Alchemy attracted the great pioneers of modern science

Detail, “The Medical Alchemist”, by Franz Christoph Janneck. CHF Collections. Now on exhibit at CHF!

Although it was publicly disparaged, even Sir Isaac Newton and John Locke had a (secret) interest in alchemy.

Recently the Science Channel aired an eight-hour television series called “The 100 Greatest Discoveries in Science.” Taking its place with Einstein’s theories of relativity, Darwin’s theory of natural selection, and Medeleev’s discovery of the periodic table of elements was Friedrich Wohler’s synthesis of urea. Until Wohler’s discovery in 1824, compounds from living organisms were believed to be essentially different from inorganic compounds. By creating a clearly natural compound in the lab, Wohler laid one of the most important foundation stones of modern chemistry.

Wohler’s discovery also put one of the final nails in the coffin of alchemy. With proof that compounds from living beings could be synthesized from inorganic chemicals, the search for the Philosopher’s Stone — the compound that would turn base metals into gold — and all the arcane mystery of alchemy finally faded away after more than a century of decline.

Many chemists in the latter half of the 20th century first saw alchemy on the covers of the thick, formula-filled catalogs of Aldrich Chemicals and Fisher Scientific. The founders of both of these fine chemicals suppliers used Flemish paintings from the 17th through the 19th centuries as cover illustrations for their 1,000-page-thick, highly detailed catalogs. The dark, mysterious works of art added a touch of beauty to what was otherwise a tome of small print. The paintings also gently hinted how far chemistry had advanced in the 19th and 20th centuries.

In many of these paintings, the alchemist is seated at a table surrounded by the clutter of his profession — books, papers, laboratory glassware, pots of clay, metal bowls, celestial globes and many mysterious symbols. In the midst of the clutter, the alchemist is often shown holding a beaker up to the light, examining its contents. While we can't know what was in the alchemist’s head as he examined the beaker, we know what is in the beaker — urine. This “golden,” natural fluid was believed to hold clues to finding the Philosopher’s Stone. Since alchemists sometimes did medical work on the side — bleeding, applying leeches, dentistry — they also used urine, and other natural fluids, to diagnose illnesses.

For those who have seen many of these paintings, there is also a comic theme in many of them. Art about alchemy was popular among the middle class of northern Europe from the late 1600s through much of the 1800s, and part of that popularity was making fun of the alchemist. He is sometimes shown setting the house on fire. Often, he is poor. Worse still, he is wasting the family income on his ill-fated experiments. In some of the paintings, a thin, frail wife holding a hungry child cowers in the background. For well-off, serious businessmen of the time, these paintings showed the kind of life dreamers led, and all the misery they caused. Better to be a serious man of business. If there were television in the 18th century, many sitcom fathers would likely be alchemists.

And yet, while alchemy did eventually prove to be wrong, some of the best minds at the beginning of experimental science were not sure whether experimental science would completely displace alchemy. Even prominent men of science who publicly said they were not interested in alchemy secretly hedged their bets and made alchemical investigations on the side. In one notable case, Sir Isaac Newton secretly obtained alchemical papers from the estate of Robert Boyle. Newton’s friend, the philosopher John Locke, was executor of the Boyle estate and provided Newton with the secret “loan” of these papers. At that time, Newton served as head of the Royal Mint, and England had recently passed a law against the transmutation of metals. Had Newton’s alchemical experiment worked, he would have been in direct violation of the law he was supposed to enforce! As we know now, chemical transformation of one element into another is impossible, but given the information available in the late 1600s, Newton did not want to be left behind in case base metals really could be turned into gold.

< Return to article list

This article was originally published under the title "We're History" in the August 2005 edition of Chemical Engineering Progress magazine. This article was prepared by Neil Gussman, communications manager for the Chemical Heritage Foundation