Professional Documents
Culture Documents
THEISEN, Wilfred. John Dastin. The Alchemist As Co-Creator
THEISEN, Wilfred. John Dastin. The Alchemist As Co-Creator
38, Part
2,
July 199 I
JOHN DASTIN:
THE ALCHEMIST
AS CO-CREATOR
By WILFREDTHEISEN*
The Alchemist
on his Knees
THE familiar picture of the alchemist on his knees on the floor of his laboratory, with arms
extended and head upturned in a gesture of prayer has undoubtedly raised questions in
many minds. "Why is the alchemist entreating God? Why would an alchemist consider his
work sacred? Why do alchemists introduce prayers into their works and their writings, when
we do not find other natural philosophers so inclined?" Other natural philosophers do not
hesitate to mention God in their treatises. Galileo,l Newton,2 Kepler,3 and Stephen
Hawking4 all mention as a motive for their natural philosophy a desire to understand God's
creation. Indeed, it is often much more than that; natural philosophy for Kepler was a means
of glorifying God: "The most wise Prince will easily reckon how great an addition this makes
in illustrating the glory of the fabric of the world, and of God the Architect".5 But one never
sees pictures of such natural philosophers on their knees. Nor are their works interspersed
with prayers for the success of their work, as are the works of the alchemists. Before the
* Department
U.S.A.
of Physics,
Saint John's
University,
Collegeville,
l\!Iinnesota
5632
I,
74
WILFRED
THEISEN
alchemist begins his experiments, he often explicitly submits his work to the will of God, with
the prayer, "If God so wills".
It is true that other natural philosophers in the Middle Ages, the sixteenth and
seventeenth centuries saw their work as having religious implications, that is, that their work
glorified God and led to a fuller knowledge and love of God. However, we do not find these
natural philosophers asking for God's approval and cooperation, as the alchemists did. The
alchemists saw their relationship with God as having a distinctive character and frequently
included prayers in their works to express this relationship. But what was the basis for this
attitude on the part of the alchemists?
In one of the works attributed to John Dastin,6 an early fourteenth century English
alchemist, we gain an insight to this peculiar religious attitude on the part of the alchemist.
In this work, The Alchemical Art/ the author draws a parallel between the creation of the soul
by God and the creation of the Philosophers' Stone by the alchemist. As he explains in the
text, the alchemist creates in a manner similar to the way God creates. However, Dastin is
careful to acknowledge in the beginning of the work that it is God who has created the matter
with which the alchemist works. Consequently, Dastin does not presume to say that the
alchemist creates ex nihilo. Nevertheless, the alchemist does participate in God's creative
activity, and for this reason considers alchemy a sacred activity.
This view of alchemy as a sacred work is consistent with the attitude found in otherworks
also attributed to Dastin. For example, in the Letter of a Good Man8 Dastin calls alchemy
God's gift and invokes Jesus to direct his hand and his mouth as he writes this letter on the
sacred art.9 In the RosariuslO Dastin also asks for the Lord's help in explaining the alchemical
teaching: "Therefore may it please our Lord Jesus Christ to send us the spirit of his
wisdom".11 As in The Alchemical Art, Dastin here also expresses his devotion to God the
Creator: "Blessed therefore be God, the Creator of most sublime creatures, who has given us
the means of destroying and reducing every thing to its first matter and nature". 12However,
in the Letter to Pope John XXII Dastin puts a limit to the power that the alchemist has:
The artists of alchemy should know that the species of metal can verily not be
transmuted, which is of course true, because the species as such are not subject to
sensible action, as they are entirely incorruptible. But the (individual) subjects of the
species can very well be changed one into another, as they are corruptible. And
nevertheless, the (individual) subjects of the species cannot be changed one into
another, unless - as follows from the sayings of Aristotle - they be first of all reduced
to their brima materia and thus changed to a form different from the one they had
before. 13
Another fourteenth century alchemist, Bernard Trevisan,14 is less precise and explicit in
describing the creative action of the alchemist. However, in his Book on the Most Secret Chemical
Work of the Philosophers 15 Bernard implies that alchemy cooperates with the creative action of
nature:
"It is clear from many irrefutable and uncontestable testimonies that nature by itself
procreates and prepares seedbearing creatures whereas the art [of alchemy] works
together with them toward that end to which nature creates.,,16
Like Dastin, Bernard Trevisan sees alchemy as a sacred art for which he finds a need to
entreat God for its success: "Indeed, I never forget to pour out my prayers to God that He
might condescend to assist my endeavours". 17
JOHN
DASTIN:
THE
ALCHEMIST
AS CO-CREATOR
75
The text of The Alchemical Art given below is a transcription and translation from MS
Sloane 2476. ff. 3-3v, of the British Library. Although there are other alchemical works with
this same title I have not found any other copies of this text. Any additions to the Latin or
English texts are included in brackets.
J ohannis
WILFRED
THEISEN
JOHN
DASTIN:
THE
ALCHEMIST
AS CO-CREATOR
77
WILFRED
THEISEN
NOTES
I. See Winifred Wisan, "Galileo and God's Creation",
Isis, 78 (1986), pp. 473-86.
2. See Martin Tamny, "Newton, Creation and Perception", Isis, 71 (1979), pp. 48-58.
3. See Johannes Kepler, Epitome of Copernican Astronomy. Great Books of the Western World. Ed. Robert Maynard
Hutchins. 54 vols. 16 (Chicago: Encyclopedia Britannica, Inc., 1938), p. 850.
4. See Stephen W. Hawking, A Brief History of Time. (New York: Bantam Books, 1988), pp. 173-75.
5. Kepler, ibid.
6. For some details on John Dastin see Lynn Thorndike, History of Magic and Experimental Science, 8 vols. 3
(New York: Columbia University Press, 1923-58), pp. 85-102.
7. Dorothea Waley Singer, in her Catalogue of Latin and Vernacular Manuscripts in Great Britain and Ireland, 3 vols. 1
(Brussels: Lamertin, 1928-31), p. 267, #287, ascribes this work to John Dastin. The only manuscript she lists
as giving this work is in the British Library, MS Sloane 2476, ff. 3-3V. There is a short excerpt from the text in
the British Library, MS Addit. 10764, ff. 246-247r. This excerpt from the text contains the first eleven lines of
the text as found in the Sloane manuscript. Since there is a good deal of confusion with regard to what texts
actually belong to Dastinit is difficult to say with certainty whether this is Dastin's work. This work differs from
other works Singer attributes to Dastin, in that it does not mention the use of sulphur at all in the alchemical
process and contradicts Dastin's repeated claims in other works that there is one and only one stone. Also, The
Alchemical Art the author stresses that the philosophers' stone is produced by nature, not by art, whereas in other
works attributed to Dastin art is seen as completing and perfecting nature. That this small treatise does not
discuss the healing properties of the stone, as Dastin does in other places, may simply be due to its brevity.
8. See Wilfred R. Theisen, "John Dastin's Letter on the Philosophers' Stone", Ambix, 33 (1986), pp. 78-87,
specifically, p. 79 and 83
9. Ibid.
10. See Singer, op. cit., ~: p. 210, #"231. Singer attributes a Rosarius with the incipit Desiderabile desiderium
impreciabile pretium to Arnold of Villa Nova, but notes that some manuscripts give John Dastin as the author
for this work. I am presuming the latter attribution is correct; there is a printed, unedited text of this Rosarius in
John Jacob Manget, ed., Bibliotheca chemica curiosa. 2 vols. 1 (Geneva, 1702), pp. 302-24.
I I. Manget, op. cit., p. 309.
12. Manget, op. cit., p. 312.
13. C. H.Josten, "The Text of John Dastin's 'Letter to Pope John XXII'" Ambix, 4 (1949): 34-51, specifically pp.
47-8.
14. For information on Bernard Trevisan, see Thorndike, op. cit., 3: pp. 611-27.
15. A printed text of this work is found in Manget, op. cit., pp. 388-99, with the title "De secretlsslmo
philosophorum opere chemico, per naturam et artem elaborando. see Thorndike, op. cit., p. 6 I 9 for information
on this work.
16. Manget, op. cit., p. 393. I have translated this from the Latin text, which reads: Patet multis irrefragabilibus
testimoniis, et evidentissimis, naturam ex seipsa procreare naturas spermaticas, ac preparare: tandem ars per
conjunctionem in eis operatur, ad finem tendens, in quem natura crearet.
17. Manget, op. cit., p. 389. I have translated this from the Latin text, which reads: Verum enimvero semper interea
meas preces ad Deum funderenon sum oblitus, ut subvenire meis conatibus dignaretur.