thought fit to retain the Language wherein the Author proposes it,
that I might also retain the propriety of some Latine Termes, to which
I do not readily remember any that fully answer in English. But as for
the Argumentation it self, 'tis built upon a precarious supposition,
that seems to me neither Demonstrable nor true; for, how does it
appear, that where the same Quality is to be met with in many Bodies,
it must belong to them upon the Account of some one Body whereof they
all partake? (For that the Major of our Authors Argument is to be
Understood of the Material Ingredients of bodies, appears by the
Instances of Earth and Fire he annexes to explain it.) For to begin
with that very Example which he is pleas'd to alledge for himself; how
can he prove, that the Gravity of all Bodies proceeds from what they
participate of the Element of Earth? Since we see, that not only
common Water, but the more pure Distill'd Rain Water is heavy; and
Quicksilver is much heavier than Earth it self; though none of my
Adversaries has yet prov'd, that it contains any of that Element. And
I the Rather make use of this Example of Quicksilver, because I see
not how the Assertors of the Elements will give any better Account of
it then the Chymists. For if it be demanded how it comes to be Fluid,
they will answer, that it participates much of the Nature of Water.
And indeed, according to them, Water may be the Predominant Element
in it, since we see, that several Bodies which by Distillation afford
Liquors that weigh more then their _Caput Mortuum_ do not yet consist
of Liquor enough to be Fluid. Yet if it be demanded how Quicksilver
comes to be so heavy, then 'tis reply'd, that 'tis by reason of the
Earth that abounds in it; but since, according to them, it must
consist also of air, and partly of Fire, which they affirm to be light
Elements, how comes it that it should be so much heavier then Earth of
the same bulk, though to fill up the porosities and other Cavities it
be made up into a mass or paste with Water, which it self they allow
to be a heavy Element. But to returne to our _Spagyrists_, we see that
Chymical Oyles and fixt Salts, though never so exquisitely purify'd
and freed from terrestrial parts, do yet remain ponderous enough. And
Experience has inform'd me, that a pound, for instance, of some of the
heaviest Woods, as _Guajacum_ that will sink in Water, being burnt to
Ashes will yield a much less weight of them (whereof I found but a
small part to be Alcalyzate) then much lighter Vegetables: As also
that the black Charcoal of it will not sink as did the wood, but swim;
which argues that the Differing Gravity of Bodies proceeds chiefly
from their particular Texture, as is manifest in Gold, the closest and
Compactest of Bodies, which is many times heavier then we can possibly
make any parcell of Earth of the same Bulk. I will not examine, what
may be argu'd touching the Gravity or Quality Analagous thereunto, of
even Celestial bodies, from the motion of the spots about the Sun, d
[Errata: and] from the appearing equality of the suppos'd Seas in the
Moon; nor consider how little those _Phaemonea_ [Transcriber's Note:
Phaenomena] would agree with what _Sennertus_ presumes concerning
Gravity. But further to invalidate his supposition, I shall demand,
upon what Chymical Principle Fluidity depends? And yet Fluidity is,
two or three perhaps excepted, the most diffused quality of the
universe, and far more General then almost any other of those that are
to be met with in any of the Chymicall Principles, or _Aristotelian_
Elements; since not only the Air, but that vast expansion we call
Heaven, in comparison of which our Terrestrial Globe (supposing it
were all Solid) is but a point; and perhaps to [Errata: too] the Sun
and the fixt Stars are fluid bodies. I demand also, from which of the
Chymical Principles Motion flowes; which yet is an affection of matter
much more General then any that can be deduc'd from any of the three
Chymical Principles. I might ask the like Question concerning Light,
which is not only to be found in the Kindl'd Sulphur of mixt Bodis
[Transcriber's Note: Bodies], but (not to mention those sorts of
rotten Woods, and rotten Fish that shine in the Dark) in the tails of
living Glow-wormes, and in the Vast bodies of the Sun and Stars. I
would gladly also know, in which of the three Principles the Quality,
we call Sound, resides as in its proper Subject; since either Oyl
falling upon Oyle, or Spirit upon Spirit, or Salt upon Salt, in a
great quantity, and from a considerable height, will make a noise, or
if you please, create a sound, and (that the objection may reach the
_Aristotelians_) so will also water upon water, and Earth upon Earth.
And I could name other qualities to be met within divers bodies, of
which I suppose my Adversaries will not in haste assign any Subject,
upon whose Account it must needs be, that the quality belongs to all
the other several bodies.
And, before I proceed any further, I must here invite you to compare
the supposition we are examining, with some other of the Chymical
Tenents. For, first they do in effect teach that more then one quality
may belong to, and be deduc'd from, one Principle. For, they ascribe
to Salt Tasts, and the power of Coagulation; to sulphur, as well
Odours as inflamableness; And some of them ascribe to Mercury,
Colours; as all of them do effumability, as they speak. And on the
other side, it is evident that Volatility belongs in common to all the
three Principles, and to Water too. For 'tis manifest, that Chymical
Oyles are Volatile; That also divers Salts Emerging, upon the Analysis
of many Concretes, are very Volatile, is plain from the figitiveness
[Errata: fugitivenesse] of Salt, of Harts-horne, flesh, &c. ascending
in the Distillation of those bodies. How easily water may be made to
ascend in Vapours, there is scarce any body that has not observ'd. And
as for what they call the Mercuriall Principle of bodies, that is so
apt to be rais'd in the form of Steam, that _Paracelsus_ and others
define it by that aptness to fly up; so that (to draw that inference
by the way) it seems not that Chymists have been accurate in their
Doctrine of qualities, and their respective Principles, since they
both derive several qualities from the same Principle, and must
ascribe the same quality to almost all their Principles and other
bodies besides. And thus much for the first thing taken for granted,
without sufficient proof, by your _Sennertus_: And to add that upon
the Bye (continues _Carneades_) we may hence learn what to judge of
the way of Argumentation, which that fierce Champion of the
_Aristotelians_ against the Chymists, _Anthonius Guntherus
Billichius_[24] employes, where he pretends to prove against
_Beguinus_, that not only the four Elements do immediately concur to
Constitute every mixt body, and are both present in it, and obtainable
from it upon its Dissolution; but that in the _Tria Prima_ themselves,
whereinto Chymists are wont to resolve mixt Bodies, each of them
clearly discovers it self to consist of four Elements. The
Ratiocination it self (pursues _Carneades_) being somewhat unusual, I
did the other Day Transcribe it, and (sayes He, pulling a Paper out of
his Pocket) it is this. _Ordiamur, cum Beguino, a ligno viridi, quod
si concremetur, videbis in sudore Aquam, in fumo Aerem, in flamma &
Prunis Ignem, Terram in cineribus: Quod si Beguino placuerit ex eo
colligere humidum aquosum, cohibere humidum oleaginosum, extrahere ex
cineribus salem; Ego ipsi in unoquoque horum seorsim quatuor Elementa
ad oculum demonstrabo, eodem artificio quo in ligno viridi ea
demonstravi. Humorem aquosum admovebo Igni. Ipse Aquam Ebullire
videbit, in Vapore Aerem conspiciet, Ignem sentiet in aestu, plus minus
Terrae in sedimento apparebit. Humor porro Oleaginosus aquam humiditate
& fluiditate per se, accensus vero Ignem flamma prodit, fumo Aerem,
fuligine, nidore & amurca terram. Salem denique ipse Beguinus siccum
vocat & Terrestrem, qui tamen nec fusus Aquam, nec caustica vi ignem
celare potest; ignis vero Violentia in halitus versus nec ab Aere se
alienum esse demonstrat; Idem de Lacte, de Ovis, de semine Lini, de
Garyophyllis, de Nitro, de sale Marino, denique de Antimonio, quod
fuit de Ligno viridi Judicium; eadem de illorum partibus, quas_
Beguinus _adducit, sententia, quae de viridis ligni humore aquoso, quae
de liquore ejusdem oleoso, quae de sale fuit._
[Footnote 24: _In Thessalo redivivo. Cap. 10. pag. 73. & 74._]
This bold Discourse (resumes _Carneades_, putting up again his Paper,)
I think it were not very difficult to confute, if his Arguments were
as considerable as our time will probably prove short for the
remaining and more necessary Part of my Discourse; wherefore referring
You for an Answer to what was said concerning the Dissipated Parts of
a burnt piece of green Wood, to what I told _Themistius_ on the like
occasion, I might easily shew You, how sleightly and superficially our
_Guntherus_ talks of the dividing the flame of Green Wood into his
four Elements; _When_ he makes that vapour to be air, which being
caught in Glasses and condens'd, presently discovers it self to have
been but an Aggregate of innumerable very minute drops of Liquor; and
_When_ he would prove the Phlegmes being compos'd of Fire by that Heat
which is adventitious to the Liquor, and ceases upon the absence of
what produc'd it (whether that be an Agitation proceeding from the
motion of the External Fire, or the presence of a Multitude of igneous
Atomes pervading the pores of the Vessel, and nimbly permeating the
whole Body of the Water) I might, I say, urge these and divers other
Weaknesses of His Discourse. But I will rather take Notice of what is
more pertinent to the Occasion of this Digression, namely, that Taking
it for Granted, that Fluidity (with which he unwarily seems to
confound Humidity) must proceed from the Element of Water, he makes a
Chymical Oyle to Consist of that Elementary Liquor; and yet in the
very next Words proves, that it consists also of Fire, by its
Inflamability; not remembring that exquisitely pure Spirit of Wine is
both more Fluid then Water it self, and yet will Flame all away
without leaving the Least Aqueous Moisture behind it; and without such
an _Amurca_ and Soot as he would Deduce the presence of Earth from. So
that the same Liquor may according to his Doctrine be concluded by its
great Fluidity to be almost all Water; and by its burning all away to
be all disguised Fire. And by the like way of Probation our Author
would shew that the fixt salt of Wood is compounded of the four
Elements. For (sayes he) being turn'd by the violence of the Fire into
steames, it shews it self to be of kin to Air; whereas I doubt whether
he ever saw a true fixt Salt (which to become so, must have already
endur'd the violence of an Incinerating Fire) brought by the Fire
alone to ascend in the Forme of Exhalations; but I do not doubt that
if he did, and had caught those Exhalations in convenient Vessels, he
would have found them as well as the Steames of common Salt, &c. of a
Saline and not an Aereal Nature. And whereas our Authour takes it also
for Granted, that the Fusibility of Salt must be Deduc'd from Water,
it is indeed so much the Effect of heat variously agitating the Minute
Parts of a Body, without regard to Water, that Gold (which by its
being the heavyest and fixtest of Bodies, should be the most Earthy)
will be brought to Fusion by a strong Fire; which sure is more likely
to drive away then increase its Aqueous Ingredient, if it have any;
and on the other side, for want of a sufficient agitation of its
minute parts, Ice is not Fluid, but Solid; though he presumes also
that the Mordicant Quality of Bodies must proceed from a fiery
ingredient; whereas, not to urge that the Light and inflamable parts,
which are the most likely to belong to the Element of Fire, must
probably be driven away by that time the violence of the Fire has
reduc'd the Body to ashes; Not to urge this, I I [Transcriber's Note:
extra "I" in original] say, nor that Oyle of Vitriol which quenches
Fire, burnes the Tongue and flesh of those that Unwarily tast or apply
it, as a caustick doth, it is precarious to prove the Presence of Fire
in fixt salts from their Caustick power, unlesse it were first shewn,
that all the Qualities ascribed to salts must be deduc'd from those of
the Elements; which, had I Time, I could easily manifest to be no easy
talk. And not to mention that our Authour makes a Body as Homogeneous
as any he can produce for Elementary, belong both to Water and Fire,
Though it be neither Fluid nor Insipid, like Water; nor light and
Volatile, like Fire; he seems to omit in this Anatomy the Element of
Earth, save That he intimates, That the salt may pass for that; But
since a few lines before, he takes Ashes for Earth, I see not how he
will avoid an Inconsistency either betwixt the Parts of his Discourse
or betwixt some of them and his Doctrine. For since There is a
manifest Difference betwixt the Saline and the insipid Parts of Ashes,
I see not how substances That Disagree in such Notable Qualities can
be both said to be Portions of an Element, whose Nature requires that
it be Homogeneous, especially in this case where an _Analysis_ by the
Fire is suppos'd to have separated it from the admixture of other
Elements, which are confess'd by most _Aristotelians_ to be Generally
found in common Earth, and to render it impure. And sure if when we
have consider'd for how little a Disparities sake the Peripateticks
make these Symbolizing Bodies Aire and Fire to be two Distinct
Elements, we shall also consider that the Saline part of Ashes is very
strongly Tasted, and easily soluble in Water; whereas the other part
of the same Ashes is insipid and indissoluble in the same Liquor: Not
to add, that the one substance is Opacous, and the other somewhat
Diaphanous, nor that they differ in Divers other Particulars; If we
consider those things, I say, we shall hardly think that both these
Substances are Elementary Earth; And as to what is sometimes objected,
that their Saline Tast is only an Effect of Incineration and Adustion,
it has been elsewhere fully reply'd to, when propos'd by _Themistius_,
and where it has been prov'd against him, that however insipid Earth
may perhaps by Additaments be turn'd into Salt, yet 'tis not like it
should be so by the Fire alone: For we see that when we refine Gold
and Silver, the violentest Fires We can Employ on them give them not
the least Rellish of Saltness. And I think _Philoponus_ has rightly
observ'd, that the Ashes of some Concretes contain very little salt if
any at all; For Refiners suppose that bone-ashes are free from it, and
therefore make use of them for Tests and Cuppels, which ought to be
Destitute of Salt, lest the Violence of the Fire should bring them to
Vitrification; And having purposely and heedfully tasted a Cuppel made
of only bone-ashes and fair water, which I had caus'd to be expos'd
to a Very Violent Fire, acuated by the Blast of a large pair of Double
Bellows, I could not perceive that the force of the Fire had imparted
to it the least Saltness, or so much as made it less Insipid.
But (sayes _Carneades_) since neither You nor I love Repetitions, I
shall not now make any of what else was urg'd against _Themistius_ but
rather invite You to take notice with me that when our Authour, though
a Learned Man, and one that pretends skill enough in Chymistry to
reforme the whole Art, comes to make good his confident Undertaking,
to give us an occular Demonstration of the immediate Presence of the
four Elements in the resolution of Green Wood, He is fain to say
things that agree very little with one another. For about the
beginning of that passage of His lately recited to you, he makes the
sweat as he calls it of the green Wood to be Water, the smoke Aire,
the shining Matter Fire, and the Ashes Earth; whereas a few lines
after, he will in each of these, nay (as I just now noted) in one
Distinct Part of the Ashes, shew the four Elements. So that either the
former _Analysis_ must be incompetent to prove that Number of
Elements, since by it the burnt Concrete is not reduc'd into
Elementary Bodies, but into such as are yet each of them compounded of
the four Elements; or else these Qualities from which he endeavours to
deduce the presence of all the Elements, in the fixt salt, and each of
the other separated substances, will be but a precarious way of
probation: especially if you consider, that the extracted _Alcali_ of
Wood, being for ought appears at least as similar a Body as any that
the Peripateticks can shew us, if its differing Qualities must argue
the presence of Distinct Elements, it will scarce be possible for them
by any way they know of employing the fire upon a Body, to shew that
any Body is a Portion of a true Element: And this recals to my mind,
that I am now but in an occasional excussion, which aiming only to
shew that the Peripateticks as well as the Chymists take in our
present Controversie something for granted which they ought to prove,
I shall returne to my exceptions, where I ended the first of them, and
further tell you, that neither is that the only precarious thing that
I take notice of in _Sennertus_ his Argumentation; for when he
inferrs, that because the Qualities he Mentions as Colours, Smels, and
the like, belong not to the Elements; they therefore must to the
Chymical Principles, he takes that for granted, which will not in
haste be prov'd; as I might here manifest, but that I may by and by
have a fitter opportunity to take notice of it. And thus much at
present may suffice to have Discours'd against the Supposition, that
almost every Quality must have some [Greek: dektikon proton], as they
speak, some Native receptacle, wherein as in its proper Subject of
inhesion it peculiarly resides, and on whose account that quality
belongs to the other Bodies, Wherein it is to be met with. Now this
Fundamental supposition being once Destroy'd, whatsoever is built upon
it, must fall to ruine of it self.
But I consider further, that Chymists are (for ought I have found) far
from being able to explicate by any of the _Tria Prima_, those
qualities which they pretend to belong primarily unto it, and in mixt
Bodies to Deduce from it. Tis true indeed, that such qualities are
not explicable by the four Elements; but it will not therefore follow,
that they are so by the three hermetical Principles; and this is it
that seems to have deceiv'd the Chymists, and is indeed a very common
mistake amongst most Disputants, who argue as if there could be but
two Opinions concerning the Difficulty about which they contend; and
consequently they inferr, that if their Adversaries Opinion be
Erroneous, Their's must needs be the Truth; whereas many questions,
and especially in matters Physiological, may admit of so many
Differing _Hypotheses_, that 'twill be very inconsiderate and
fallacious to conclude (except where the Opinions are precisely
Contradictory) the Truth of one from the falsity of another. And in
our particular case 'tis no way necessary, that the Properties of mixt
Bodies must be explicable either by the Hermetical, or the
_Aristotelian Hypothesis_, there being divers other and more plausible
wayes of explaining them, and especially that, which deduces qualities
from the motion, figure, and contrivance of the small parts of Bodies;
as I think might be shewn, if the attempt were as seasonable, as I
fear it would be Tedious.