Who are we to fight the alchemy?

0:00If we knew more about our sleep, what would we do differently? Would we go to bed at a consistent time? Or take steps to reduce interruptions to our sleep? With Sleep Score, Apple Watch measures your bedtime consistency, interruptions, and sleep duration. Then, every morning it combines these factors into an easy-to-understand score from 1 to 100. So you'll know how to take the quality of your sleep from OK to Very High. Know your Sleep Score with Apple Watch. iPhone 11 or later required. Ready to soundtrack your summer? With Red Bull Summer All Day Play, you choose a playlist that fits your summer vibe the best.

0:38Are you a festival fanatic, a deep-end DJ, a road dog, or a trail mixer? Just add a song to your chosen playlist and put your summer on track. Red Bull Summer All Day Play. Red Bull gives you wings. Visit redbull.com slash brightsummer ahead to learn more. See you this summer.

1:06Lawrence Principe has been interested in alchemy for a while now. Many years ago, and I won't say how many, when I was in high school, I was rooting about in the public library. Now, the usual reason I did this was because I was very interested in chemistry, often very interested in making fireworks and that sort of thing that teenagers like to do. And in this particular visit, I noticed that there were books before I got to chemistry on the history of chemistry. And there was a book I remember called The Arts of the Alchemists.

1:44And I took it down off the shelf and I started thumbing through it. And it was filled with beautiful images and some facsimile pages of alchemical manuscripts. And at that point, I began to think, well, wow, what were they actually doing? Now, after that discovery, he did go on to make some fireworks. Oh, yes. I spent quite a great deal of time doing that when I was a younger person. Yes, and I still even have all my fingers and toes. But ultimately, the question of what the alchemists were actually doing stuck with him. In fact, he has devoted a sizable chunk of his career to answering it. He's now a professor of the history of science and a professor of chemistry at Johns Hopkins.

2:32And over the last few decades, he has helped turn our understanding of alchemy kind of on its head. So before I read about Lawrence's work, I thought alchemists were nothing more than either medieval quacks or single-minded obsessives obsessives who wrote fanciful books about turning lead into gold and achieving immortality. I thought they were a joke, essentially. And I thought this because that's been the cultural narrative about alchemy for a long time. But now Lawrence is one of several historians of science who've been rewriting that narrative. They have been recreating old alchemist experiments in modern-day labs.

3:14And by doing this historical recreation, they have pieced together a new story. A story that is forcing people like me to reevaluate what I thought I knew, not just about alchemists, but also about the history of chemistry itself. So, this is Unexplainable. I'm Bird Pinkerton. And today on the show, what were the alchemists actually doing? Researchers like Lawrence don't have all the answers, but what they are learning is kind of transmuting alchemy from a joke into a fascinating chapter in the history of science.

4:10Okay, let's start with some basics. Like, what actually is alchemy? Yeah, that's actually a more difficult question than it sounds. Turns out alchemy has a long history that stretches back millennia. And for a lot of that history, some of what people refer to as alchemy sounds a lot like what we might call chemistry. Because alchemists weren't always solely focused on making gold. It was one of the major goals of the alchemists, but it wasn't all that they did. They were interested as well in making medicines, for example, improved pharmaceuticals, but a whole range of sort of quotidian substances like cosmetics, perfumes, alcoholic drinks, metal alloys, all these sorts of things, dyes and pigments.

4:59When Lawrence was starting out, though, he was reading through the work of European alchemists who were trying to make the philosopher's stone. So the substance that was thought to transmute metals and also sometimes extend life. Basically, the kind of alchemy you read about in literary fiction that seems like a pointless pursuit, right? Or a whole lot of nonsense. And at least part of the reason that people have spent so much time thinking this kind of alchemy is nonsense is that if you read through alchemical books, a lot of them look like a bunch of nonsense. They are full of riddles and metaphorical language and stuff like, Take our fiery dragon that hides the magical steel in its belly with our magnet and mix them with torrid Vulcan.

5:46This will be easily done if Saturn beholds himself in the mirror of Mars. Thence is made our chameleon, our chaos.

5:58Well, just try to take that into the lab and do something with it. This language is, it turns out, intentionally confusing. Alchemists didn't necessarily want everyone to understand their books. First of all, if you think you're close to the way of making gold from cheap substances, you don't really want everybody else to know about it. So you might write stuff in weird coded language. Moreover, alchemy was actually illegal in terms of the transmutation of base metals into gold in a number of countries, mostly because people were afraid that, oh, what if this guy in his cellar starts making all this gold?

6:38Well, then the value of gold becomes zero because you can make it and your entire economy and political stability goes out the window. These various bands didn't stop people from doing alchemy, but again, they meant that alchemical writing was often bizarre and full of metaphors, especially as you got to the late 14th century, 15th century and beyond. And once you have that kind of metaphorical language, people just sort of go crazy with it. So instead of saying this material and that material, they'll say the red king and the white queen, the wolf, the lion that devours the sun and so forth. And instead of describing anything that could possibly seem to be like a chemical formula, let's say, they become dream sequences or metaphorical stories.

7:31You know, I fell asleep one day and I saw a king come to take a bath and he took off his clothes and he got into the water and he melted away and blah, blah, blah. And all this sort of very rich, extravagant, really bizarre kind of language. Your fiery dragons and your Saturns beholding themselves in the mirrors of Mars. And so you can see why it is that alchemy, until very recently, in terms of historical understanding, has simply not been understood. Because it just looks so weird. And listen, if I were a historian, I too would probably not read through something that sounded like the inspiration for Alice in Wonderland and think it looked like solid science.

8:16So it's maybe not surprising that there were a lot of interpretations that argued that alchemy was something else. There were 19th century writers who thought that the practice was more about transforming the self than about transforming real things in the laboratory. With one author saying, you know, mercury in an alchemical text could be read as a metaphor for a clear conscience, for example. Or in the 20th century, Carl Jung reinterpreted alchemy as a kind of psychological phenomenon. So when I started trying to learn about alchemy in the late 70s and early 80s, I did not have a lot of books that helped.

8:54Still, there were people who were curious about whether some alchemists might have been doing something non-metaphorical. And young Laurent Principe was one of those people. He enjoyed chemistry. He knew enough to make his own fireworks safely. And in some of these authors' private and even public writings, there were things that looked less like fanciful metaphors and more like a series of instructions. So he figured one way to figure out if any of these texts had real practical advice or if they were all just imagery was to see if he could follow the instructions and produce results. So when he went off to college, that's what he tried to do.

9:34I was extremely fortunate to have chosen the University of Delaware to go to as an undergraduate. And I happened to mention my interest to one of the faculty there. And he said, oh, let me check on something and get back to you. Well, it turned out the university had purchased a huge collection of books in the history of science from an Italian chemical engineer, as I recall. And this faculty member actually got me access to them. Well, I couldn't have been more happy at that point having free run of this amazing collection of alchemical and early chemical books. And to make it even better, the chemistry department itself actually let me use some unused student laboratories to try to replicate these processes.

10:29He selected one specific text written by a pretty famous alchemist. A text by a supposed Benedictine monk who went under the name of Basilius Valentinus, which is a fake name if anyone's ever heard one. A text written in 1604 on the properties and the preparations of the element antimony. Antimony is a brittle, silverish, toxic metalloid that makes an appearance in a lot of different texts, including this one. I chose that document in particular because it was unusually clear. It did not have the sort of wild metaphors. It seemed at least to have what were rather straightforward recipes. And for his recreation, Lawrence picked instructions that the book claimed were simple.

11:18This way of making something called the glass of antimony, which was basically taking antimony, manipulating it in specific ways until you got kind of brittle golden glass. So young undergrad Lawrence got some antimony and got to work. All right. Well, I started feeling really bad about this because the author says, well, just because I'm being complete, I'm going to tell you how to make this. But everybody knows how to make it. Yeah, well, I tried for months to make it and it never worked. He was following the instructions and getting gunk, not glass. Not the best sign if you're trying to entertain the idea that these old texts from the 1600s describe legitimate experiments.

12:01You don't immediately think, well, there's something wrong with me. You probably think there's something wrong with the author. But Lawrence did not write off Basil Valentine because he figured his experiment was not actually a perfect recreation. He was using Bunsen burners and other modern equipment and antimony that came from a chemical supplier, not exactly what Basil had access to back in the day. Maybe something about his modern tools was throwing things off. And so he experimented a little bit. He went to a mineral shop, for example, to try and get antimony in a form that was closer to what basil would have had.

12:35I even tried to get it from Hungary, or what was Hungary in Basil Valentine's Day, to see if I could get something that was quite similar. What he eventually figured out was that basil was probably working with something that had some impurities in it, like sand. And that probably would have added some silica to the mix. And so he tried things again, but this time with some silica added. And you just need about 2 % of silica. And wow, it becomes a beautiful, transparent glass. So it was a matter of the impurity that was in the original material. He'd done it. He had shown that this recipe, at least, was a real set of instructions that he could follow in the present day.

13:18I was exhilarated by this. People have criticized alchemical writers for reporting imaginary effects or just making things up or being sloppy workers. But my argument was maybe we need to just look a little bit closer and give these texts enough free space and enough time to justify themselves by looking more deeply, by being less judgmental and trying to get into the mindset as much as is possible of the original authors. And that is, after all, what historians are trying to do. This was a victory, obviously. But it wasn't the biggest victory. Because, yes, Florence had successfully done an experimental recreation from an alchemist's book.

14:09But it was for a pretty simple glass experiment. And there's nothing in modern chemistry that suggests you can't make glass. So he started to wonder about the wackier stuff that alchemists were writing about. like the weird metaphor language and the philosopher's stone. When you've got something like the philosopher's stone that's supposed to turn one element into another that modern chemistry tells us shouldn't happen, then you're getting a little bit deeper into the thick of things, I think. I think so, too. So after the break, we will go deeper into the thick of things.

14:52Support for the show comes from Quince. I'm often on quests for weirdly specific basic clothing staples. So, like, sometimes I want a really nice long-sleeved black shirt that just kind of fits in a certain way so that I can layer it under one of my sleeveless dresses. Or other times I want a nice short-sleeved black shirt that looks a certain way with my favorite pair of jeans. And what I really appreciated about Quince is that they had a whole range of different shirts for me to choose from. I wound up getting three different ones, each with variations in neckline and sleeves and material. And they were all pretty much exactly what I was hoping for.

15:34Now, you might not be looking for several different kinds of hyper-specific black shirts, but Quince also has lots of wardrobe staples for spring for you to choose from. Think 100 % European linen shorts and shirts from$34 that are lightweight, breathable, and comfortable, but still look put together. You can refresh your wardrobe with Quince. Go to quince.com slash unexplainable for free shipping on your order and 365-day returns now available in Canada too. That is q-u-i-n-c-e dot com slash unexplainable to get free shipping and 365-day returns. Quince.com slash unexplainable.

16:44Futurology isn't sci-fi. Each week, they have thoughtful conversations with scientists, artists, technologists, philosophers, people who illuminate the forces shaping our lives and try to imagine both where they'll take us and also how we can respond. They discuss whether the future is something we have to endure or something we can design. And if we can design it, what will we build? Subscribe to Futurology wherever you get your podcasts or watch full episodes on YouTube.

17:39online and pick up at your favorite rack store for free. Great brands, great prices. That's why you rack.

17:54And now the last word in modern alchemy. So, as an undergrad, Lawrence Principe used experimental recreation to show that a recipe for making glass, published by an alchemist back in the 1600s, was in fact a legitimate recipe. But he still had questions, especially about the parts of alchemical texts that were more fanciful or more weird. What I was trying to do was to figure out, well, why did people believe that they were able to transmute base metals into gold? What made them write these texts with often the wild imagery? What's really going on there? He started working with the text of a 17th century alchemical author.

18:41His real name was George Starkey. He was born in Bermuda in 1628. He went to England, and he started circulating or writing texts under the pseudonym of Irenaeus philolethes, which is Greek for the peaceful lover of truth.

18:58Lawrence Principe:That's such a difference from George Starkey. So yeah, Irenaeus philolethes is really George. George was interesting to Lawrence because in his public work, he was as metaphorical and flowery as the next guy. But in his private letters and his lab notebooks, his instructions were clearer and followable. And he talked a lot about his theories about alchemy. And one of his theoretical ideas is that if you want to make gold, he uses a sort of agricultural metaphor, that gold has within itself a seed, and if you can find the right kind of metallic water to cause it to grow, you should be able to make more gold, just like you take one grain of wheat, you put it in the ground, you get more wheat back.

19:47So it's this agricultural metaphor. Apparently, there was a school of alchemical thought that believed that just like there is a seed of an apple inside an apple, there's also a seed of gold inside of gold. And that you could use the right kind of mercury to free that seed, which would result in a philosopher's stone that could change other stuff also into gold. So in this vein, one of George's projects was to make this special philosophical mercury. He claimed that you could make a particular kind of mercury, quicksilver, right? prepared in a special kind of way, that when mixed with gold and heated in a flask, would, as he calls it, vegetate.

20:28So this sounds extraordinarily unlikely. As a 21st century chemist, Lawrence was pretty skeptical that mercury was going to do anything that you would describe as vegetating. But he did have these rough instructions from George about how to make this happen. So he took some mercury and tried to do a version of what George did. mixed it up with a bit of gold, put it in a flask, sealed it up, and started heating it. Again, Lawrence works in a modern lab, so he was not exactly replicating all the steps, like because he was using mercury, which is toxic. He was working under a ventilation hood, for example.

21:04But he had the substance sealed in a flask. What's called the philosophical egg, a round bottom flask with a very long neck that you put the ingredient in and then you seal. and I had it buried in a sand bath in a thermostatically controlled heating mantle. He doesn't give us a correct degree of heat that has to be added, and so it took several weeks. And it just sat there as sort of a gray, slightly bubbly mass. So what I started doing is I started increasing the heat very slightly every few days before I went home. And one morning, I went in, took the flask up out of the sand, and what the night before had been an amorphous mass of sort of gray, slimy stuff, there was a beautiful, glittering silver tree inside the flask.

22:05What? Well, that's sort of the result I had. I put it back in the sand bath. I sat down in my desk and sat there for several minutes, quite concerned that I had actually lost my mind.

22:20Lawrence Principe:What do you mean a tree? Well, what had been just at the very bottom of the flask had grown upwards to fill the entire flask with a trunk and what we would call dendritic growths of a brilliant silver color. What? Yes, I have photos. I've even published photos of that.

22:49Now, this does not mean that modern chemistry is wrong or that either mercury or gold grows like a tree. But the mercury in the flask did take a shape that looks tree-like. And so suddenly, George's vegetative language was beginning to make more sense to Lawrence. Which is one really clear thing that experimental reconstruction can give a historian like him. So when they talk about this bizarre metaphorical description, it's not necessarily just their imagination or just a series of literary or metaphorical images. It actually, in some cases, has this concrete visual experience behind it. Part of the reason I study this is why does alchemy persist so long?

23:39Well, I think that they were actually seeing remarkable things, maybe not the actual transmutation of lead into real gold. Nevertheless, imagine just for a second, if I, as a late 20th, early 21st century chemist, was absolutely shocked by this and thought that I had lost my mind, what would that have done to a 17th century alchemist who is convinced that a vegetative theory of the growth of metals is the right explanation? He would surely have said, wow, it really works. I'm going to work twice as hard to take this on to the next steps of making the philosopher's stone because I've seen this amazing thing.

24:30Based on his work so far, Lawrence has developed a kind of hypothesis that he's exploring. So his idea here is that the early parts of some of these texts, the first few steps, they're more like this tree of mercury situation. They're doable, practical experiments. But then as the texts move on, he thinks they become more hypothetical. experience transitions to expectation. I've got a theory of how this is supposed to go. I've seen it work this far. What should happen next as a kind of extrapolation are the next few steps. I haven't gotten them to work, but here's the way they should work. And then a lot of these books end with a description of the philosopher's stone that he thinks is just copied from other older books, so not drawn from personal experience.

25:26It's kind of like a description of what they're all working towards or how they will know that they got things right. That's my working hypothesis right now. How many alchemical texts of the thousands that are out there this actually works with, I can't say, but I can cite several where it does seem to work pretty darn well.

25:44Lawrence Principe:Is there any part of you that's like, the first few steps don't seem to be metaphorical? Maybe they were just making philosopher stones. Oh, I often wish that. I did have the former dean of my university once come by and say, wow, if I can't balance the budget, I'm going to be coming to your lab for some help. So, there's still some imagination at work in alchemical texts, but Lawrence and other historians like him have shown that there's also some real stuff to be found as well. Stuff that's grounded in repeatable experimentation. And this new perspective has also changed how Lawrence and others look at some of the early figures of the scientific revolution.

26:33Isaac Newton studied alchemy, for example, as did Robert Boyle, a leading light in early modern chemistry. Robert Boyle certainly knew his alchemical literature. He depended upon some alchemical writers. In fact, our friend George Starkey that I mentioned to you was school-tutored, essentially, in the practice of chemistry by George Starkey. What? They knew each other? Oh, yes. Robert Boyle, in fact, knew about the vegetative theory of mercury. Yes. Starkey entrusted him with the secret of how to do that. And he spent the next 40 years of his life trying to get it to completion. If you think alchemy is total nonsense, that might seem like a stain on Boyle's reputation.

27:24But if you've redone the experiment and seen that this mercury tree stuff was doable chemistry, then maybe it seems less out of character. people have sort of imagined there to be some great discontinuity in the development of chemistry or in the development of the sciences, with what I like to refer to as the arrogance of the present, thinking that old people were dumb, and look here, the light dawns suddenly, and now we're modern. And we just see that this is just not true. And in fact, the truth of the matter is much more interesting to see this gradual accumulation of information, the refining of ideas, sometimes the discarding of theories in favor of a new one.