Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T12:59:22.511Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

“Sooty Empiricks” and Natural Philosophers: The Status of Chemistry in the Seventeenth Century

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 July 2010

Antonio Clericuzio
Antonio Clericuzio*
Affiliation:
University of Cassino
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Argument

This article argues that during the seventeenth century chemistry achieved intellectual and institutional recognition, starting its transition from a practical art – subordinated to medicine – into an independent discipline. This process was by no means a smooth one, as it took place amidst polemics and conflicts lasting more than a century. It began when Andreas Libavius endeavored to turn chemistry into a teaching discipline, imposing method and order. Chemistry underwent harsh criticism from Descartes and the Cartesians, who reduced natural phenomena to the mechanical affections of matter, leaving little room for chemistry as an independent discipline. Boyle rejected the chemical principles and promoted the fusion of chemistry with corpuscularianism. He did not reduce chemical phenomena to the mechanical affections of matter, but strived to promote chemistry as part of natural philosophy. Lemery gave strong impulse to the recognition of chemistry as a discipline in its own right by fostering a compromise of chemistry and mechanism. Lemery adopted the chemical principles, but did not see them as the ultimate ingredients of bodies. In order to promote chemistry, he distanced it from alchemy and pursued the reform of chemical terminology.

Type
Research Article
Information
Science in Context , Volume 23 , Issue 3 , September 2010 , pp. 329 - 350
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Agricola, Georgius [Georg Bauer]. 1950. De re metallica. Translated from the 1st Latin edition of 1556, with biographical introduction, annotations, and appendices upon the development of mining methods, metallurgical processes, geology, mineralogy & mining law, from the earliest times to the sixteenth century, by Herbert Clark Hoover and Lou Henry Hoover. New York: Dover.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beaulieu, Armand. 1993. “L'attitude nuancée de Mersenne envers la Chymie.” In Alchimie et philosophie à la Renaissance, edited by Margolin, Jean-Claude and Matton, Sylvain, 395–403. Paris: J. Vrin.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beguin, Jean. 1610. Tyrocinium Chymicum e Naturae fonte et manuali experientia depromptum. s.l.Google Scholar
Beguin, Jean. 1612. Tyrocinium Chymicum recognitum et auctum. Paris: Le Maistre.Google Scholar
Beguin, Jean. 1618a. Tyrocinium Chymicum. Königsberg: C. Berger.Google Scholar
Beguin, Jean. 1618b. Secreta spagyrica revelata, sive Tyrocinium chymicum [. . .] recognitum [. . .] e Gallico, in Latinum translatum [. . .], a Jeremia Barthio. s. l.Google Scholar
Biringuccio, Vannoccio. 1977. De la pirotechnia. Edited by Carugo, Adriano. Milan: Il Polifilo.Google Scholar
Boas, Marie. 1958. Robert Boyle and the Seventeenth Century Chemistry. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bougard, Michel. 1999. La Chimie de Nicolas Lemery. Thurnhout: Brepols.Google Scholar
Boyle, Robert. 1999–2000. The Works of Robert Boyle. Edited by Hunter, Michael C. and Davis, Edward B.. 14 vols. London: Pickering and Chatto.Google Scholar
Brendel, Zacharias. 1630. Chymia in artis formam redacta. Jena: J. Reiffenberg.Google Scholar
Brock, William H. 1992. The Fontana History of Chemistry. London: Fontana.Google Scholar
Chalmers, Alan F. 2010. “Boyle and the Origins of Modern Chemistry: Newman Tried in the Fire.” Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 41:1–10.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Clericuzio, Antonio. 1993. “From van Helmont to Robert Boyle: A Study of the Transmission of Helmontian Chemical and Medical Theories in Seventeenth-Century England.” British Journal for the History of Science 26:303–334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clericuzio, Antonio. 1994. “Carneades and the Chemists: A Study of the Sceptical Chymist and Its Impact on Seventeenth-Century Chemistry.” In Robert Boyle Reconsidered, edited by Hunter, M., 79–90. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clericuzio, Antonio. 2000. Elements, Principles and Atoms: Chemistry and Corpuscular Philosophy in the Seventeenth Century. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
Clericuzio, Antonio. 2006. “Teaching Chemistry and Chemical Textbooks in France: From Beguin to Lemery.” Science and Education 15:335–355.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Contant, Jean-Paul. 1952. L'enseignement de la chimie au Jardin Royal des Plantes de Paris. Cahors: Coueslant.Google Scholar
Crisciani, Chiara and Pereira, Michela. 1996. L'arte del Sole e della Luna. Alchimia e filosofia nel medioevo. Florence: SISMEL-Edizioni del Galluzzo.Google Scholar
Crisciani, Chiara and Pereira, Michela. 2001. “L'alchimia tra Medioevo e Rinascimento.” In Storia della Scienza, edited by Petruccioli, Sandro, et al. 10 vols., vol. 4, 907–920. Rome: Istituto dell'Enciclopedia Italiana.Google Scholar
Croll, Oswald. 1609. Basilica Chymica. Frankfurt am Main: Marnius & Aubrius.Google Scholar
Darmstaedter, Ernst, ed. 1926. Berg-Probir-und Kunstbuechlein. Munich: Verlag der Münchner Drucke.Google Scholar
Debus, Allen G. 1977. The Chemical Philosophy: Paracelsian Science and Medicine in the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries. New York: Science History Publications.Google Scholar
Debus, Allen G. 1991. The French Paracelsians. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991.Google Scholar
Debus, Allen G. 2001. Chemistry and the Medical Debate: van Helmont to Boerhaave. Canton MA: Watson.Google Scholar
Descartes, René. 1983. Oeuvres de Descartes. Edited by Adam, Charles and Tannery, Paul, 11 vols. Paris: J. Vrin.Google Scholar
Franckowiak, Rémi. 2001. “Le Cours de Chimie d'Etienne de Clave.” Corpus 39:73–99.Google Scholar
Franckowiak, Rémi. 2008. “La chimie du XVIIe siècle: une question de principes” Methodos [On line], 8 | 2008 (last accessed on May 5, 2010): http://methodos.revues.org/index1823.htmlCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Golinski, Jan. 1990. “Chemistry in the Scientific Revolution: Problems of Language and Communication.” In Reappraisals of the Scientific Revolution, edited by Lindberg, David C. and Westman, Robert S., 367–396. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Guédon, Jean-Claude. 1974. “Protestantisme et Chimie: Le milieu intellectuel de Nicolas Lémery.” Isis 65:212–228.Google Scholar
Guerlac, Henry E. 1972. “Guy de La Brosse and the French Paracelsians.” In Science, Medicine and Society in the Renaissance: Essays to Honor Walter Pagel, edited by Debus, Allen G., 2 vols. 1:177–199. New York: Science History Publications.Google Scholar
Hall, A. Rupert and Hall, Marie Boas, eds. 1965–1986. The Correspondence of Henry Oldenburg, 13 vols. Madison, London, and Philadelphia: University of Wisconsin Press, Mansell, Taylor and Francis.Google Scholar
Hannaway, Owen. 1965. “Early University Courses of Chemistry.” Ph.D. diss., University of Glasgow.Google Scholar
Hannaway, Owen. 1975. The Chemist and the Word: The Didactic Origins of Chemistry. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Hartsoeker, Nicolaas. 1706. Conjectures physiques. Amsterdam: H. Desbordes.Google Scholar
Hirschfield, J. M. 1981. The Académie Royale des Sciences (1666–1683): Inauguration and Initial Problems of Method. New York: Arno Press.Google Scholar
Holmes, Frederic Lawrence. 2004. “Investigative and Pedagogical Styles in French Chemistry at the End of the 17th Century.” Historical Studies in the Physical and Biological Science 34:277–309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Howard, Rio C. 1981. “Guy de La Brosse and the Jardin des Plantes.” In The Analytic Spirit: Essays in the History of Science in Honor of Henry Guerlac, edited by Woolf, H., 195–224. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Howard, Rio C. 1983. La Bibliothèque et le laboratoire de Guy de La Brosse au Jardin des plantes à Paris. Paris: Champion.Google Scholar
Joly, Bernard. 1995. “De l'alchimie à la chimie: le développement des ‘Cours de chymie’ au XVIIe siècle en France.” In Alchimie: Art, Histoire et Mythes, edited by Kahn, Didier and Matton, Sylvain, 671–690. Paris and Milan: SEHA and Arché.Google Scholar
Kahn, Didier. 2001. “Entre atomisme, alchimie et théologie: la réception des thèses d'Antoine de Villon et Étienne de Clave contre Aristote, Paracelse et les ‘cabalistes’.'’ Annals of Science 58:241–286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kahn, Didier. 2007. Alchimie et Paracelsisme en France à la fin de la Renaissance (1567–1625). Geneva: Droz.Google Scholar
Kent, Andrew and Hannaway, Owen. 1960. “Some New Considerations on Beguin and Libavius.” Annals of Science 16;241–250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kim, Mi Gyung. 2001. “The Analytic Ideal of Chemical Elements: Robert Boyle and the French Didactic Tradition of Chemistry.” Science in Context 14:361–395.Google Scholar
Kuhn, Thomas S. 1952. “Robert Boyle and Structural Chemistry.” Isis 43:12–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Le Fèvre, Nicaise. 1669. Traicté de la chymie. 2nd ed.Paris: T. Jolly.Google Scholar
Lemery, Nicolas. 1675. Cours de Chymie. Paris: Published by the author.Google Scholar
Lemery, Nicolas. 1683. Cours de Chymie. 5th edition, revised and expanded by the author. Paris: E. Michallet.Google Scholar
Libavius, Andreas. 1597. Alchemia. Frankfurt am Main: P. Koppf.Google Scholar
Long, Pamela. 2001. Openness, Secrecy, Authorship: Technical Arts and the Culture of Knowledge from Antiquity to the Renaissance. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Maillard, Jean-François. 1998. “Descartes et l'alchimie: une tentation conjurée?” In Aspects de la tradition alchimique au XVIIe siècle, edited by Greiner, Frank, 95–109. Paris and Milan: SEHA and Arché.Google Scholar
Mandosio, Jean-Marc. 1990–1991. “La place de l'alchimie dans les classifications des sciences et des arts à la Renaissance.” Chrysopoeia 4:199–282.Google Scholar
Mandosio, Jean-Marc. 1998. “Quelques aspects de l'alchimie dans les classifications des sciences et des arts au XVIIe siècle.” In Aspects de la tradition alchimique au XVIIe siècle, edited by Greiner, Frank, 19–61. Paris and Milan: SEHA and Arché.Google Scholar
Matton, Sylvain. 1992–1996. “Une source inavouée du Traicté de la chymie de Nicaise Le Febvre: L’Abrégé des secrets chymiques de Pierre Jean Fabre.” Chrysopoeia 5:721–731.Google Scholar
Matton, Sylvain. 1998. “Cartésianisme et alchimie: à propos d'un témoignage ignoré sur les travaux alchimiques de Descartes. Avec une note sur Descartes et Gomez Pereira.” In Aspects de la tradition alchimique au XVIIe siècle, edited by Greiner, Frank, 111–179. Paris and Milan: SEHA and Arché.Google Scholar
Meinel, Christoph. 1983. “Theory or Practice? The Eighteenth-Century Debate on the Scientific Status of Chemistry.” Ambix 30:121–132.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Moran, Bruce T. 1991a. Chemical Pharmacy Enters the University: Johannes Hartmann and the Didactic Care of Chymiatria in the Early Seventeenth Century. Madison: American Institute of the History of Pharmacy.Google Scholar
Moran, Bruce T. 1991b. The Alchemical World of the German Court: Occult Philosophy and Chemical Medicine in the Circle of Moritz of Hessen, 1572–1632. Stuttgart: Franz Steiner.Google ScholarPubMed
Moran, Bruce T. 2007. Andreas Libavius and the Transformation of Alchemy. Sagamore Beach: Science History Publications.Google Scholar
Newman, William R. 2004. Promethean Ambitions: Alchemy and the Quest to Perfect Nature. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Obrist, Barbara. 1993. “Les rapports d'analogie entre philosophie et alchimie médiévales.” In Alchimie et philosophie à la Renaissance, edited by Margolin, Jean-Claude and Matton, Sylvain, 43–64. Paris: J. Vrin.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pagel, Walter. 1958. Paracelsus: An Introduction to Philosophical Medicine in the Era of the Renaissance. Basel: Karger.Google Scholar
Partington, James R. 1961–70. A History of Chemistry, 4 vols. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Patterson, T. S. 1937. “Jean Beguin and his Tyrocinium Chymicum.” Annals of Science 2:243–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peterschmitt, Luc. 2007. “The Cartesians and Chemistry: Cordemoy, Rohault, Regis.” In Chymists and Chymistry: Studies in the History of Alchemy and Early Modern Chemistry, edited by Principe, Lawrence, 193–201. Sagamore Beach: Science History Publications.Google Scholar
Powers, J. C. 1998. “Ars sine Arte: Nicholas Lemery and the End of Alchemy in Eighteenth-Century France.” Ambix 45:163–189.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Principe, Lawrence. 1998. The Aspiring Adept: Robert Boyle and His Alchemical Quest. Princeton: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Principe, Lawrence, ed. 2007. Chymists and Chymistry. Studies in the History of Alchemy and Early Modern Chemistry. Sagamore Beach: Science History Publications.Google Scholar
Read, John. 1961. “William Davidson of Aberdeen: The First British Professor of Chemistry.” Ambix 9:70–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rolfinck, Werner. 1661. Chymia in artis formam redacta. Jena: S. Krebs.Google Scholar
Sennert, Daniel 1619. De chymicorum cum Aristotelicis et Galenicis consensu ac dissensu. Wittenberg: Schurerus.Google Scholar
Sisco, A. G. and Smith, C. S., eds. 1949. Bergwerk-und Probierbüchlein: A Translation from the German of the Bergbüchlein. New York: American Institute of Mining and Metallurgical Engineers.Google Scholar
Solomon, Howard M. 1972. Public Welfare, Science and Propaganda in Seventeenth-Century France: The Innovations of Théophraste Renaudot. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Stroup, Alice. 1990. A Company of Scientists: Botany, Patronage, and Community at the Seventeenth-Century Parisian Royal Academy of Sciences. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Stubbs, J. G. 1939. “Chemistry at the Académie des Sciences.” Ph.D. diss., University College, London.Google Scholar
Sturdy, David J. 1995. Science and Social Status: The Members of the Académie des Sciences, 1666–1750. Woodbridge: Boydell Press.Google Scholar
Taylor, F. Sherwood. 1952. “The Chemical Studies of John Evelyn.” Annals of Science 8:285–292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Todériciu, Doru. 1974. “Sur la vraie biographie de Samuel Duclos (Du Clos) Cotreau.” Revue d'Histoire des Sciences 27 (1):64–67Google Scholar
Webster, Charles. 2008. Paracelsus: Medicine, Magic and Mission at the End of Time. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Westfall, Richard. 1977. The Construction of Modern Science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar