# Reflections upon Ancient and Modern Learning/Chapter 10

CHAP. X.
Of the Natural Philosophy, Medicine and Alchemy of the Ancient Egyptians.
The Egyptian Natural Philosophy and Physick shall be joined together, because there is so great an Affinity between them, that true Notions in either Science assist the other. Their Physick, indeed, was very famous in Homer's Time: And wonderful Things are told of Hermes, the pretended Father of the Chymical Art. But one ought to distinguish between particular Medicines, how noble soever, and general Theories founded upon a due Examination of the Nature of those Bodies from whence such Medicines are drawn, and of the Constitution and Fabrick of the Bodies of the Patients to whom they are to be applied, and of the incidental Circumstances of Time and Place; which are necessary to be taken in by a wise Physician. The Stories of the West-Indian Medicines are many of them very astonishing; and those Salvages knew perfectly how to use them, and yet they were never esteemed able ​Physicians. This Instance is applicable to the present Question: Galen often mentions Egyptian Remedies in his Treatises of Medicines, which are numerous and large, yet he seldom mentions any of their Hypotheses, from which only a Man can judge whether the Egyptians were well-grounded Physicians, or Empiricks. This is the more remarkable, because Galen had lived long at Alexandria, and commends the Industry of the Alexandrians in cultivating Anatomy, which is so necessary a Part of a Physician's Business.
In general therefore we may find, that all the Egyptian Notions of Physical Matters were built upon Astrological and Magical Grounds: Either the Influence of a particular Planet, or of some tutelar Daemon were still considered. These Foundations are precarious and impious, and they put a Stop to any Increase of real Knowledge, which might be made upon other Principles. He that minds the Position of the Stars, or invokes the Aid of a Dæmon will rarely be sollicitous to examine nicely into the Nature of his Remedies, or the Constitution of his Patients, without which none of the ancient rational Physicians believed that any Man could arrive at a perfect Knowledge of their ​Art. So that if Hippocrates learn'd his Skill in Egypt, as it is pretended, the Egyptian Physicians afterwards took a very stupid Method to run upon imaginary Scents, so far as even to lose the Memory that they had ever pursued more rational Methods. Those that would be further satisfied of the Truth of this Matter of Fact, may find it abundantly proved in Conringius's Discourse of the old Egyptian Medicine (h).{h} De Hermeticâ Ægyptorium vetere & Paracelsicorum novâ Medicinâ.
But we are told, that there was a particular sort of Physick, used only amongst the Egyptian Priests, which was kept secret, not only from the Greeks that came into their Country for Knowledge, but from the Generality of the Natives themselves; wherein, by the Help of the Grand Elixir, they could do almost any thing but restore Life to the Dead. This Elixir, which was a Medicine made with the Philosophers Stone, was a Chymical Preparation: And if we may believe Olaus Borrichius (i),(i) De Ortu & Progressu Chemiæ; as also Hermetis Ægyptorium & Chemicorum sapientia ab Herm. Coringii Animadversionibus vindicata. the Great and Learned Advocate of the Chymical and Adept Philosophers, was the Invention of Hermes, who was contemporary with Isis and Osiris, whose Age none ever yet determined. If these Claims are true, there is no Question but ​the Egyptians understood Nature, at least that of Metals, in a very high Degree. This is an Application of Agents to Patients (k),(k) Pag. 46. which, if made good, will go farther than any Assertion commonly brought to prove the extent of Egyptian Knowledge: And therefore, I presume, I shall not be thought tedious if I enlarge more particularly upon this Question, than I have done upon the rest; especially since there has not been, that I know of, any direct Answer ever Printed to Borrichius's Book upon this Argument, which he wrote against the forementioned Discourse of Conringius.
One may justly wonder that there should have been so noble an Art as that of turning baser Metals into Gold and Silver so long in the World, and yet that there should be so very little, if any thing, said of it in the Writings of the Ancients. To remove this Prejudice therefore, all the fabulous Stories of the Greeks have, by Men of fertile Inventions, been given out to be disguised Chymical Arcana. Jason's Golden Fleece, which he brought from Colchis was only a Receipt to make the Philosopher's Stone, and Medea restored her Father-in-Law, Æson, to his Youth again by the Grand Elixir. Borrichius is very confident that the Egyptian Kings ​built the Pyramids with the Treasures that their Furnaces afforded them, since if there were so many Thousand Talents expended in Leeks and Onions, as Herodotus tells us there were, which must needs have been an inconsiderable Sum in Comparison of the whole Expence of the Work, one cannot imagine how they could have raised Money enough to defray the Charge of the Work any other Way. And since Borrichius, Jacobus Tollius has set out a Book called Fortuita, wherein he makes most of the Old Mythology to be Chymical Secrets.
But though Borrichius may believe that he can find some obscure Hints of this Great Work in the Heathen Mythologists, and in some scattered Verses of the Ancient Poets, which according to him they themselves did not fully understand when they wrote them; yet this is certain, That the ancientest Chymical Writers now extant, cannot be proved to have been so old as the Age of Augustus. Conringius believes that Zosimus Panopolita is the oldest Chymical Author that we have, whom he sets lower than Constantine the Great. That perhaps may be a Mistake; for Borrichius, who had read them both in MS. in the French King's Library, brings very plausible Arguments to prove ​that Olympiodorus, who wrote Commentaries upon some of the Chymical Discourses of Zosimus, was 150 Years older than Constantine, because he mentions the Alexandrian Library in the Temple of Serapis, as actually in being, which in Ammianus Marcellinus's Time, who was contemporary with Julian the Apostate, was only talked of, as a thing destroyed long before. I don't mean that which was burnt in Julius Cæsar's Time, but one afterwards erected out of the scattered Remains that were saved from that great Conflagration, which is mentioned by Tertullian, under the Name of Ptolemee's Library at Alexandria. If this Zosimus is the same whom Galen mentions, for a Remedy for sore Eyes, in his 4th. Book of Topical Medicines, then both he and Olympiodorus might have been considerably older; and yet have lived since our Blessed Saviour's Time. However, be their Age what it will, they wrote to themselves, and their Art was as little known afterwards as it was before; Julius Firmicus is the First Author that has mentioned Alchemy, either by Name, or by an undisputed Circumlocution; and he dedicated his Book of Astrology to Constantine the Great. Manilius indeed (who is supposed to have lived in Augustus's Time) ​in the 4th. Book of his Astronomicon, where he gives an Account of those that are born under Capricorn, has these Words,
————scrutari cæca metalla, Depositas & opes, terræq; exurere venas, Materiemq; manu certâ duplicarier arte:
which last Verse seems to be a Description of Alchemy: But besides that, the Verse is suspected to be spurious; even the Age of Manilius himself is not without Controversie; some making him contemporary with the Younger Theodosius, and consequently later than Firmicus himself. We may expect to have this Question determined, when my most Learned Friend Mr. Bentley shall oblige the World with his Censures and Emendations of that Elegant Poet.
But if these Grecian Chymists have the utmost Antiquity allowed them that Borrichius desires, it will signifie little to deduce their Art from Hermes, since Men might pretend that their Art was derived from him in Zosimus's Days, and yet come many Thousand Years short of it, if we follow the Accounts of Manetho. Wherefore, though this is but a negative Argument, yet it seems to be unanswerable, because if there had been such an Art, ​some of the Greeks and Romans, who were successively Masters of Egypt, would have mentioned it at least, before Zosimus's Time. Such a Notice whether with Approbation, or Contempt, had been sufficient to ascertain the Reality of such a Tradition. Tacitus (l)(l) Annal. Lib. XVI. tells us that Nero sent into Africa to find some Gold, that was pretended to be hid under Ground: This would have been an excellent Opportunity for him to have examined into this Tradition, or to have punished those, who either falsly pretended to an Art which they had not, or would not discover the true Secret; which in his Opinion would have been equally criminal; and had Nero done it, Pliny would have told us of it, who was very inquisitive to collect all the Stories he could find of every thing that he treats about, whereof Gold (m)(m) Nat. Hist. Lib. XXXIII. cap. 1, 2, 3, 4. is one that is not slightly passed over; and besides, he never omits a Story because it appears strange, and incredible, if we may judge of what he has left out, by what he has put in, but often ranges the wonderful Qualities of natural Bodies under distinct Heads, that they might be the more observed.
To evade the Force of this Argument, Borrichius (n)(n) Herm. Ægypt. says that the Egyptians were afraid of their Conquerours, and so ​industriously concealed their Art. But there is a wide Difference between concealing the Rules and Precepts of an Art, and concealing the Memory that ever there was such an Art. If it was ever known before the Persian Conquest, as by his Account of the Erection of the Pyramids, which were built many Ages before Cambyses's Time, it is plain he believes it was, though we should allow it to have been in few Hands, it is not credible that this Art of making Gold should never have been pretended to before Dioclesian's Time, who is reported by Suidas to have burnt great Numbers of Chymical Book, which gave an Account of the Process. Whereas afterwards, ever now and then, Footsteps of cheating Alchemists are to be met with in the Greek Historians. It was not possible to pretend to greater Secrecy in the Manner of their Operations, than is now to be found in all the Writings of Modern Adept Philosophers (as they call themselves.) And yet these Men, who will not reveal their Process, would think themselves affronted, if any Man should question the real Existence of their Art.
But the Hypothesis of those who find Chymical Secrets in Homer, Virgil, and the rest of the ancient Poets, is liable to ​several Exceptions taken Notice of neither by Conringius nor Borrichius.
1. They say that when Jason heard that the King of Colchis had a Book writ upon a Ram's-skin, wherein was the Process of the Philosopher's Stone, he went with the Argonauts to fetch it. Here it may be objected, 1. That it is not likely that Sesostris, who conquered Colchis, would ever suffer the Egyptian Priests to reveal such a Secret to that conquered People. Dioclesian according to them burnt all the Chymical Books that he could find in Egypt, that the Egyptians might not rebel, when they were deprived of that Fund, which supported their Wars. And Borrichius supposes that the Egyptian Priests used this Art chiefly to supply the Expences of their Kings. 2. How came Jason and the Argonauts not to grow richer by this Fleece? It cannot be pretended that it was concealed from them, because it was like the Books of the Modern Adepti, written in so obscure a Stile, that it was unintelligible for want of a Master; since Medea was with Jason, who had the Secret, what or how great soever it was. 3. Since the Grecians were not tied to Secrecy, how came their Traditions to be so obscure, that those Passages in Apollonius Rhodius's Argonauticks ​which are supposed to be meant of the Grand Elixir, were never applied to a Chymical Sense, till the Writings of Synesius, Zosimus, and the other old Grecian Chymists appeared? Especially since, 4. Apollonius Rhodius himself was an Alexandrian Greek, born in Egypt, and so could easily acquaint himself with the Traditions of that Country, which he, originally of another Nation, was under no Obligation to conceal.
2. The Chymists, at least Borrichius for them, own Democritus's Books to be genuine, upon the Credit of Zosimus who quotes them: If they are, this pretended Secrecy falls to the Ground: For Democritus affirms, That he learnt his Art from Ostanes a Mede, who was sent by the Kings of Persia into Egypt, as Governour of the Egyptian Priests. Then the Secret was divulged to some of the Conquerours of their Country. If so, why no more Tradition of it? If not the Process it self, yet at least the Memory that once there was such a Process? Which would have been enough for this Purpose. The same Question may be asked of Democritus, to whom Ostanes revealed it. This will weaken Zosimus's Credit as an Antiquary, upon whose Assertion most of this pretended Antiquity ​is founded. Since at the same Time that he objects the Secrecy of the ancient Egyptian Priests, as a Reason why the Memory of this Art was so little known, he owns himself obliged to a Greek, who had it from the Egyptians at Second Hand.
But how will these Pretenders to remote Antiquity, who tell us, that Moses, by his Skill in Chymistry, ground the Golden Calf to Powder, reconcile a Passage in Theophrastus to their Pretensions? He, speaking of Quicksilver (o)(o) Lib. de Lapidibus., says that the Art of extracting it from Cinnabar was not known till 90 Years before his Time, when it was first found out by Callias an Athenian. Can we think that the Egyptians could hinder these inquisitive Grecians, who staid so long in their Country, from knowing that there was such a Metal as Mercury? Or could these Egyptians make Gold without it? If they could, they might reasonably suppose that the Israelites could make Brick without Straw, since they could make Gold and Silver without that, which Modern Adepti affirm to be the Seed of all Metals. Theophrastus's Words are too general, to admit of an Objection, as if he believed that Callias's Invention ought to be limited to his own Country. This, join'd ​to the great Silence of the Ancients, especially Herodotus and Diodorus Siculus, who dwell so long upon the Egyptian Arts and Learning, concerning most of the wonderful Phænomena of that extravagant Metal, plainly shews that there were no Traditions of such mighty things to be done by it, as the Alchemist's Books are full of. Borrichius therefore recurrs to his old Subterfuge, Egyptian Secrecy, and finds some doubtful at least, if not fabulous, Stories of Dædalus, and Icarus, and the Poetical Age, which he opposes to the positive Testimony of Theophrastus. Perhaps this may be thought to be begging the Question, since some who have written of the Philosophers Stone, have taught that their Mercury has no Affinity with common Mercury: Which has led many Persons to try several extravagant Processes to find it out. But Eirenæus Philalethes, who is look'd upon as one of the clearest Writers that has ever written upon this Subject; says expressly that (p)(p) Enarratio Methodica trium Gebri Medicinarum, p. 18. Natural Mercury Philosophically prepared is the Philosophical Menstruum, and the dissolvent Mercury.
After so long an Enquiry into the Antiquity of this Art of transmuting Metals, it will be asked perhaps, what may be thought of the Art it self. I must needs ​say, I cannot tell what Judgment to make of it: The Pretences to Inspiration, and that Enthusiastick Cant, which run through the Writings of almost all the Alchemists, seem so like Imposture, that one would be tempted to think that it was only a Design carried on from Age to Age, to delude Mankind: and it is not easy to imagine why God should hear the Prayers of those that desire to be rich. If, as they pretend, it was Zeal for the good of Mankind that made them take such Pains to find out such noble Medicines as should free Men from the most obstinate Diseases to which our Natures are subject, why do they not communicate them, and leave the Process in Writing plainly to Posterity, if they are afraid of Danger for themselves: Concern for the Welfare of Mankind and affected Secrecy, seem here inconsistent things: Men of such mortified Tempers, and publick Spirits ought not to be concerned, though Gold or Silver were made as common as Lead, or Tin, provided that the Elixir which should remove all Diseases were once known.
Though these are reasonable Prejudices against the Belief of the Truth of this Operation, yet one can hardly tell how to contradict a Tradition so general, ​and so very well attested (q) Vide Borrichium de Ortu & Progressu Chemiae, & Morhosii Epistolam de transmutatione Metallorum ad Joelem Langelottum(q). So many Men, methinks, could not have cheated the World successfully so long, if some had not been sincere: And, to use a Proverb in their own Way, so much Smoak could scarce have lasted so long without some Fire. Till the seminal Principles from which Metals are compounded, are perfectly known, the Possibility of the Operation cannot be disproved: Which Principles, as all other real Essences of things, are concealed from us. But as a wise Man cannot, perhaps, without Rashness disbelieve what is so confidently asserted, so he ought not to spend much Time and Cost, about trying whether it will succeed, till some of the Adepti shall be so kind as to give him the Receipt.
By what has been said it is evident, what Opinion one ought to have of the Chymical Skill of the ancient Egyptians: Though it is most probable that the Art owes its Original to them, from whom it receives its Name: But this Original is much too late to do Sir William Temple's Hypothesis any Service.
But it is high Time to leave the Egyptian Physick, and therefore, I shall only add One or Two Instances of their Skill ​in Anatomy, and so pass on. Gellius (r)(r) Noct. Attic. Lib. cap. 10. and Macrobius (s)(s) Saturnal. l. 7. cap. 13. observe; the one from Appion, who wrote of the Egyptians; the other from the Egyptian Priests themselves, that there is a particular Nerve that goes from the Heart to the little Finger of the Left-Hand, for which Reason they always wore Rings upon that Finger; and the Priests dipped that Finger in their perfumed Ointments; this being ridiculed by Conringius, Borrichius (t)(t) Herm. Ægypt. Præfat. assures us that he always found something to countenance this Observation upon cutting of his Nails to the quick: Pliny in the 37th. Chapter of the 11th. Book of his Natural History, and Censorinus in the 17th. Chapter of his little Book De Die Natali, give this following Reason from Dioscorides the Astrologer, why a Man cannot live above a Hundred Years, because the Alexandrian Embalmers observed a constant Increase and Diminution of Weight of the Hearts of those sound Persons whom they opened, whereby they judged of their Age. They found that the Hearts of Infants of a Year old weighed two Drachms, and this Weight encreased Annually by two Drachms every Year till Men came to the Age of Fifty Years: At which Time they as gradually decreased till they came to an Hundred, ​when, for want of a Heart, they must necessarily die.
To these two Instances of the Criticalness of Egyptian Anatomy I shall add one of their Curiosities in Natural Enquiries; and that is, their Knowledge of the Cause of the Annual Overflowing of the Nile. This, which was the constant Wonder of the Old World, was a Phænomenon seldom over-looked by the Greek Philosophers: Seven of whose Opinions are reckoned up by Plutarch, in the First Chapter of the Fourth Book of his Opinions of the Philosophers. If Curiosity generally attends a Desire of Knowledge, and grows along with it, then the Egyptian Priests were inexcusably negligent, that they did not know that the swelling of the Nile proceeded from the Rains that fell in Ethiopia, which raising the River at certain Seasons, made that overflowing of the Flats of Egypt. One would think that in Sesostris's Time the Egyptian Priests had Access enough into Ethiopia; and whoever had once been in that Country could have resolved that Problem, without any Philosophy. It was known indeed in Plato's Time, for then the Priests told it to Eudoxus; but Thales, Democritus, and Herodotus, who had all enquired of the Egyptians, give such un​couth Reasons, as shew that they only spoke by guess. Thales thinks that the Etesian Winds blew at that Time of the Year against the Mouths of the River, so that the fresh Water finding no Vent, was beaten back upon the Land. Democritus supposes that the Northern Snows being melted by the Summer Heats, are drawn up in Vapours into the Air, which Vapours circulating towards the South, are by the Coldness of the Etesian Winds condensed into Rain, by which the Nile is raised. Herodotus thinks that an equal Quantity of Water comes from the Fountains in Summer and Winter, only in Summer there are greater Quantities of Water drawn up by the Sun, and in Winter less, and so by Consequence all that Time it overflowed. Democritus's Opinion of the Phænomenon seems not amiss, though his Hypothesis of the Cause of it is wrong in all Probability: Yet it is plain, That Plutarch did not believe it to be the same with that which the Egyptian Priests gave to Eudoxus, which is the only true one, because he sets them both down apart. The Cause of this wonderful Phænomenon could not be pretended to be a Secret; no Honour could be got by concealing a thing, the pretended Ignorance whereof was rather a ​Disgrace. Those Egyptian Priests, whose Business it was to gather Knowledge, must have had an extraordinary Love for a sedentary Life, or have been averse to inform themselves from others, more than the rest of Mankind, who would not be at the Pains either to learn what Sesostris's Soldiers could have told them, or to go about Two Hundred Miles Southward to search for that, which they must certainly have often reasoned about, if they were such Philosophers as they pretended to be.
Nay, by the Curiosity of the Greeks we are sure they did reason about it; they thought it as much a Wonder as we can do now: Rather more, because they knew of no other Rivers, that overflow at periodical Seasons like it, as some are now known to do in the East-Indies.
Upon the whole Matter, after a particular Search into the whole Extent of Egyptian Learning, there seems to be no Reason to give the Egyptians the Preeminence in point of Knowledge above all Mankind. However, considering the great Labour which is requisite to form the First Notions of any part of Learning, they deserve great Applause for what they discovered, and ought to have proportionable Grains of Allowance for ​what they left unfinished: So that when the Holy Scriptures (u)(u) Acts VII. 22. assure us that Moses was skilled in all the Learning of the Egyptians, they give him the greatest Character for humane Knowledge that could then be given to any Man. The Egyptian Performances in Architecture were very wonderful, and the Character which Hadrian the Emperour gives them, that they found Employments for all Sorts of Persons, the Blind, the Lame, the Gouty, as well as the strong and healthy, shews that it was natural to the Egyptians to be always busied about something useful. The Art of Brewing Mault-drinks was very anciently ascribed (w)(w) Herodotus Columella, Lib. X. to the Egyptians as the first Inventors, for which these Northern Nations are not a little beholding to them. Their Laws have, by those who have taken the greatest Pains (x)(x) Conringius in Medicinâ Hermeticâ to destroy the Reputation of their Learning in other things, been acknowledged to be very wise, and worth going so far as Pythagoras, Solon and Lycurgus did to fetch them. So that if Sir William Temple had extolled their Learning with any other Design than that of disparaging the Knowledge of the present Age, there would have been no Reason to oppose his Assertions.
Cite error: <ref> tags exist for a group named "errata", but no corresponding <references group="errata"/> tag was found
Layout 2 Errata
Cite error: <ref> tags exist for a group named "errata", but no corresponding <references group="errata"/> tag was found