I know that the Romans were aware of alchemy, and that they practised it, but what did they call it? I can’t seem to find a reference in Latin on alchemy (the word).
As you know the Romans would not have used the word ‘Alchemy’ as that is from the Arabic definite article ‘al’ plus the Greek ‘chemie’ and is a medieval construct . You say the Romans were aware of it , but the Oxford Classical Dict. says ‘there is no early Latin alchemy , the technical terms in Pliny have no trace of Alchemy .’
There are early Greek texts and they are associated with Egypt and Gnostic beliefs . But I cannot think of a Roman author who mentions any mystical association with chemical processes , though other aspects of magic are well represented in Roman authors . I would be interested to hear if you turn up any sources .
I got some information from Wikipedia. The brief article does state that they received (or inherited) their knowledge of alchemy from the Greeks. Here is a link:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alchemy#Alchemy_in_the_Roman_Empire
Not all-inclusive, but so far that is all I could find. Thanks for your information.
Taking another tack, I suppose Medieval alchemists, at least those that would have written in Latin would have had a word to describe it, but I haven’t come across that term yet.
Because of its secretive and deliberately obscure nature Alchemists often gave fanciful names to their ‘craft’ .
ars chymica, magica ,ars hermetica
opus magnum , alchymia ,alchimia (and other spellings) ars alchemistica
occulta philosophia etc
What would a practioner of alchemy be called, then?
My dictionary gives ‘alchemista’ and ‘alcumista’ . These must be renaissance terms as it cites Erasmus and Francis Bacon as sources .
Erasmus uses the term 'Alcumista 'as the title of one of his colloquies . It is similar in tone to Jonson’s ‘Alchemist’ , mocking both the dupe and the false magician.
The editor of my copy, Petrus Rabus promises ; " Ridebis mecum , lector , in hoc colloquio insaniam eorum , qui student callere artem Alcumisticam , vel Alchimiam ut vocant barbare , qua possent facere aurum vel argentum ex pulveribus metalli."
Bacon goes into a lot of detail in his 'Novum Organum ’ this is an extract .
“Quod si quis ad intuendum ea, quae magis curiosa habentur quam sana, animum submiserit, et alchymistarum aut magorum opera penitius introspexerit, is dubitabit forsitan utrum risu an lachrymis potius illa digna sint. Alchymista enim spem alit aeternam, atque ubi res non succedit errores proprios reos substituit; secum accusatorie reputando, se aut artis aut authorum vocabula non satis intellexisse, unde ad traditiones et auriculares susurros animum applicat; aut in practicae suae scrupulis et momentis aliquid titubatum esse, unde experimenta in infinitum repetit: ac interim quum inter experimentorum sortes in quaedam incidit aut ipsa facie nova aut utilitate non contemnenda; hujusmodi pignoribus animum pascit, eaque in majus ostentat et celebrat: reliqua spe sustentat. Neque tamen negandum est, alchymistas non pauca invenisse, et inventis utilibus homines donasse.”
Pexenfelder defines it thus;
“Qui e sequioribus metallis conantur enixe factitare aurum, vocantur Alchimistae ab Alchimia, seu Chimia aut Chemia, Arabes articulum ‘al’, linguae suae familiarem apposuerunt, unde Arabice ‘Alchimistae’: Graece ‘Chrysopoei’; et Ars ipsa ‘Chrysopaeia’, quae sibi persuadet, posse ex viliore metallo semen colligi, cujus cum sulphure et argento vivo (Mercurium vocant) permixtione, fiat Pulvis, aut Tinctura, (quibusdam Lapis Philosophicus,) quae tinctum in suam naturam, hoc est, aurum transformet, et convertat.
Quod an fieri possit, digladiantur Philosophi; illud satis certum
est, huic arti plus fumi quam lucri inesse.”
The common theme seems to be the continual self-delusion and outpouring of money in repeated failure until inevitable ruin .The squalor and poverty of alchemists being a perrenial joke given their claims to create vast riches.