge, enjoyed a vigorous
circulation in early modern Europe. Offering philosophical speculation,
practical recipes, polemical attacks and passionate defences (several of
these functions sometimes combined in a single text), alchemical writing traversed the continent via manuscript and printed book, in compendia and correspondence, through practical demonstration and by
word of mouth. Practitioners of alchemy also travelled, or were perceived to have travelled, far and wide: seeking to acquire the wisdom
of their own and other nations; sometimes acquiring the sobriquet
Cosmopolite in the process.1 From the latter half of the sixteenth century,
this pan-national pursuit also served rhetorical ends, in defending the
reputation of alchemy from its critics. From their vantage points at the
urban, courtly and academic hubs of Central Europe, a host of writers,
editors and practitioners appealed to the authority of alchemists from
far-flung regions to support their contention that all the philosophershowever dispersed in time and placeessentially spoke with
one voice, testifying to the universal truth of alchemy, grounded in an
overarching prisca philosophia.2
The conference of philosophers provided both a literary trope and a
practical reality. In late medieval florilegia such as the Rosarium philo
sophorum, the words of many and varied authorities were accommodated within a single text, while the commonplacing of dicta and
recipes enabled physical encounters between the words, if not the persons, of the philosophers.3 Within individual tracts, however, authori Famous examples include such legendary, wandering adepts as Alexander Seton and
Eirenaeus Philalethes, able to live off their alchemical expertise; see William R.
Newman, Gehennical Fire: The Lives of George Starkey, an American Alchemist in the
Scientific Revolution (Cambridge, MA, 1994), Introduction. The grittier practicalities
of alchemical peregrinations are explored by Tara Nummedal, Alchemy and Authority
in the Holy Roman Empire (Chicago, 2006), 30-32 and passim.
2)
On the universality of alchemical knowledge, see also Stephen Clucas, Alchemy
and Certainty in the Seventeenth Century, in Lawrence M. Principe, ed., Chymists
and Chymistry: Studies in the History of Alchemy and Early Modern Chemistry (Sagamore
Beach, MA, 2007), 39-51; and the essays by Hkan Hkansson and Vera Keller in this
volume.
3)
See Joachim Telle, ed., Rosarium Philosophorum. Ein alchemisches Florilegium des
Sptmittelalters. (Faksimilie der illustrierten Erstausgabe Frankfurt 1550), 2 vols.
1)
479
480
481
482
483
The travels and travails of the alchemist are familiar topoi of alchemical texts, and given the prevalence of pseudo-epigraphic works in the
Ripley corpus, these autobiographical assertions should be handled with
care. Such survivals nevertheless illustrate an interesting trend in Ripleys later reception, in which the Yorkshire canon is extracted from his
geographically remote starting point and resituated within a wider
European tradition. The relationship between knowledge and travel,
often worked out through the peripatetic lives of alchemical practi
tioners, is explicit in Ripleys methodology. Dissatisfied by the inade
quacies of English learning, he embarks for the great heartlands of
alchemical knowledge: Italy and the German lands. Having acquired
the necessary knowledge from continental masters, he makes the return
voyage to England to compose his works, unaware that a century later
his physical and intellectual peregrinatio alchemica would be curiously
echoed by the activities of his own continental editors.
Early Editions
Even as Ripleys reputation blossomed in England, his alchemy took
root abroad, with Latin translations of Ripleian works already circulating in manuscript in France and Italy by the early 1570s,19 and throughout East-Central Europe by the end of the century.20 An established
and trusted authority, Ripley was esteemed among continental cogno
scenti both for his clarity of exposition, and the practical utility of his
processes. Thus the Saxon alchemist, physician and schoolmaster
Andreas Libavius (c. 15501616), a sharp critic of contemporary practitioners, considered the late medieval Hermetic alchemy of Lull and
Ripley superior to more recent Paracelsian works in practical efficacy
See, for instance, Rampling, CRC 9.42 and 9.46 (Liber duodecim portarum); and
CRC 16.10-11 (Latin re-translations from the English Marrow of Alchemy, based on
the Medulla alchimiae).
20)
These include Ripleian compilations in Cieszyn, Ksinica Cieszyska MS
DD.vii.33 and Wien, sterreichische Nationalbibliothek Codex 11133. See Rampling,
CRC; eadem, John Dee and the Alchemists: Practising and Promoting English
Alchemy in the Holy Roman Empire, Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 43
(2012), 498-508, at 501-2.
19)
484
485
486
487
first five stanzas of the Compounds Preface, followed by selected precepts drawn from the remainder of the Preface, the Twelve Gates
and the Recapitulation. The concluding Admonition, in which
Ripley recounts his long past history of failed experiments, is omitted
entirely, apart from a few lines at the end. Possibly Penot felt that this
material detracted from the case he was attempting to put across. Also
omitted is a long passage from the fifth Gate, Putrefaction, in which
Ripley satirises fraudulent alchemists. Although satirical verses provided
a staple component of English alchemical poetry, in emulation of Chaucers Canons Yeomans Tale, it seems they failed to weather the tough
continental climate.
The publication of a more substantial edition of Ripleys poem was
not, however, far off, and was soon effected by Nicolas Barnaud, who
had previously met Penot in Prague.33 Ripleys Liber duodecim portarum
and Liber de mercurio et lapide philosophorum provide, respectively, the
second and third wheels of Barnauds four-wheeled chariot of texts, the
Quadriga aurifera, compiled in Leiden in 1599.34
Even more explicitly than Penot, Barnauds prefaces emphasise the
trans-national quality of alchemical knowledge. In the preface to his
readers, the well-travelled editor promises that his Quadriga offers the
best knowledge to be gleaned from the French, English, Germans, Italians, Poles, Bohemians, Prussians, Swedes and Dutch, not to mention
the philosophers of the Swiss Confederacy:
All of which kingdoms, dominions and countries, by the goodness of God I travelled through, practising medicine, several times: and I discussed my studies with
no small number of philosophers known to me.35
488
489
far from a complete translation of the Compound. Both the Admonition and 30 stanzas from Putrefaction, including the most controversial material, are missing.40
That Ripleys works were already circulating in France by the 1580s
is confirmed by the survival of several early manuscripts, including a
compilation in the Caprara collection, now in Bologna, containing a
Liber duodecim portarum and five other Ripleian works, transcribed in
France around February 1570.41 The Liber in Bibliothque Nationale
MS Lat. 12993 is dated 1571,42 while Bibliothque Nationale MS Lat.
14012 includes a Liber and six other Ripleian texts compiled between
January 1585 and August 1587.43
A striking similarity between these manuscript Libri and Penots and
Barnauds editions is that all are based on the same Latin translation.44
However, there is also a significant difference. Although lacking the
original prologue (also missing from both print versions), the Libri in
BUB MS 109 and BN MS Lat. 12993 are otherwise complete versions
of Ripleys poem, while BN MS Lat. 14012 lacks only twelve stanzas
throughout. All three retain the controversial sections on fraudulent
and failed alchemy, subsequently omitted in print. Thus, although
Penot and Barnaud drew on an existing manuscript tradition in prepar TC, II: 120; III: 810. The omitted stanzas are 20-47 and 49-50 respectively.
Biblioteca Universitaria di Bologna MS 109, vol. II, fol. 1r: Ex vetustissimo
manuscripto | transcriptus Anno Christi 1570 | Mense februario 5 (see Rampling,
CRC). On the provenance of the Caprara collection, see Didier Kahn, Le fonds
Caprara de manuscrits alchimiques de la Bibliothque Universitaire de Bologne,
Scriptorium, 48 (1994), 62-110.
42)
Georgii Riplaei Chanonici angli. Xii. portar[um] Libru[m] ann[o] .1471. Prologus.
anno 1571. CRC 9.46, in Rampling, CRC.
43)
CRC 9.47, in Rampling, CRC. The other texts are the Epistle to Edward IV,
Philorcium, Pupilla (dated January 1585), Liber de Mercurio et lapide philosophorum,
Terra terrarum, and Medulla (dated August 1587). Both manuscripts are described in
James A. Corbett, Catalogue des manuscrits alchimiques latins, vol. I: Manuscrits des
bibliothques publiques de Paris antrieurs au XVIIe sicle (Brussels, 1939), 161-63;
202-7. As Didier Kahn has noted, part of Ripleys Preface was also incorporated into
an anonymous Discours of 1590: Didier Kahn, Alchimie et littrature Paris en des
temps de trouble: le Discours dautheur incertain sur la pierre des philosophes (1590),
Rforme, Humanisme, Renaissance, 21 (1995), 75-122, at 120.
44)
Incipit: O lumen incomprehensibile, et gloriosum in Majestate; explicit: Quam
in suo regno faxit is ut possimus videre. Amen.
40)
41)
490
ing their editions, they appear to have been selective with this materialexcising text which did not suit the apologetic objectives of their
compilations.
Exemplary Texts
The selection of high quality exempla was necessary for any editor claiming to preserve an original text, free from errors, lacunae or extraneous
additions. This humanistic concern with textual integrity was as valid
for alchemy as for other subjects, and editors of alchemical books were
quick to point out the inadequacies of earlier or rival publications, and
to emphasise the reputable provenance of their own manuscript copies.
However, as the excision of controversial material from print copies of
the Liber suggests, editors could also introduce changes to their text
that influenced its subsequent reception. Thus Libavius, relying on the
editions of Penot and Barnaud, seems to have been unaware of the
content of Ripleys prologue and Admonition, which accordingly
receive no commentary in his own Analysis duodecim portarum.
Yet Libavius was clearly aware of the perils of faulty transcription
and careless editing. In his introduction to the Analysis he describes
a German translation of the Liber made by a nameless alchemist, who
presented it to a certain prince as though the treatise were his own.45
However, this translation differed in various ways from the text of
Barnauds 1599 edition. Libavius concluded that, rather than interpolating anything new himself, the translator had relied upon an alternative version of the classic text. He does not speculate as to whether this
version may have been an alternative Latin redaction, or a fresh translation from the English. Rather, he takes the opportunity to criticise
errors arising from faulty transcription or inappropriate amendment:
Which no one should wonder at who knows that monks in epitomising render
many things ambiguous and obfuscate; while scribes will have gone astray in read-
I have been unable to trace this German translation of the Compound, which clearly
does not correspond to that published in Chymische Schrifften. The latter is a direct
translation of Barnauds Quadriga aurifera, in which all four texts, including one
attributed to Paracelsus, are grouped under Ripleys name.
45)
491
ing and copying; to say nothing of those smatterers, who when they think some
text is false, delete it, substituting their own fantasies, and thus make work for
other correctors in turn, so that eventually, if the author had to identify his own
book, he would probably not be able to recognise it.46
492
to stress the reliability and completeness of his editions, based on manuscript exemplars that included copies endorsed by well known practitioners, who included, besides Mosanus, the imperial councillor
Nicolaus Mai, or Maius, and the English alchemist Edward Kelley.
Combachs comments may also offer clues to his relationship with other
physicians who benefited from the Landgraf s patronage.49 Despite his
chemical interests, Combach was employed as a medical rather than an
alchemical consultant, in contrast with Moritzs protg Rhenanus: a
fact which may have added spice to his critique.
Contemporary concerns also underwrote Combachs efforts to bring
the Liber duodecim portarum to the press for the third time, as the first
of twelve works included in Ripleys Opera omnia chemica (1649).50
Combachs interest in editing texts in a variety of languages, by both
medieval and contemporary authors, is attested by his earlier volume,
the Tractatus aliquot, and his later translation of Jacques de Nuysements
popular work on salt from French into Latin.51 In the Opera omnia we
have apparently his only attempt to collect the works of a single author,
Combach, Tractatus aliquot, 10-1. This treatise is presumably the anonymous Liber
de principiis naturae, & artis Chemicae (Combach, Tractatus aliquot, Pt. I, 3-56),
previously published by Rhenanus as De Principiis naturae, & arte alchymica in his
Syntagma harmoniae chymico-philosophicae ... (Frankfurt, 1625), 7-48. The Syntagma
should not be confused with the similarly titled Harmoniae chymico-philosophicae ...
Decas II, also published by Rhenanus in Frankfurt in 1625.
49)
See Bruce T. Moran, The Alchemical World of the German Court: Occult Philosophy
and Chemical Medicine in the Circle of Moritz of Hessen (15721632) (Stuttgart, 1991),
ch. 5, esp. 75-9.
50)
George Ripley, Opera omnia chemica, cum praefatione a Ludovico Combachio (Kassel,
1649) (hereafter OOC).
51)
Tractatus De Vero Sale Secreto Philosophorum, & de universali Mundi Spiritu ... Nunc
simplicissimo stylo Latine versus a Ludovico Combachio D. & Illustrissimor. Hassiae PP.
Medico ordinario (Kassel, 1651). This edition was itself translated into English by
Robert Turner, who also transformed Combach into a French court physician: Sal,
lumen, & spiritus mundi philosophici: or, the dawning of the day ... Written originally in
French, afterwards turned into Latin, by the illustrious doctor, Lodovicus Combachius,
ordinary physitian to the King, and publick professor of the physick in the University of
Mompelier. And now transplanted into Albyons Garden, by R.T. (London, 1657). Bruce
Moran also cites Combach as the author of a treatise concerning an alchemical Liquor
Alkahest (Venice, 1641): Moran, The Alchemical World, 75.
493
Vides, benigne Lector, quot & quanti viri veritatem hujus divinae scientiae
testentur, qui omnes aut manuscripti, aut typis impressi extant; & cum tantoper
nationibus, aetate, & linguis different, magna etiam verbis eorum videatur inesse
discrepantia, mir tamen in Sensu & Rebus consentiunt; quos temer, cum Nicolao
Guiberto Medico Lotharingo, vanitatis, inscitiae, stultitiae, insaniae, mendacii,
impietatis reos pronunciare, maxima profect temeritas esset. OOC, fol. 4r.
52)
494
495
Ten pages into an eleven page preface to his own collected works, Ripleys name has as yet appeared only once, and then merely as an entry
in Combachs roll call of adepts. Only in the final pages does Combach
turn to Ripleys merits, in a passage that would shortly after be translated by Ashmole:
A worthy Author without exception, who is diligently studyed by the lovers of
Chimestry, forasmuch as he is open, well compast, and plaine of delivery, and not
wrapt in any Thornes, after the custome of others Besides, he hath great Affinity with the Writings of Lully, insomuch that the one explaineth the other.59
Et vero iam supra demonstratum est, librum de Quinta essentia Raimundi plenum
esse ineptiarum ac vanitatum. Hermann Conring, De Hermetica gyptiorum vetere
et Paracelsicorum nova medicina (Helmstedt, 1648), 382.
57)
Von Hoghelande, Historiae aliquot, 39-49.
58)
Vt obiter hoc inseram, fuit hic Guibertus, vir alioquin satis doctus, prae aliis
Chemicorum acerrimus hostis. Raymundum Lullium, hominem nunquam satis
laudatum, dicit Mercatorem, laicum, phantasticum, imperitum, & totaliter Gram
maticae ignarum fuisse, in Daemonis laqueos incidisse, [...] quae specioso titulo, Artis
illuminati Doctoris circumfertur. OOC, fol. 4r4v.
59)
TCB, 456. Combachs text reads, Est autem Riplaeus autor procul dubio dignus,
qui ab amatoribus Chemiae sedul evolvatur, cu[m] in sermone apertus sit, rotundus
& planus, nec ullis spinis aliorum more obsitus. Videtur tamen lectionem requirere
multiplicem & saepis repetitam, ut locus cum loco conferri, ex sensu sensus erui,
atq[ue] ad usum practicum accommodari felicius omnia possint, quem laborem ijs
56)
496
497
Liber that Combach seems to have used as the main exemplar for his
own edition.63 The codexs value, however, is greater than the sum of
its texts. Annotated by Kelleys Prague acquaintance Nicolas Mai, it also
includes fragments of recipes attributed to Kelley, which Combach
published as part of his Tractatus aliquottwo years before his edition
of the manuscripts primarily Ripleian contents.64 In an atmosphere of
heightened concern with authenticity, the association with two prominent practitioners, Mai and Kelley, must have made this codex an
irresistible source for Combach, ever keen to stress the provenance of
his manuscript exemplars.
Conclusion
Such points of contact, often merely hinted at in printed prefaces and
manuscript marginalia, indicate both how and why alchemical authorities from widely dispersed regions were used and represented by their
editors and compilers. As an expositor of pseudo-Lull, George Ripley
could be readily situated on the vertical axis of a universal, diachronic
alchemical tradition. As a doyen of English practice, he also had
a place upon the geographical, horizontal axis of pan-European
alchemy, where superficial differences between nations, languages and
choice of words still failed to obscure the underlying unity of alchemical wisdom. These axes intersect in Combachs preface, where the English canon is redeployed as both descendant and defender of a Hermetic
prisca philosophia.
The Liber 12 portarum, Medulla philosophiae chemicae, Clavis aurae portae, Pupilla
alchemiae, Terra terrae philosophicae, Viaticum seu varia practica, Cantilena, and Epistola ad Regum Eduardum. Of the remaining four texts printed by
Combach, three (Liber de Mercurio & Lapide philosophorum, Philorcium Alchymistarum,
and Accurtationes & practicae Raymundinae) are found in Combachs second major
exemplar, Kassel Landesbibliothek 4o MS chem. 66. I have yet to identify Combachs
source for the remaining item, the Concordantia, although this work is mentioned by
title in 4o MS chem. 67 (fol. 133v). On the Kassel manuscripts, see Hartmut Broszinski,
Manuscripta chemica in Quarto (Wiesbaden 2011), 303-16.
64)
Combach, Tractatus aliquot, 31-33. On Mai, see Joachim Telle, ed., Parerga Para
celsica: Paracelsus in Vergangenheit und Gegenwart (Stuttgart, 1991), 176-7; Rampling,
John Dee and the Alchemists, 501-2.
63)
498
The textual peregrinations of Ripleys writings did not end with his
Opera omnia. In 1690, the entire collection resurfaced in a German
translation by the Nuremberg physician and chemist Johann Hiskia
Cardilucius (16301697).65 In his foreword, the editor speculated anew
on the close relationship between Ripleys alchemy and that of two other
semi-legendary authorities, Bernard Trevisanus and Isaac Hollandus.
Building on Ripleys own reference to a sojourn abroad, Cardilucius
suggested that the similarities might be explained by a physical rather
than a merely textual encounter:
He sets out in the preface to his tract called the Medulla, that for nine whole years
in Italy and the surrounding regions he travelled in search of these philosophical
secrets, and may perhaps himself have met with Trevisanus in Italy, or also in Germany with Hollandus.66
This account, in which the English alchemists deliberations with philosophers of other nations are subsequently enshrined in his own treatise, presents a Ripley who is in fact the image of his own well-travelled
and well-connected editors. From Penot to Barnaud, Mai to Combach,
Ripleys cosmopolitan readers enjoyed fruitful encounters in person and
on paper, at distinct geographical nodes, notably Prague and Kassel.
Such nodes provided centres, or, perhaps more aptly, crossroads, for
scholars and practitioners from across the continent, through whose
efforts the wisdom of all nations was communicated, translated and
edited, transcending territorial divisions of alchemical knowledge.
George Ripley, Des Grossen Engellndischen Philosophi Georgii Riplaei Expe
rientzreiche/Hermetische Schrifften betreffend die Vniversal-Tinctur; so bisher noch
niemals teutsch ausgangen, in Johann Hiskias Cardilucius, ed., Magnalia Medicochymica continuata, Oder, Fortsetzung der hohen Artzney und Feuerkunstigen Geheim
nssen (Endter, 1680), 379-710. On Cardilucius, see Norbert Marxer, Praxis statt
Theorie! Leben und Werk des Nrnberger Arztes, Alchemikers und Fachschriftstellers Johann
Hiskia Cardilucius (16301697) (Heidelberg, 2000).
66)
Aber Riplaeus selber ist allem Ansehen nach, ein hocherfahrner sehr reicher Artist
gewesen, gestaltsam er in der Vorrede ber seinen Tractat Medulla genannt, melder,
da er 9. ganzer Jahr in Italien und den benachbarten Landschafften in Erlern- und
Erfahrung dieser Philosophischen secreten zubracht, und mag vielleicht wohl selbsten
mit Trevisano in Italien senn bekandt worden, oder auch in Teutschland mit Hollando.
Cardilucius, Vorrede to Ripley, Des Grossen Engelndischen Philosophi, 382.
65)
499