Dedicated to the memory of Holger Preissler (1943â2006), in gratitude, admiration, and affection for an eminent Arabist, a truly humanistic scholar, and a teacher in the best sense!
Prolegomena: A Brief Account of Earlier Approaches to Coptic Alchemical Manuscripts
A legend transmitted in the KitÄb al-fihrist of AbÅ« al-Faraj Muḥammad ibn IsḥÄq al-NadÄ«m tells the story of the first translation of alchemical writings into Arabic, focusing on the figure of the Umayyad prince KhÄlid ibn YazÄ«d ibn MuÊ¿Äwiya, âwho used to be called the ḥakÄ«m of the MarwÄn family. Being noble-minded and deeply enamoured of the sciences, particularly the alchemical arts, he ordered a number of Greek philosophers living in the town of Miá¹£r, who understood Arabic perfectly, to come to him and translate their books on the art of alchemy from the Greek and Egyptian languages into Arabic. This was the first translation from one language into another under Islam.â1
Julius Ruska, the famous German historian of sciences, commented on the âEgyptian languageâ that âMan wird qibá¹Ä« hier im Sinne von altägyptisch, nicht koptisch zu verstehen haben.â2 The way of conceptualizing ancient Egyptian wisdom in the early and even earliest alchemical tradition3 seems to make this meaning of qibá¹Ä« most probable indeed. Would Ruska have maintained this view, however, had he known of the existence of Coptic alchemical manuscripts?
As early as 1885, the German Egyptologist Ludwig Stern edited the manuscript known today as British Library Oriental Manuscript 3669(1), a Coptic alchemical treatise on parchment.4 While Stern developed academic interests far removed from Egyptology, and therefore did not deliver a translation, the text remained scarcely noticed by Coptologists or by other scholars for the next 120 years.5 To my knowledge, there is just one work directly dealing with the manuscript, MacCoullâs 1988 study.6 In the field of the history of science, there is an exceptional note in Halleuxâs Les textes alchimiques commenting on the same detail of the KhÄlid ibn YazÄ«d legend, the translation from Coptic into Arabic:7 âCette tradition a été mise en doute par Ruska â¦, mais la voie égyptienne nââ¯est pas pour autant impossible, car il existe des traités coptes.â âVoir, par example, le traité publié par L. Stern.â As Halleux could not know, this text does not provide evidence for the possibility of translations from Coptic to Arabicâin fact, it does quite the opposite, as we will see.
Since 1890 an assemblage of three alchemical papyri has been kept in the Bodleian Library, known only to a few outstanding British Coptologists, such as Walter Crum,8 Paul Kahle Jr., and Sarah Clackson. Again, it was Leslie MacCoull who in 1988 first publicised the existence of these manuscripts and provided some preliminary information about their contents.9 As for myself, I came to know of them only after Sarah Clacksonâs premature death in 2003. Sarah, having been informed about my interest in Arabic words borrowed into Coptic, transferred to me her materials on British Library Or. MS. 13885, an eleventh-century monastery account book full of lexical borrowings from Arabic.10 Even more surprising, her bequest also contained copies of Walter Crumâs and Paul Kahleâs transcriptions of Bodl. MSS. Copt. (P) a. 1, 2 and 3. As I prepared to include this new wealth of Arabic words into my glossary and pondered the meaning of single lexical items, I could not help but think more and more about the texts themselves and their significance. Thus a plain Coptic papyrologist was nolens-volens won over to alchemy.
My intention here is to give an overview of the small but important Coptic alchemical dossier, its nature, significance, and the related problems it presents that have yet to be resolved. As a first step the Coptic manuscripts themselves will be introduced, then I shall focus on aspects of their setting within the Geistesgeschichte and of their transmission within the scientific tradition of early Islamic Egypt.
1 The Coptic Dossier of Texts Relating to Alchemy
The Coptic alchemical dossier, as far as is known to me at present, consists of no more than six textual items altogether,11 being quite different in length and character. Two of them, although somehow related to alchemy, are not alchemical texts in a proper sense: P.Berlin P 8316, because it is not really alchemical; and Cairo Catalogue Général 8028, because it is not really a text (and perhaps not properly alchemical as well).
P.Berlin PÂ 8316,12 a manuscript belonging to the Berlin assemblage of mainly magical Coptic papyri,13 provides a recipe for purple-dye14 under the seal of strictest secrecy:
| Ex. 1 |
P.Berlin P 8316, verso 16â18: 16 ⦠â²Ì â²Ïâ²â²Ï¥ â²â²©â²± Ï£â²â² 17 Ï©â²â²â²â²¥Ï¥Ì â²â²â²â² â²â²Ï¥ â²â²¡â²â²â²© 18 Ï«â²â²â²â²£â²±â²â² â²â²â²© â²£â²Ï¥ â⦠and you shall wrap it and cover it when you take it to the water, so that nobody can see it.â |
Its content and aim vividly recall those of Papyrus Leiden I 397 and Papyrus Holmiensis:15 two Greek papyri written around 300â¯C.E., which are usually regarded as the earliest extant manuscripts dealing with alchemy, although they are concerned, in quite similar ways, with merely technical aspects of the artâthe production, imitation and even forgery of costly materials, such as gold, silver, precious stones, pearls, and purple.16
Cairo Catalogue Général 8028,17 a single leaf of paper, supposedly from the town of Akhmīm in Upper Egypt, provides a short list of eight Arabic names of ingredients transcribed into Bohairic18 (i.e. Lower Egyptian) Coptic:
| Ex. 2 |
(Entire text) â²¥â²â²â²â²â²â²â²© Ⲡ⢠⢠ⲥâ²â²©â²Ï«â²â²©Ï¥â²Ï¥â²¥â²â²? â²â²¥â²¡â²â²â²§â²Ï« ⢠⢠â²â²â²â²â²
ⲣⲠ⢠⢠â²â²¥â²¥â²â²Ï«â²â²£ ⢠⢠â²â²¥â²â²£â²â²Ï§ ⢠⢠â²â²â²â²â²â²â² ⢠⢠â²â²â²â²â²§â²â² â¦â²¡â²â²¥â²¥â²â²Ï«â²â²£â§ âsyriac red (ÏÏ
Ïικόν)19 or cinnabar (zunjufr)âwhite lead (isbÄ«dÄj)âred chalk (al-maghra)âverdigris (al-zinjÄr)â(red or yellow) orpiment (al-zirnÄ«kh)â lapis lazuli (al-lÄ«nakh/al-lÄ«naj)âink (al-midÄd)â |
As was noted by Crum, this compilation of inorganic substances could have served alchemical purposes of some kind.20 Indeed, as each of these substances was common dye stuff and together they cover a good deal of the palette, we may even have nothing but the shopping list of a dyer or painter.21
So in a way, P.Berlin P 8316 and Cairo Cat.Gén. 8028 are on the margins of our dossier, while its core consists of the aforementioned alchemical manuscripts of London and Oxford, four extensive treatises written in Sahidic (Upper Egyptian) Coptic.
British Library Oriental MS. 3669(1)22 comprises 20 pages, forming a single quire, a quinternion, of a palimpsest parchment codex.23 The beginning and the end of the text are missing, and its first surviving pages are partly damaged, but at least 10 pages are fully preserved. There is no pagination, but the page order was originally fixed by the remains of the codexâs original binding.24 Ludwig Stern estimated the age of the manuscript to be five or six centuries,25 which would mean the thirteenth or even fourteenth centuries, but this seems to be considerably too late a dating. The handwriting, even if not very careful and therefore difficult to date (cf. Figure 10.1), does not indicate a time later than the tenth or eleventh century; likewise, the language of the text, a non-archaic late Sahidic, recalls tenth and eleventh-century Coptic texts.26 BL MS. Or. 3669(1) was acquired by the German Egyptologist August Eisenlohr at SÅhÄg in Upper Egypt,27 the famous site of Shenouteâs monastery near the town of AkhmÄ«m. But if SÅhÄgâs being the site of the manuscriptâs purchase does not automatically make itâor even its environsâthe site of its discovery, at least it could have been found there.
Bodleian mss. Copt. (P) a. 1, 2 and 3 were purchased, according to information available in the Bodleian Library Oriental Reading Room card catalogue of âManuscripts: Donors and Vendors,â in 1890 from âThe Rev[erend] G[reville] J[ohn] Chester,â a widely interested traveler, amateur archaeologist and collector of antiquities,28 who provided a number of British collections with objects of amazing diversity. In the case of the Coptic Bodleian manuscripts (P) a. 1â3, Chesterâs source remains unknown; wherever it was, there is no doubt that all three manuscripts were found and sold together, because they are as similar to each other as they are different from other Coptic texts. We also know that other Coptic papyri likewise kept in the Bodleian Library were bought by Rev. Chester near SÅhÄg.29 Based on information given by Chassinat, Le manuscrit magique, Leslie MacCoull, Coptic Alchemy quoted the opinion of Crum that the Bodleian manuscripts had been brought from el-Meshaikh, a site near the modern village of Girga. However, this argument is clearly erroneous and must be put aside.30 Even more striking as an argument than such fragmentary bits of external evidence is the actual resemblance of Bodleian mss. Copt. (P) a. 1â3 and the Papyrus Médical Copte of the Institut français dââ¯archéologie orientale (IFAO) in terms of layout and palaeography,31 which could indeed point to a shared milieu for all of the manuscripts, if not necessarily to their shared provenance in the same find. However, taking into account all of the evidence for the provenance of Bodleian manuscripts (P) a. 1â3, BL MS. Or. 3669(1) and Catalogue général 8028, I cannot help but at least raise the possibility that all of these Coptic texts belong to a single assemblage, originating from the same place of discovery. But even if this is not the case, the accumulation of alchemical writings from a narrowly limited area remains remarkable.32 This consideration leads me to a brief remark about the importance of the town of Panopolis/AkhmÄ«m and its surroundings as a likely site of alchemical practice in the late antique and early Islamic period.
An âAlchemy Valleyâ around Panopolis/AkhmÄ«m?
The aforementioned fourth-century Papyri Leiden I 397 and Holmiensis originally belonged to the famous dââ¯Anastasi collection purchased in 1828, which means that they originally formed part of the huge papyrus assemblage discovered at Thebes (some 120â¯km away from AkhmÄ«m) that has yielded the vast majority of all extant Greek, Demotic, and Old-Coptic magical manuscripts.33 Living at the time these manuscripts were composed, the Egyptian Zosimos, who reached his prime around 300â¯CE, is considered to be the earliest non-pseudepigraphic author of alchemical writings. Zosimos is usually referred to as ὠΠανοÏολίÏÎ·Ï in the alchemical tradition,34 and Mertens has adopted this as reliable biographical information, against the witness of the Suda.35 The continuation, perhaps even concentration, of this hub of alchemical activity in and around the Upper Egyptian urban centre of AkhmÄ«m into early Islamic times is indicated by the number of Arabic alchemists whose lives were somehow related to it in the literary biographical tradition.36 These include DhÅ« l-NÅ«n, a mystic and alchemist who spent his entire life in AkhmÄ«m (796â861);37 Ê¿UthmÄn ibn Suwayd ḤarÄ« al-IkhmÄ«mÄ« (al-NadÄ«m, Fihrist 358; floruit around 900);38 a nameless disciple of JÄbir ibn ḤayyÄn called al-IkhmÄ«mÄ« (al-NadÄ«m, Fihrist 355.23, probably not identical with the preceding person);39 AbÅ« Ê¿Abd AllÄh Muḥammad ibn Umayl (ca. 900â960);40 and Buá¹rus al-ḤakÄ«m al-IkhmÄ«mÄ« (living in the ninth century or later).41 Indeed, there might be a relationship between the broad stream of evidence for alchemical thought and practice in Panopolis/AkhmÄ«m on the one hand, and the townâs importance as a centre of textile production and, accordingly, of dyeing, as was emphasised by MacCoull,42 on the other. If âhonestâ alchemy was essentially a way of purifying and improving oneâs soul, it was hardly capable of making one a living. Alchemical efforts therefore are usually found in symbiotic connection with professions more appropriate for gaining a livelihood, be it the occupation of a physician as in theâperhaps typicalâcase of the famous AbÅ« Bakr Muḥammad ibn Zakariyya al-RÄzÄ« (d. 925â¯CE), or in a trade such as dyeing, in some respects a close neighbour of the alchemical arts.
Unlike BL MS. Or. 3669(1), the Bodleian MSS. Copt. (P) a. 1, 2 and 343 are written on papyrus. Bodl. MS. Copt. (P) a. 1 currently consists of four papyrus leafs of 91/4 by 93/4 inches, placed under glass in one large frame according to the direction of the fibres (see figure 10.2). Two of them, pages e(ro)/c(vo) and d(ro)/vacat(vo), are still joined together:
|
Frame, obverse: |
|||
|
page a (â) |
page b (â) |
page c (â) = conjunction = page d (â) |
|
|
Frame, reverse: |
|||
|
vacat (|) = conjunction = |
page e (|) |
page f (|) |
page g (|) |
Figure 10.2. Bodl. MS. Copt. (P) a. 1 as arranged in the frame
The original page order, albeit disarranged in the frame, can easily be reconstructed by comparison with the parallel text as attested in Bodl. MS. Copt. (P) a. 3 (see Table 1).
Table 1
Synopsis: Correspondences between Bodl. MSS. Copt. (P) a. 1 and 3
|
MS. a. 1 |
MS. a. 3 |
|
pag. 1 (Crum g) |
(|| verso, 1â14) |
|
pag. 2 (Crum a) |
recto, 1â12 |
|
pag. 3 (Crum f) |
recto, 13â24 |
|
pag. 4 (Crum b) |
recto, 24â35 |
|
pag. 5 (Crum e) |
recto, 35â49 |
|
pag. 6 (Crum c) |
recto, 50â64 |
|
pag. 7 (Crum d) |
recto, 64â78 |
|
pag. 8 (vacat) |
verso, 1â14 |
The original âquireâ was made up, somewhat strangely from a codicological point of view, of two single leaves (pages 1/2 and 3/4) and one folded double leaf (pages 5/6+7/8) laid next to each other piece by piece.
Bodl. MS. Copt. (P) a. 1 is written in a sloping hand likewise far from usual book writing as from business hands (cf. Figure 10.2). It can hardly be dated earlier than the ninth century but surely not later than the tenth century, because papyrus in Egypt fell rapidly into disuse after the mid-tenth century.
Bodl. MSS. Copt. (P) a. 2 and 3 strikingly resemble each other not only in measurements44 and layout, but in their handwritingâto an extent that it is not unlikely to assume that the same scribe was responsible for both. Both manuscripts are written in a sort of semi-uncial, clearly dependent on the contemporary bimodular Coptic book hand (the type otherwise called Alexandrian majuscule, narrow style, or unciale copte), which permits us to date these manuscripts with some confidence to the ninth or tenth century (cf. Figure 10.2). Both of them are written transversa charta in lines running parallel to the kollaseis (bonds) of the papyrus leaves, a manner otherwise attested, apart from documentary texts, in Papyrus Médical Copte IFAO (cf. above, n. 31). Finally, both pieces had been re-used and their recto sides are covered in Arabic letters from an earlier text.45
After providing some information on the appearance and physical coherence of the Coptic alchemical dossier, a few words about its contents can now be added. To start with, perhaps the most striking fact: we have four manuscripts, but only three texts. As has already been mentioned briefly, Bodl. MSS. Copt. (P) a. 1 and 3 are witnesses of the same text (see table 1). While all four Coptic alchemical treatises are plain compilations of alchemical recipes, more or less free of theoretical reflections and philosophical considerations, the literary form of Bodl. MSS. Copt. (P) a. 1 and 3 is shaped by an overriding narrative idea. The text is presented as a record drawn up by a disciple who had observed his teacher at work and written down what âthe masterâ (ⲡⲥâ²Ï©)âas he always calls himâdid and said. The paragraphs of the text of Bodl. MSS. Copt. (P) a. 1 and 3 are marked by opening phrases referring to this narrative framework, such as âI saw the master,â âI heard the master,â âthis is what the master let me knowâ and, most frequently, âthe master spokeâ (ⲡâ²Ï«â² ⲡⲥâ²Ï©). Thus, the voice we hear telling us recipes is that of the master, but always quoted by a distinct âhomodiëgeticâ46 narrator, his pupil. See for instance ex. 3:
| Ex. 3 |
Bodl. MS. Copt. (P) a. 1, pag. a, 1â7 || Bodl. MS. Copt. (P) a. 3, ro, 1â6: 1 â²¥â²â² ⲡâ²Ï«â² ⲡⲥâ²Ï© Ï«â² Ï«â² â² Ï©â²â²¡â²£â² â²â² â²â²©Ï£â² 2 â²â²â²â²â²â²©â²â² â²â² â²â²â²Ï¥ â²â²â²â²±â²¥ â²â²â²â²±â²¥ â²â²â²â²±â²¥ 3 ⲧâ²â²â²© â²â²©â²§â²â²â²â²¥ â²â²¥â²â²â²£â²Ï© â²â²â²£â²¥Ì â²â²©â²â²â²¡ 4 â²â²â²â²¥ â²â²¥â²Ï£â² â²Ï©â²£â²â² Ï©â²Ì â²â²©â²â²â²£â²â²â²â² 5 â²Ï¥Ï©â²â²â²¥Ì â²Ï¥Ïâ²â² â²Ï¥â²â²â²â²â²© â²â²â²Ï© â²Ì â²¥â²â²«â²â²¥ 6 â²Ï¥Ï©â²Ì â²â²©â²â²±Ï©â²§Ì â²Ï¥â²â²â²£â² â²Ì â²¥â²â²§ â²â²â²¡â²â²¥â² 7 â²â²â²Ï¥ â²Ì â² â²Ì Ï©â²â²â²© â²â²â²§â²â²©Ï£â² Ï©â²â²¡â²Ï¥â²¥â²±â²¡ 8 Ï£â²â²â²§â²Ï¥â²£Ì â²â²©â²±â²â² â²Ì â²â²©â²±â²§ âThe master spoke: Take 1 of âthe Sunâ [i.e., gold] and one unit (lit. measure) of ointment (al-mulgham), grind it very, very well, fill it into a stretchy bag, tie it to a string, let it hang down in a covered, drilled retort(?), smeared with âclay of the sagesâ [i.e., laboratory cement], leaving it in a gentle fire of dung, while you cook it 7 days (without nights) upon its broth, until it becomes one single stone.â |
While it is amazing enough to have two copies of this text, it is even more significant to see that both copies differ from each other at several textual levels. While morphology and orthography of Bodl. MS. Copt. (P) a. 1 come near to the standard of common literary (i.e., biblical) Sahidic, some spellings of Bodl. MS. Copt. (P) a. 3 bear dialectal features pointing to its Upper Egyptian origin. Both texts have entire phrases as well as single expressions of their own. And even the general textual arrangement differs slightly but significantly (see table 1): the initial paragraph of Bodl. MS. Copt. (P) a. 1, âI saw the master as he sublimated, etc.â (see ex. 4) forms just the epilogue of the text transmitted in Bodl. MS. Copt. (P) a. 3:
| Ex. 4 |
Bodl. MS. Copt. (P) a. 1, pag. g, 1â6 || Bodl. MS. Copt. (P) a. 3 vo, 1â5: 1 â²â²â²â²â²© â²â²¡â²¥â²Ï© â²Ì ⲧâ²Ï¥â²¥â²â²â²â² â²Ì ⲡâ²â²¥â²¥â²â²â²¡aâ² â²Ì â² â²Ì â²¥â²â²¡ 2 > â²â²Ì â²Ì ⲥⲱⲥ ⲡâ²â²¥â²¥â²â²£â²â²Ï£ [â²Ì ]â²â²â²â²â²¥â²â²â²£ â²Ï¥â²§â²¥â²± 3 â²Ì â²â²Ï¥ â²Ì â²â²Ï© â²Ì â²â²â²â²±[â²]â²¥ â²Ï¥â²Ï©â²â² â²Ì â²â²Ï¥ â²Ì â² â²Ì â²¥â²â²¡ 4 > â²â²Ì â²Ì ⲥⲱⲥ â²Ï¥â²¥â²â²â²â² â²Ì â²â²Ï¥ Ï©â²â²¡â²â²â²â²â²â²â²£ â²Ì â² â²Ì â²¥â²â²¡ 5 > â²â²Ì â²Ì ⲥⲱⲥ ⲡâ²â²â²â²â²¡â²£â²â² [â²â²]â²â²â²â²¥â²â²â²£ â²Ï¥â²§â²â²Ï¥ â²â²©â²¥â²â²© 6 â²â²â²£â²â²¥ â²Ï¥â²â²©â²â²Ï¥Ì Ï©â²â²Ï£Ï£â²â²£â²â² â²Ï¥â²â²Ï¥ â²Ì â²â²©â²±â²â² âI saw the master as he sublimated (á¹£aÊ¿Ê¿ada) the quicksilver (al-zaybaq) 7 times,âthereafter the yellow (al-aá¹£far) arsenic (al-zirnÄ«kh) [i.e., orpiment], soaking it in oil of aloe, he heated (aḥmama) it four timesâthereafter he sublimated (á¹£aÊ¿Ê¿ada) it on the refined gold (al-naá¸Ä«r) four timesâthereafter the yellow (al-aá¹£far) sulfur (al-kibrÄ«t), he put it in a ladle (ÏÏμάÏιÏÏÏον), he melted it on al-sharÄ«k (? âthe partnerâ), he made it a stone.â |
So what we actually have are not just two copies of one text but copies of two recensions of one text.
Further more, the text of Bodl. MSS. Copt. (P) a. 1 and 3 makes use of so-called Decknamen, substitute names, which are likewise attested in Arabic alchemical texts,47 such as:
| Ex. 5 |
Bodl. MS. Copt. (P) a 1 a 12: â²â²â²â²© â²â²â²¥â²Ïâ²Ï âglass (al-zujÄj) waterâ: cf. Siggel, Decknamen 51: mÄʾ al-zujÄj âglass waterâ as substitute name of Hg. |
| Ex. 6 |
Bodl. MS. Copt. (P) a. 1 g 9: ⲡâ²â²Ï©â²â²â²â²£ âî² (silver-) [symbol: crescent] yeast (al-khamÄ«r)â: cf. Siggel, Decknamen 39: khamÄ«r al-dhahab âgold yeastâ and khamÄ«ra âyeastâ as substitute names of Hg. |
Finally, it is worth mentioning that the final paragraph of Bodl. MS. Copt. (P) a. 1 (= the penultimate of Bodl. MS. Copt. (P) a. 3) seems to point to another text. This paragraph deals with the â²â²â²â²â²â² â²â²â²¥â²â²«â²â²¥, the âmachine of the sages,â a means or contrivance serving to decompose every substance (or at least, every metal).48 This âmachine,â however, needs what in Coptic is called a ⲡâ²Ï©â²£â², a ârecipeâ or âingredient,â in order to work, and it is this recipe that the master gives to his disciple in the text. The ending of the paragraph sounds like a to-be-continued, when the disciple says, âIf God puts it into the heart of the master, then he will let me knowâthe machineâ. Is this an intertextual reference to another alchemical text providing the continuation of the procedure? I shall return to the issue later in the article.
Bodl. MS. Copt. (P) a. 2, comprising 72 lines altogether, is the shortest and in some ways, the plainest (which does not mean easiest to understand) of the Coptic alchemical treatises, a mere sequence of recipes structured by simple initial phrases such as Ï«â² â²â²â², âtakeâ or â²â²â²â²â²¥, âanother oneâ (sc. recipe of the same purpose), cf. ex. 7:
| Ex. 7 |
Bodl. MS. Copt. (P) a.2, lines 1â6: 1 Ï«â² â²â²â² â â²â²â²â²£â²±â² â²â²Ï©â²Ï¥ â²â²â²Ï¥ â²Ï©â²â²â²© Ï©â²â²Ï£â²Ï©â²â²£â² â²â²Ï£â²â²©â²â² â²â²â²Ï¥ â²â²â²©[â²â²©Ï£â²] 2 â²â²â²§Ï¥ â²â²â²â² Ï«â²Ï©Ï«â²±Ï©Ï¥ â²â²â²â² ⢠ϫⲠâ²â²â² â² î¨ â²Ï©â²â²§Ï¥ â²â² â²â²â² â² â²Ï©â²â²§ â²â²©â²±â²â²â²© â²â²â²â²â²©- 3 â²â²£â²â²© ⦠â²Ï©â²â²§Ï¥ â²â²â²©â²¡â²Ï£Ï£â² â²Ï©â²â²§Ï¥ â²â²©â²± [â²â²©]Ï£â² î³ â²â²©â²â² â²â²¡â²â ⲧâ²Ï¥ â²Ï©â²â²©â² 4 â²â²¡â²Ï©â²â²â²© â²â²â²§â² â²¥â²â²¡ â²Ì Ï£â²â²â²Ï©â²â² â²â²â²Ï¥ ⲧâ²Ï¥ â²Ï©â²â²©â² â²â²¡â²Ï©â²â²â²© Ï£â²â²â²§â²â²â²Ï¥ 5 â²â²£ â²Ï¥ . â²â² â²â²©â²±â² â²â²Ï¥ â² â² â²â²â²â²â²© . â²â² . . â²â²â²â² â²â²Ï£â²â²â²Ï¥ . . â² . . 6 Ï£â²Ï¥â²â²â²â² â²â²â²©â²â²â²©â² âTake a (plate) [symbol: Ïá½³Ïαλον] of copper, cover (laḥafa) it with salt and al-shaḥīra (i.e., a vitriol), roast (shawÄ) it one night, take it away, beat it. Take 11/2 mil(iarÄsion) of it and 1 mil(iarÄsion) silver, melt them with each other, ⦠in it, a half-measure of it and [one] measure of (gold) [symbol: gold]. Melt(?) the (plate) [symbol: Ïá½³Ïαλον], put it into the salt, (namely) from time to time when you heat (aḥmama) it, put it into the salt until you make it a (plate) [symbol: Ïá½³Ïαλον] which ⦠. Melt it, make it one. It is very(?) beautiful(?). But if you make it a â¦, it will become black shortly.â |
As a recurrent finishing clause it has the formula â²â²©â²â²±â²â²â²â²â² ⲡâ². This could be understood either in a special, technical sense, âthis is a proof,â or, more likely, as a general recommendation âit is proved,â as is an often-attested conclusion in recipes in magic, medicine and cookery.
BL MS. Or. 3669(1) provides the most extensive and elaborate Coptic alchemical text. Its style is rich in imagery; alchemical metaphors and Decknamen are excessively used making it even more difficult to understand whatâs going on, such as:
| Ex. 8 |
BL MS. Or. 3669(1), fol. IVB 8: â²â²â²â²â²â²â²© â²Ïâ²â²Ï[â²â²±] âbat urineâ: cf. Siggel, Decknamen 43, shÄ«darj âbat excrementsâ as substitute name of Hg; cf. ibid., 36 with bawl âurine.â |
| Ex. 9 |
BL MS. Or. 3669(1), fol. VA 18: ⲧÏâ²â²â²¡â²â²¥â² â²â²¡Ï©â²â²â²â²§ âthe way of cooking the birdâ: cf. Siggel, Decknamen 44â¯f.: with á¹ayr, âbird.â |
| Ex. 10 |
BL MS. Or. 3669(1), fol. VIII A, 19: â²â²â²â²±â²â² âpearl (al-luʾluʾ)â: cf. Siggel, Decknamen 49: luʾluʾ raá¹Ä«b âliquid pearlâ as substitute name of Hg; cf. ibid., 51: marjÄn âpearlâ as substitute name of Sf. |
| Ex. 11 |
BL MS. Or. 3669(1), fol. VIII B, 12: â²â²â²â²â² âslaveâ: cf. Siggel, Decknamen 45: several substitute names with Ê¿abd, âslaveâ, âservant,â ibid., 37: jÄriya âfemale slaveâ (= Fe), and ibid., 38: khÄdim âservantâ (= Fe). |
The recurrent concluding formula of its recipes is â²Ï¥Ï«â²±â² â²â²â²â², âit is finished.â Compare ex. 12:
| Ex. 12 |
BL MS. Or. 3669(1), fol. VIa, 9â21: 9 Ï«â² â²â²â² â²â²Ì â²Ï£â² â²Ï©â²â²â²â²§: 10 â²± â²Ì : â²Ì ϣⲠâ²â²â²¥â²¥â²â²£â²Ì â²Ï© â²Ì â²â²â²â²â²¥ 11 Ï©â²â²§â²â²© â²Ì ⲣⲱϥ: Ï£â²â²§â²Ï¥â²â²â²© â²â²â²â²â²¥: 12 ⲧâ²Ï©â²â²© Ï©â²â²â²â²©â²â²£â²â²©: Ï[â²â²¡] â² [â²Ì ]ϣⲠ13 â²Ì â²â²â²â²£â²: â²¥â²â²â²§â²â²© ⲧâ²â²â²© [â²â²©â²â²â²â²] 14 ⲧâ²Ï© â²Ì â²¥â²â²©â²â²: Ï©â²â²â²¥Ì â²â²â²â²©â² [â²Ï«â²Ï¥:] 15 Ï«â²Ï©Ï¥ â²â²â²â²â² â²Ì â²¥â²â²«â²â²¥: â²¥[â²Ï©â²§â² Ï©â²â²£â²â²â²©?] 16 Ï£â²â²â²§â²â²©Ï©â²â² â²Ï©â²£â²â²: Ïâ²â²¡ â²â²©[Ï£â²] 17 Ï©â²â²â²Ï¥: â²¥â²â²§Ï¥ Ï©â²Ï«â² â²£Ì â²Ï£â² â²Ì â²â²â²¥â² 18 ⲧâ²â²£â²â²: â²â²â²â² â²¥â²â²â²â² â²Ì ⲡâ²â²â²¥â² 19 ⲧâ²â²£â²: â²Ì Ï£â²â²£â²¡Ì ϩⲠⲡâ²â²£â²â²§â²: â²â²¡â²â²¥ 20 ⲧâ²â²«â²â²â²: ⲡâ²Ì ϩⲱϥ â²â²Ï«â²â² 21 â²Ì â²â²â² â²â²â²â²â²â²¥ â²Ï¥Ï«[â²â²] â²â²â²â². âTake 10 units of the âbirdâ and (wa-) 10 units of red arsenic (al-zirnÄ«kh) [i.e., realgar], âtortureâ them until they âdieâ well; mingle them with each other, take six units of âthroat,â grind them, put them into an open glass, put another one on it, smear it with âclay of the sagesâ [i.e., laboratory cement], heat beneath it until they âfly up.â Take one [unit] of it, spread it over 100 units of tinâbut clean (á¹£affÄ) the tin with laurel(?)-milk!âyour work will succeed well. It is finished.â |
As might be expected, the aim of all recipes in these treatises is the extraction of gold, silver, a kind of gold even better than common gold, and certain artificial substances wanted for laboratory work, such as â²â²â² â²â²¥â²â²«â²â²¥, âclay of the sages,â which is an artificial cement used for insulating laboratory vessels, and the elixir, the ultimate catalyst, which is referred to as â²â²â²â²â²â²â² âalchemyâ in BL MS. Or. 3669(1),49 when it says:
| Ex. 13 |
BL MS. Or. 3669(1), fol. IIb, 16â22: 16 [â¦] Ï£â²â²â²§â²â²©â²â²â² â²â²â²â² 17 Ï©â²Ï«â² ⲡâ²â²Ï©â²§Ì : â²â²â²â²© Ï£â²â²â²§â²â²©â²â²â²± 18 Ï£â²â²§â²â²© â²â²â²â² Ï«â² â²â²©â²â²£ Ï©â²â²â²â²©â² ⲧâ²â²£â²â²©: 19 ⲧâ²â²â²â²â²© â²â²¡â²â²Ï©â²§Ì â²Ì â²â²â²¥â²â²¡: 20 ϯ â²Ï©â²£â²â² [â²]Ï«[â²]â²â²© â²â²â²©Ï£â² â²â²â²â²â²§â²â²â²Ì : 21 â²Ì â²â²â²â²â²â²â²â²: â²â²Ï£â²â²â²â²Ï¥ â²Ì 22 ⲡâ²â²â²Ì ⲧⲠâ²â²Ì â²â²â² â²Ì â² Ì â²â²â² Ï«â² â²Ï¥â²â²£â²¥â²â²: â[â¦] until they dissolve on the fire; let them, until they cool down, measure them to know how much is in them altogether. Put them on the fire a second time, add one mithqÄl [-measure] of al-kÄ«miyÄʾ [i.e., the elixir] to them. If you do it in front of yourself, then you will know: it has become beautiful.â |
2 The Setting of the Coptic Alchemical Dossier: Greek and Arabic Alchemy in Late Antiquity and Early Islamic Times
In late antiquity two hitherto independent traditions were merged into a new alloy, to invoke an apt metaphor. Bits of technological knowledge from the realms of specialised crafts, such as goldsmithing,50 metal-working,51 glass-making52 and dyeing53âso-called sub-scientific traditions according to Høyrup54âjoined with the scientific knowledge of Greek philosophical thought in the tradition of Empedocles, Plato and Aristotle. This novel and promising alliance of practice and theory, epitomised by the alchemical laboratory equipped with an increasing inventory of tools, vessels and furnaces,55 had even a third dimension: a gnostic hope of salvation through self-improvement.56 Processes such as distillation and sublimation were equated with purification and the ascent of the soul, while the earthly body, due to its heavy, solid state of matter, had to be left behind and overcome. Accordingly, in the alchemical terminology metals are called Ïá½° ÏώμαÏα, al-ajsÄd, âbodies,â while substances such as quicksilver, sulphur, and Sal ammoniac are designated Ïá½° ÏνεύμαÏα, al-arwÄḥ, âspirits.â57
Apart from the aforementioned (semi-)alchemical papyri at Leiden and Stockholm, the Greek alchemical tradition partly survived in a Byzantine compilation, the so-called Corpus Alchymicum Graecum, attested in a considerable number of manuscripts.58 The oldest parts of that corpus, pseudepigraphic treatises and dialogues, are assumed to have been composed in the first centuries CE;59 however, the manuscripts themselves are considerably later (see table 2). By far the earliest is a codex from the eleventh century kept in San Marco in Venice, followed by two manuscripts in Paris from the thirteenth and fifteenth centuries.60
Table 2
Greek and Coptic Alchemical Manuscripts
|
Greek Papyri |
Coptic Papyrus and Parchment MSS. |
Corpus Alchymicum Graecum |
|||||
|
(Halleux 1981) |
(Berthelot 1888) |
||||||
|
P.Leid. X |
P.Holm. |
P.Berlin |
P.Bodl. MSS. |
BL MS. Or. |
Cod.Marc. |
Cod.Par. |
Cod.Par. |
|
(inv. IÂ 397) |
P.8316 |
a. 1, 2 & 3 |
3669(1) |
299 |
2325 |
2327 |
|
|
iiid / ivth c. C.E. |
viith/ viiith c. |
ixth / xth c. |
xth/xith c. |
xith c. |
xiiith c. |
xvth c. |
|
However, when it comes to identifying a Vorlage of the Coptic texts, Greek compositions can generally be left out of consideration, since all the four Coptic alchemical treatises are so obviously influenced by Arabic models.61 A good deal of alchemical ingredients (cf. e.g. ex. 14â34) and laboratory tools (cf. e.g. ex. 35â39) have Arabic names:
| Ex. 14 |
â²â²â²â²â²â²â²â²â²â² < al-qalqand < Ïá½±Î»ÎºÎ±Î½Î¸Î¿Ï Siggel, Arabisch-Deutsches 86a: â(green) vitriol, Cu-vitriol.â |
| Ex. 15 |
â²â²â²â²â²â² < al-qilÄ« Siggel, Arabisch-Deutsches 86a: âpotash, saltpetre.â |
| Ex. 16 |
â²â²â²â²â² â²â²â²¥â²â² < al-maghnÄ«siyÄ < μαγνήÏια Sezgin 2003, 189; Siggel, Arabisch-Deutsches 88a; LSJ 1071b: âmanganise minerals.â |
| Ex. 17 |
â²â²â²â²â²â²â²â²§â²â²¥ < al-miqnÄá¹Ä«s < μαγνήÏÎ¹Ï (λιθοÏ), LSJ 1071b; Sezgin, Wissenschaft 181: âmagnetite.â |
| Ex. 18 |
â²â²â²â²â²£â²â²â² < al-martak Siggel, Arabisch-Deutsches 88: âlitharge.â |
| Ex. 19 |
â²â²â²â²â²£â²â²Ï£â²â²â² < al-marqashÄ«thÄ Siggel, Arabisch-Deutsches 88a; Sezgin, Wissenschaft 179; Goltz, Studien 267â¯f.: âmetallic sulphides.â |
| Ex. 20 |
â²â²â²â²â²©â²â² â²â² < al-mulgham Siggel, Arabisch-Deutsches 88b; Ullmann, Katalog 264 s.v. talghÄ«m, ilghÄm: âointment, alloys of Hg.â |
| Ex. 21 |
â²â²â²¡â²â²©â²£â²â² < bawraq, bawrÅ«q Siggel, Arabisch-Deutsches 78a; Sezgin, Wissenschaft 197: âborax.â |
| Ex. 22 |
â²â²â²â²â²â²â² < al-kÄ«miyaʾ Ullmann, Katalog 93â¯f., the âelixir,â cf. here above, n. 49. |
| Ex. 23 |
â²â²â²â²â²¡â²£â²â²§, â²â²â²â²â²¡â²£â²â² < al-kibrÄ«t Siggel, Arabisch-Deutsches 86a; Sezgin, Wissenschaft 200: âsulphur.â |
| Ex. 24 |
â²â²Ï©â²â²§â²â²§ < al-ḥadÄ«d Siggel, Arabisch-Deutsches 79b: âiron.â |
| Ex. 25 |
â²â²â²â²â²©Ï£â²(â²)ⲧâ²â²£ < al-nÅ«shÄdir Siggel, Arabisch-Deutsches 89: âsalmoniac.â |
| Ex. 26 |
â²â²¥â²Ï (al-zÄj) Wahrmund, Handwörterbuch I 818; Siggel, Arabisch-Deutsches 81a: âvitriol, sulphate of iron or copper.â |
| Ex. 27 |
â²â²¥â²¥â²â²â²Ï©â² < al-á¹£afīḥa Siggel, Arabisch-Deutsches 98; Ullmann, Katalog 60: âmetal plates.â |
| Ex. 28 |
â²â²¥â²¥â²â²£â²â²Ï© < al-zirnÄ«kh Siggel, Arabisch-Deutsches 81; Sezgin, Wissenschaft 202: âarsenic.â |
| Ex. 29 |
â²â²¥â²¥â²â²Ïâ²â²£ < al-zinjÄr Siggel, Arabisch-Deutsches 81; Goltz, Studien 256â¯f.: âverdigris.â |
| Ex. 30 |
â²â²¥â²¥â²â²Ïâ²â²©â²â²£ < al-zunjufr, al-zinjafr, Dozy, Supplément I 606a; Siggel, Arabisch-Deutsches 81b; Sezgin, Wissenschaft 195: âcinnabar.â |
| Ex. 31 |
â²â²¥â²¥â²â²¡â²â² < al-zÄ«baq Dozy, Supplément I 616b; Siggel, Arabisch-Deutsches 81b; Sezgin, Wissenschaft 195: âquicksilver.â |
| Ex. 32 |
â²â²§â²§â²â²(â²)â² < al-á¹alq Siggel, Arabisch-Deutsches 84a; Sezgin, Wissenschaft 197: âglimmer.â |
| Ex. 33 |
â²â²§â²§â²â²â²â²â²â²£ < al-tinkÄr Siggel, Arabisch-Deutsches 78b: âborax.â |
| Ex. 34 |
Ï©â²Ïâ²â²£ < ḥajar Dozy, Supplément I 250â252; Siggel, Arabisch-Deutsches 79a: âstone.â |
| Ex. 35 |
â²â²â²â²â²§â²Ï©, â²â²â²â²â²§â²Ï© < al-qadaḥ Siggel, Arabisch-Deutsches 99a: âcup, glass.â |
| Ex. 36 |
â²â²â²â²Ì Ï©â²â²â² < al-munkhal Siggel, Arabisch-Deutsches 100: âsieve.â |
| Ex. 37 |
â²â²â²¡â²â²©â²§â²â²â²â² < al-bÅ«taqa Siggel, Arabisch-Deutsches 96: âcrucible, melting pot.â |
| Ex. 38 |
â²â²â²â²â²â²â²©â² < al-kÄnÅ«n Siggel, Arabisch-Deutsches 99: âsmall oven, stove.â |
| Ex. 39 |
â²â²â²â²â²©â²¥ < al-kÅ«z Siggel, Arabisch-Deutsches 99: âjug.â |
And even more revealing, a number of verbal lexemes borrowed from Arabic does occur (ex. 40â44 and fig. 5):62
| Ex. 40 |
â²Ï©â²â² < aḥmama: âto heat s.th.â |
| Ex. 41 |
â²â²ÏⲣⲠ< ajrÄ: âto cause to run s.th.â |
| Ex. 42 |
â²â²Ï©â²Ï¥ < laḥafa Wahrmund, Handwörterbuch II 626; Dozy, Supplément I 527a: âto wrap, to cover s.th.â |
| Ex. 43 |
â²â²¥Ï©â²â² < zahaqa Wahrmund, Handwörterbuch I 852: âto grind s.th.â |
| Ex. 44 |
â²â²§â²§â²â² < addama Wahrmund, Handwörterbuch I 39b: âto join, to add s.th. to s.th. other.â |
In the language of alchemyâthe art of producing, processing, managing par excellenceâverbal expressions could receive highly terminological semantic values. Therefore, it is not surprising to find among the Arabic words borrowed into the Coptic texts a number of terms which belong to a set of crucial concepts of alchemy called tadbÄ«rÄt or tadÄbÄ«r, âmanagements, proceedings, methods,â such as dabara (in Coptic transcription taperi), âto prepare,â the verbal item underlying the term tadbÄ«r itself, and the other examples displayed in table 3.
Table 3
Arabic alchemical terminology: terms of tadÄbÄ«r âproceduresâ borrowed into Coptic
|
Procedure |
Arabic term |
Word class |
Coptic term |
Meaning |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
tadbīr procedure63 |
dabbara |
verb |
ⲧâ²â²¡â²â²£â² |
to prepare, to manage |
|
κάθαÏÏÎ¹Ï |
al-taá¹£fiya |
nomen actionis |
â²â²â²â²¥â²â²©â² |
purifaction, filtering |
|
al-taá¹£fiya |
á¹£affÄ |
verb |
â²¥â²Ï¥â²â², â²¥â²â²â²â² |
to purify, to filter |
|
purifaction64 |
al-muá¹£affi |
adjective |
â²â²â²â²â²©â²¥â²â²â²â² |
purified, filtered |
|
Ïá¿Î¾Î¹Ï |
aʿqada |
verb |
â²â²â²â²§, â²â²â²§Ì |
to fix, to thicken |
|
taʿqīd |
al-Ê¿aqd |
nomen |
â²â²â²(â²)â²â²§ |
fixed, thickened |
|
fixation65 |
||||
|
taṣʿīd, |
ṣaʿʿada |
verb |
â²¥â²â²â²§, â²¥â²â²â²â² |
to distill, to condense, to sublimate, to evaporate |
|
sublimation, destillation66 |
al-muṣaʿʿad |
adjective |
â²â²â²â²â²©â²¥â²â²â²§, â²â²â²â²â²©â²¥â²â²â²â² |
distilled, sublimated |
|
á½ÏÏηÏÎ¹Ï |
ashwÄ |
verb |
â²(â²)Ï£â²â²©â²â² |
to calcine, to roast |
|
tashwiya |
||||
|
calcination67 |
||||
|
λύÏÎ¹Ï |
inḥalla |
verb |
â²Ì Ï©â²â² |
to dissolve |
|
taḥlīl |
maḥlūl |
adjective |
â²â²Ï©â²â²â²©â² |
dissolved |
|
dissolution68 |
||||
|
mauh |
al-mÄwÄ« |
adjective |
â²â²â²â²â²©â²â²©â²â² |
watered down, diluted |
|
to dilute69 |
However, there are not only lots of lexical borrowings from Arabic, but also some remarkable higher-level linguistic interference phenomena, such as the occurrence of a linkage marker â²±, probably to be identified with the Arabic wa- (see e.g. ex. 12). Arabic verbs are usually borrowed in their imperative form,70 the grammatical equivalent of the predominant mode of recipes as a textual genre, however, this might be a linguistic rather than textual feature. Both the quantity and quality of borrowings from Arabic attested in the Coptic alchemical treatises leave no doubt that we have to look for Arabic Vorlagen. I believe the most reasonable conclusion to be drawn from this kind of evidence is that all the Coptic alchemical treatises came into being as translations of Arabic texts.71
This conclusion seems even more convincing given the fact that not only linguistic features point to Arabic patterns, but also the contents of the texts. The entire Greek tradition, as far as it is known to us, is in quite a different intellectual vein, as it were, being much more mysterious both in content and style.72 The rather technical, scientific, matter-of-fact nature of our texts, by contrast, seems to have its intellectual native soil, in Arabic alchemy. In the course of the development of Arabic alchemy this quality evolved after the translation movement from Greek into Arabic of the early Abbasid period and is connected with the names of JÄbir ibn ḤayyÄn and AbÅ« Bakr Muḥammad ibn Zakariyya al-RÄzÄ«.73 The latter died in 925â¯CE,74 while JÄbir is now suspected of having been a pseudepigraphic prosopon representing the intellectual and religious efforts of an extreme ShiÊ¿ite school. The large volume of alchemical literature claiming JÄbirâs authorship is now assumed to have been composed between the early ninth and the mid-tenth centuries CE.75 However, the issue is still being debated, and I have to restrict myself to reporting the opinion dominant at present.76
Be this as it may, our Coptic manuscripts, roughly datable to the tenth century and thereby surpassing in age the oldest extant Greek, as well as Arabic, alchemical manuscripts, seem to be renderings of almost contemporary Arabic texts. Certainly it would be desirable to identify these Arabic Vorlagen. Due to the striking feature of its unusual narrative frame, the most promising candidate for identification seems to be the text of Bodl. MSS. Copt. (P) a. 1 and 3. Unlike the great bulk of Greek as well as Arabic alchemical texts, which are usually presented as a teacherâs exchanges with his pupil/son (and reader), this text is structured quite differently. Phrases such as âI saw the master, as he did â¦â or âthe master said â¦â might enable someone familiar with the Arabic tradition to identify the text, if it is known at all. Since the experts I asked were unable to do so,77 I am strongly inclined to believe that such an Arabic text, if extant at all, has not yet been published which is hardly surprising. Despite the tremendous progress since the days of Marcellin Berthelotâs pioneering work La Chimie au Moyen Age in 1893, many texts even by such famous authorities as al-RÄzÄ« and JÄbir ibn ḤayyÄn remain unedited and untranslated.78
An important issue related to the narrative framework of the text of Bodl. MSS. Copt. (P) a. 1 and 3 is its character in terms of reality vs. fictitiousness. Initially, I had no doubts that the construct of the recording pupil was a literary conceit, and for two reasons I felt inclined to assume the text belonged to the huge corpus of writings composed in the name (or, as in our case, in the attitude) of JÄbir ibn ḤayyÄn.
First, according to his legendary biography, JÄbir was initiated into alchemy by JaÊ¿far al-á¹¢Ädiq, the sixth ShiÊ¿ite imÄm, and indeed several writings by JÄbir do contain references to his master JaÊ¿far.79 On the other hand, the often-attested phrasing of these references, wa-ḥaqqa sayyidÄ«, âand my Lord confirmed,â80 refers back to a distant past when JÄbir was the disciple of JaÊ¿far from a present in which JÄbir himself is teaching. This model is quite different from the narrative frame of Bodl. MSS. Copt. (P) a. 1 and 3, where the entire text is presented as notes kept by the disciple. Second, the authors of the corpus of JÄbirâs writings recommended and applied a strategy they called tabdÄ«d al-Ê¿ilm, âdispersion of knowledge,â in order to prevent unworthy and unprepared minds from acquiring the entire store of alchemical truth all at once:
Um die Profanierung ihrer geheimen Künste zu verhindern, enthüllen die Autoren des Corpus Gabirianum die ganze, ungeteilte Wahrheit nie an einer Stelle. Sie begnügen sich vielmehr mit Andeutungen und verweisen immer wieder auf andere Schriften des Corpus, in denen die übrigen Teile der Wahrheit niedergelegt seien und die man also ergänzend studieren müsse. Nur wer das ganze Corpus kenne, sei im Vollbesitz der Wahrheit. Es ist das Prinzip der âVerstreuung des Wissensâ [tabdÄ«d al-Ê¿ilm].81
I wonder if we do not have here a nice example of âdispersion of the knowledgeâ in the aforementioned paragraph about the âmachine of the sagesâ with its conspicuous reference to a future time when the master might let his pupil know the machine itself, in contrast to the present when he is feeding him mere snippets of information (cf. ex. 45).82
| Ex. 45 |
Bodl. MS. Copt. (P) a.1 d, line 11â12 || Bodl. MS. Copt. (P) a. 3, ro line 76â77: â²â²£â²â²¡â²â²â²©â²§â² ⲧâ²â²â²¥ â²â²¡Ï©â²â²§ â²â²¡â²¥â²Ï© â²Ï¥â²§â²â²â²â² â²â²§â²â²â²â²â²â² âGod will put it into the heart of the master, and he will let me know the machine (too)!â |
On the other hand, the separation of related material in order to limit the circle of initiates seems not such an extraordinary strategy, especially in a secret lore such as alchemy. So the mere fact that this literary technique was also practiced in the Corpus Jabirianum would hardly provide sufficient grounds for an attribution.83
As to the crucial question of whether or not the ârecording pupilâ is a literary fiction, I was recently led to quite a different way of explaining the literary form of Bodl. MSS. Copt. (P) a. 1 and 3. Through discussions with experts in Arabic science84 I learned that similarly organised treatises are attested elsewhere in the fields of early Arabic educational writing, such as in medical and toxicological literature, and more generally, that the transformation of educational matters from oral to written and their migration from the classroom to the institutions of literary transmission are well-evidenced stages in the formation of Arabic scientific literature.85 So the alternative, non-fictional possibility that our pupilâs records of alchemical experiments executed by his nameless âmasterâ may be traceable back to actual lessons in alchemy in a real laboratory should be born in mind. If so, the original (Arabic) text of Bodl. MSS. Copt. (P) a. 1 and 3 might have left the âclassroomâ and become literature some time ago, as is indicated by its existence in Coptic translation and even in two Coptic recensions (cf. above).
3 Conclusion
Although comprising only a small number of manuscripts, the Coptic dossier of alchemical texts is of some importance for the history of science. Apart from semi-alchemical texts such as the Greek papyri of Leiden and Stockholm and the Coptic P.Berlin P. 8316, the Coptic alchemical treatises of London and Oxford, datable to the ninth and/or tenth centuries, are by far the earliest alchemical manuscripts known to us, significantly older than all of the extant manuscripts of the Greek corpus of late antique alchemical writing, the Corpus Chymicum Graecum, and older than any Arabic manuscript on alchemy known thus far.86
The probable provenance of (at least some of) the Coptic manuscripts in the environs of Akhmīm sheds further light on the importance of that upper Egyptian town as a centre of alchemy in late antique and early Islamic period.
Despite its age, and contrary to what the KhÄlid ibn YazÄ«d legend of the KitÄb al-Fihrist would indicate, the Coptic alchemical dossier cannot be considered a link between Greek and Arabic alchemical traditions and does not contribute to the issue of possible ancient Egyptian roots of alchemy.87 The language, contents and literary genre of the Coptic texts prove them to be descendants of the Arabic stock of alchemy, and in particular its more empirical branch. More specifically, there is good reason to believe that they are renderings of almost contemporary, still-unknown Arabic texts.
Seen from the perspective of Coptic literature, the Coptic alchemical dossier belongs to a distinctive group of late Sahidic manuscripts dealing with matters such as medicine,88 mathematics,89 astrology,90 or just alchemy, while referring to taxonomies and technical terminologies of contemporary Arabic science. All these texts bear witness to the intellectual efforts of educated members of the Christian Egyptian society, who were willing and still able to think and write in their native language, to grapple with the new culture. It was only now, on the eve of the linguistic Arabisation of Egypt, that Coptic became a language of sciencesâalbeit of Arabic sciences! Such efforts might have been stimulated by the same feelings of fascination and the same high esteem underlying the much more famous, and much better investigated, medieval translations of Arabic scientific texts into Latin.91
Postscript (fall 2012)
After having finished the print version of this paper, my ongoing work on the Coptic alchemical texts tremendously profited from two sources. First, grants from the Alexander von Humboldt foundation and the Sarah J. Clackson fund permitted me to stay at Oxford and London for five weeks in fall 2007 and to thoroughly study the manuscripts. The results of this work, some of them most amazing, shall be dealt with elsewhere; they do not contradict, but partly enlarge, enrich and improve the observations communicated above. Second, thanks to discussions with Bink Hallum, in writing and orally during the workshop on medieval alchemy held at the Warburg Institute in London in October 2007, I have become a little bit more cautious against a too straightforward argument for a mere translation of the Coptic treatises from Arabic Vorlagen. I have also become more sensitive to the possible complexity of the reception and transmission processes underlying, and eventually resulting in our manuscripts. Taking the aforementioned linguistic observations into account, I still find Ludwig Sternâs assumption that texts such as BL. Or 3669(1) might have been somehow translated from Arabic compositions, a very likely and convincing suggestion. But strong as it seems at first glance, this hypothesis has some weak points too. For instance, a concept like the machine of the sages, mechanÄ nnsophos as the text puts it, is linguistically composed of two Greek terms, which needs to be explained if one assumes an Arabic composition simply having been rendered into Coptic. Also certain palaeographic features of the Coptic manuscripts, such as their use of cryptography and of symbols of the Ïημεία Ïá¿Ï á¼ÏιÏÏá½µÎ¼Î·Ï type, rather recall the habits of Greek alchemical manuscripts. So I would no longer exclude the possibility that our texts have been composed in Coptic, by Coptic authors, rather than translators, who were familiar with contemporary Arabic and Greek alchemical traditions. But we must not forget a remarkable gap in our knowledge: We do know fairly well, how translating from Greek into Coptic workedâthe kind of rendering attested by the great bulk of Coptic literary texts, but we have simply no idea of what a translation from Arabic into Coptic would look like.
Figure 10.1
British Library Oriental MS. 3669(1)
Figure 10.2
P.Bodl. MS Copt. (P) a.1, © University of Oxford, Bodleian Library
Ibn al-NadÄ«m, KitÄb al-Fihrist 242.
Ruska, Arabische Alchemisten 9, n. 3; cf. also 3 Ullmann, KhÄlid ibn YazÄ«d. Linden, The alchemy reader 71, favours the meaning âCopticâ: âUnder his (i.e. KhÄlidâs), direction, Arabian translations of Greek and Coptic treatises were completed.â
One need only remember the Greek and Arabic hermetic tradition, cf. Festugière, La révélation, Faivre, The eternal Hermes, Fowden, The Egyptian Hermes, Plessner, Hermes Trismegistos, Ruska, Tabula Smaragdina; Sezgin, Geschichte des arabischen 31â44, Vereno, Studien zum ältesten 32â35, and the importance of figures such as Petesis, Isis and Kleopatra in pseudepigraphic texts of the Corpus Chymicum Graecum and the Arabic alchemical literature, cf. Mertens, Une scène dââ¯initiation and Mertens, Pourquoi Isis, Quack, Die Spur, Richter, Miscellanea magica, Sezgin, Geschichte des arabischen 44 and 70; Ullmann, Die Natur- und Geheimwissenschaften 179â183.
Fragment eines koptischen 102â119.
Stern moved in 1886 from Egyptology to Celtic studies (Dawson, Uphill and Bierbrier, Who was who 404). In 1897, Ludwig Stern and Kuno Meyer founded the Zeitschrift für celtische Philologie, where he also received an obituary (Meyer, Ludwig Christian Stern). See also Magen, Ludwig Stern.
Apart from bibliographical items such as Crumâs entries on Or. MS. 3669(1) = nº 374 in Catalogue of the Coptic manuscripts in the British Museum 175, and on Cairo catalogue général 8028 in Coptic monuments 12, or occasional quotations in commentaries and comprehensive coptological bibliographies.
Halleux, Les textes alchimiques 65 and n. 40.
Crum mentioned the Bodleian mss. in the entry on Or. MS. 3669(1) = no. 374 of his Catalogue of the Coptic manuscripts in the British Museum, 175, n. 1, cf. below, and he utilised them for his Coptic dictionary, where they are referred to as Bodl. MSS. (P) a 1, 2, and 3.
MacCoull, Coptic alchemy, who had knowledge of at least two of the three Bodleian manuscripts, quoted by her as A(2)P and A(3)P.
The edition of this manuscript, based on Sarah Clacksonâs work, is under preparation by Georg Schmelz and myself.
I have not yet identified the whereabouts of the two manuscripts referred to by Chassinat, Le manuscrit magique, 15 as âdeux autres [sc. papyrus] de même nature [sc., alchimique] en ma possessionâ and again, âles fragments alchimiques que jââ¯ai acquis, il y a quelques quarante ans, à Louxor.â I also do not yet know the alchemical papyrus brought from el-Meshaikh, the ancient site of Lepidotonpolis, by Urbain Bouriant, according to the account given by Chassinat, Un papyrus 1â2: âAprès plusieurs semaines de pourparlers et de marchandages durant lesquels sa patience fut soumise à de dures épreuves, Bouriant entrait enfin en possession du précieux manuscrit [sc. the Coptic medical papyrus of the Institut français dââ¯archéologie orientale (IFAO)] et des restes dââ¯un feuillet des papyrus portant sur chacune de ses faces des recettes dââ¯alchimie, qui avaient été recueillis avec lui.â I recently suggested that this item could be identical with the medical papyrus Louvre AF 12530: Richter, Neue koptische medizinische, 167â168. Also Crum, Catalogue of the Coptic manuscripts in the British Museum 175, n. 1 ad no. 374, mentioned âother âalchemisticâ textsâ such as âZoega no. cclxxviii, Acad. des Inscr., Comptes rend. for 1887, 374 (Bouriant), Berlin Aeg. Urk. Kopt. nos. 21, 25; also Bodleian Papyri a1, a2, a3 and several papyri in the IFAO at Cairoâ; however, he subsumed clearly medical texts (Zoega, Bouriant, BKU I 25) under that category. So too did Tito Orlandi, Corpus dei Manoscritti Copti Letterari â¨
Papyrus, H. 42â¯cm à B. 9â¯cm; palaeographically datable to the seventh or eighth century; edited by Erman in BKU I 21.
Cf. Erman, Ein koptischer.
As to the affinity between dyeing and alchemy, see below; cf. also Pfister, Teinture and MacCoull, Coptic alchemy who certainly over-emphasised the connection of the Bodleian manuscripts to dyeing craft and dye-stuff trade (101): âAs will be seen, much of what was disguised with occult-sounding language as âalchemyâ was in fact simple craft technologyâtrade secrets.â
Ed. Halleux, Les alchimistes grecs; cf. also Berthelot and Ruelle, Collection; Caffaro and Falanga, Il papiro di Leida; Caley, The Leyden papyrus and Caley, The Stockholm papyrus; Halleux, Les textes alchimiques and Halleux, Indices chemicorum; Letrouit, La chronologie.
The operating instructions of P.Leid. I 397 and P.Holm. are ennobled, as it were, by the occurrence of parallels in the properly alchemical treatise of Pseudo-Demokritus, Physika kai mystika (although overlaid here by an additional symbolic layer); cf. Halleux, Les alchimistes grecs 72â75, and Vereno, Studien zum ältesten 8. A new edition of Pseudo-Democritus in now available: Martelli, The Four books.
Leaf of paper, H. 17â¯cm à B. 12â¯cm, ed. Crum, Catalogue général 12â13, nº 8028.
This dialectal tendency, rather amazing with regard to the assumed provenance of the text, is indicated not only by the occurence of the letter ϧ, but also by the use of Ï« for rendering Arabic âjâ (â®Ø¬â¬â) where transcriptions of Arabic words based on Sahidic phonology and orthography generally have Ï, cf. Richter, Coptic 497.
The common written form in Greek pigment lists is ÏιÏÎ¹ÎºÎ¿Ï , cf. Mitthof, Pigmente 291.
Crum, Catalogue général 13: âContents: Apparently Arabic alchemistic terms transcribed.â
Strikingly similar lists of dye stuffs in Greek have been edited and discussed by Fritz Mitthof, Liste von Pigmenten and Mitthof, Pigmente (providing an exhaustive bibliography on 299â304); cf. also Halleux, Pigments et colorants.
H. 16â¯cm à B. 12â¯cm; ed. by Ludwig Stern, Fragment eines koptischen 102â119; described by W.E. Crum in P.Lond.Copt. I, 374, p. 175, collated by myself in September 2006.
Traces of the earlier writing, a bimodular bookhand, are regularly visible on the flesh-sides (cf. Figure 10.1), but nothing distinctive enough for identifying the erased text can be read as yet.
Cf. Stern, Fragment eines koptischen 103: â⦠da sie noch in der ursprünglichen Heftung hängen.â; W.E. Crum ad P.Lond.Copt. I, 374, p. 175: âthreaded together in book form by a small parchment thong.â Today the page fragments are fixed in frames of Japanese paper and (together with the parchment fragment Or. MS. 3669[3] obviously not belonging to 3669[1]) have been re-bound in a hardbacked booklet. According to a pencil note at the half-title, this may have happened in October 1907. The correctness of the present page order can still be understood by conclusive codicological features.
Stern, Fragment eines koptischen 103: âDie Handschrift, welche immerhin 5â6 Jahrhunderte alt sein mag â¦â
Unexpected confirmation of my own impressions came from a handwritten acquisition catalogue in the British Library Oriental Manuscripts Reading Room, the List of Oriental manuscripts, 1879â1889, Or. 2091â4046. The entry on Or. 3669(1) among the 1889 acquisitions runs as follows (232): âVellum fragment of an alchemical treatise in Coptic (see Stern, Zeitschrift für Ãgyptische Sprache 102â119). A smaller Coptic fragment [i.e., probably, Or. 3669(3)]. 10th cent.â The authority the librarian may have been drawing upon is Crum, who classified the handwriting of BL MS. Or. 3669(1) in P.Lond.Copt. I, 374, p. 175 in terms of the palaeographical typology according, to the plates in Zoëga, Catalogus: âThe text ⦠is written in a small, uneven, sloping hand of Zoegaâs 9th class.â
Cf. Stern, Fragment eines koptischen 102; for Eisenlohr, cf. Dawson, Uphill and Bierbrier, Who was who 139.
Cf. Dawson, Uphill and Bierbrier, Who was who 96â97.
Such as Bodl. MSS. Copt. (P) a. 4, edited by Crum, Coptic manuscripts appendix, 77â82, which was brought from Sheikh Hammad near SÅhÄg, although its dialect is Fayyumic and its content is an account listing persons from villages in the FayyÅ«m.
MacCoull, Coptic alchemy 101, wrote that Crum âapparently ⦠was of the opinion that they [sc. Bodl. MSS. Copt (P) a. 1â3], like the medical papyrus ⦠now at the French Institute in Cairo, were found at el-Meshaikh (Lepidotonpolis) near Girga, across the Nile just south of Akhmim,â referring to Chassinat, Le manuscrit magique 15. The passage in question runs as follows: âLe papyrus médical de lââ¯Institut français a été découvert près du village dââ¯El-Méshaîkh (Lepidotonpolis), à quelques kilomètres au sud-est de Girga. Les fragments alchimiques que jââ¯ai acquis, il y a quelques quarante ans, à Louxor, mââ¯ont été donnés comme provenant de la même trouvaille. Celle-ci, au dire du marchand, comprenait plusieurs autres pièces encore, de dimensions plus grandes. Je nââ¯ai pu les acheter en raison de leur prix élevé, ni les voir, leur propriétaire refusant de me les montre si je ne lui versais préalablement la somme quââ¯il en demandait. Je pense quââ¯il sââ¯agit des trois papyrus conservés maintenant à Oxford, et dont je dois la connaissance à lââ¯amabilité de M. Crum.â However, Crum certainly knew the true circumstances of the acquaintance of Bodl. mss. Copt (P) a.1â3 from Rev. Chester in 1890, and the same circumstances disprove Chassinatâs assumption that the manuscripts withheld by his purchaser were identical with the Bodleiean manuscripts, since these were already resident in Oxford when Chassinat arrived in Egypt for the first time in 1895 (cf. Dawson, Uphill and Bierbrier, Who was who 95â96). A different argument for the shared provenance of Bodl. MSS. Copt. (P) a. 1â3 and P.MeÌd.IFAO is made by Richter, Neue koptische medizinische 167â168.
Especially the unusual format of the papyrus scrolls, written transversa chartaâin the case of the medical papyrus a strip of 248â¯cm in length and 27â¯cm in width, in the case of the Bodleian manuscripts a. 2 and 3, strips of ca. 70 and ca. 80â¯cm in length by ca. 25â¯cm in width.
As is also true of the still-missing alchemical manuscripts from el-Meshaikh, cf. above, n. 11.
Cf. Halleux, Les alchimistes grecs 5â6. Preisendanz commented on nº xiii (P.Leiden J 395) (Papyri 86): âGleiche H[an]d in P Leid. J 397, P Holm,â cf. also Halleux, Les alchimistes grecs 12: âIl ne nous a pas été possible de vérifier cette hypothèse qui révèlerait dans la personne du scribe une curieuse connexion des préoccupations alchimiques avec la magie.â On the circumstances of this find and the history of the dââ¯Anastasi papyri, cf. Tait, Theban magic and Dieleman, Priests 11â20.
Cf. Mertens, Alchemy 165 and Mertens, Zosime de Panopolis XIIâXIX.
Mertens, Zosime de Panopolis 166.
Cf. Abt, Madelung and Hofmeier, Muḥammad Ibn-Umail xiiiâxiv; Plessner, Vorsokratische 130â131.
Abt, Madelung and Hofmeier, Muḥammad Ibn-Umail xiv.
Abt, Madelung and Hofmeier, Muḥammad Ibn-Umail xiv
Ullmann, Die Natur- und Geheimwissenschaften 217.
Abt, Madelung and Hofmeier, Muḥammad Ibn-Umail xiv.
Sezgin, Geschichte 274, and Ullmann, Die Natur- und Geheimwissenschaften 235.
MacCoull, Coptic Alchemy 101: âFrom burials at Akhmim ⦠have come a great many of what art historians generically term Coptic textiles. Both Greek and Arabic papyri attest to the presence of weaving and dyeing facilities in the city and its surrounding area ⦠Panopolis had gained the reputation of a continuing center of âarcane philosophy,â i.e., craft technology, which combined with surviving Christianity and a memory of Hellenistic philosophy.â The importance of that branch of trade is already mentioned by Strabo XVII 1.41, and was still valid in Abbasid, Tulunid and Fatimid times, cf. Frantz-Murphy 1981, A new interpretation. From the wealth of papyrological evidence, I only cite the bilingual archive of the purple-dye trader Aurelius Pachymios (Wessely, Neue griechische 122â139).
Using the transcriptions of this unpublished mss. in Crumâs notebook 83 (Bodl. MSS. Copt. (P) a.1, 2, and 3) and Kahleâs notebook 33 (Bodl. MSS. Copt. (P) a.1 and 3), I had the opportunity to collate the texts in September 2004 and September 2006.
Bodl. MS. Copt. (P) a. 2 measures 81â¯cm in length by 25â¯cm in width, Bodl. MS. Copt. (P) a. 3 measures 82â¯cm in length by 25.5â¯cm in width.
Petra Sijpesteijn was kind enough to have a look at these texts and was able to identify them as P.Bodl.Arab. 1 (= verso of Bodl. MS. Copt. (P) a. 3) and 2 (= verso of Bodl. MS. Copt. (P) a. 2), edited by Margoliouth in 1893, who only made a laconic note on the Coptic texts (7): âThe Coptic documents written on the back of both Papyri and partly within the lines of Papyrus 1 have, I understand, no connexion with these letters.â Apparently P.Bodl.Arab. 1 is cut off at the lower part and P.Bodl.Arab. 2 at the upper part. In the case of Bodl. MSS. Copt. (P) a. 3, the last 14 lines of the Coptic alchemical text were placed on the |-side, using the interlinear space between the first lines of P.Bodl.Arab. 1.
In terms of Gérard Genette, Narrative discourse.
Cf. Siggel, Decknamen; Ullmann, Die Natur- und Geheimwissenschaften 266â270.
The very result which was expected of a piece of equipment called menstruum universale in early modern western alchemy.
For this meaning, cf. Dozy, Supplément 514b: âkÄ«miyÄʾ désignait dans lââ¯origine la substance qui transmue les métaux, la pierre philosophale â¦; cââ¯est le synonyme de iksÄ«r ⦠. La science (lââ¯alchimie) sââ¯appelait á¹£anaÊ¿at al-kÄ«miyÄʾ (= á¹£anÊ¿at al-iksÄ«r), Ê¿ilm á¹£anÊ¿at kÄ«miyÄʾ, Ê¿ilm al-kÄ«miyÄʾ, et enfin al-kÄ«miyÄʾ tout court.â Stern, Fragment eines koptischen 102 was wrong when he thought the â²â²â² â²â²¥â²â²«â²â²¥ âclay of the sagesâ to be the elixir.
Depauw, New light.
Cf. Reiter, Die Metalle; Tylecote, A history.
Cf. Nicholson, Egyptian; Stern and Schlick-Nolte, Early glass.
Cf. Pfister, Teinture et alchimie and Germer, Die Textilfärberei.
Høyrup, Integration/non-integration.
Cf. Mertens, Alchemy CXIIIâCLXIX on the appareillage de Zosime; cf. also Ganzenmüller, Liber Florum Geberti; Humphrey, Oleson and Sherwood, Greek and Roman; for pictures and reconstructions, cf. Sezgin, Wissenschaft 109â153. For the excavation of an alchemical laboratory in 1882 at Dronkah south of Assiut see Maspero, Ãtudes de mythologie 1, 206â209, and Stern, Fragment eines koptischen 102. Regrettably, I could not find any information on the whereabouts of this unique archaeological evidence.
Cf. Eliade, Die hellenistische, Hofmeier, Alchemie; Merkur, A study; Stolzenberg, Unpropitious tinctures; Wilson, Pythagorean theory and Wilson, Distilling.
Cf. Macuch, Greek technical terms; Ullmann, Die Natur- und Geheimwissenschaften 148â¯f.
Cf. Berthelot and Ruelle, Collection; Halleux, Les textes alchimiques; Rehm, Zur Ãberlieferung.
The model developed by Halleux, Les textes alchimiques 61â64 and Letrouit, La chronologie and adopted by Mertens, Alchemy distinguishes three chronological layers within the corpus: 1st stratum (1stâ3rd centuries CE)âpseudepigraphic writings (Moses, Isis, Cleopatra, AgathodaimÅn, Thot, Hermes, Joseph, Maria the Jewess, Democritus, Zarathustra, Ostanes, Chymes etc.), partly quoted and presupposed by Zosimos, perhaps the earliest among them Physika kai mystika of Pseudo-Democritus; 2nd stratum (ca. 300â¯CE)âthe writings of Zosimos of Panopolis; 3rd stratum (ca. 4thâ7th centuries CE)âcommenting writings (e.g. Synesios, Olympiodor, Stephanos).
Cf. Halleux, Les textes alchimiques 60â61.
Already Chassinat, Un papyrus médical VIII noticed à propos the influences of Arabic science on the Papyrus Médical Copte IFAO: âElle se retrouvent encore, et cela sans exception, dans les quelques écrits alchimiques que nous connaissons.â
16 out of a total of 21 Arabic verbs borrowed into Coptic so far identified are attested in the corpus of our dossier. As for the strategy of inserting Arabic verbal lexemes into Coptic syntactic structures, cf. Richter, Coptic 498â499.
Ullmann, Katalog der arabischen II 33.
Ullmann, Katalog der arabischen II 263 s.v. taá¹£fiya; Ullmann, Katalog der arabischen II 52.
Ullmann, Die Natur- und Geheimwissenschaften 263 s.v. taʿqīd.
Ullmann, Katalog der arabischen II 263 s.v. taṣʿīd.
Ullmann, Katalog der arabischen II 57 and Ullmann, Die Natur- und Geheimwissenschaften 263 s.v. tashwiya.
Ullmann, Die Natur- und Geheimwissenschaften 262, s.v. taḥlÄ«l, ḥall (λύÏιÏ); Ullmann, Katalog der arabischen II 27.
Wahrmund, Handwörterbuch I 2 956b; Dozy, Supplément II 634a.
Cf. Richter, Coptic 498. Meanwhile, I am reasonably confident that examples (1) akÄt and (2) elhÄf should also be interpreted as Arabic imperative (aÊ¿qid, alḥif), rather than infinitive (iÊ¿qÄd, ilḥÄf), forms. This was also suggested to me by my esteemed teacher of Arabic, Prof. Holger Preissler â .
This was already Sternâs opinion of BL MS. Or. 3669(1); cf. Stern, Fragment eines koptischen 102: âein recht ansehnliches Fragment ⦠welches, wie ich darthun werde, aus dem Arabischen übertragen ist, aber die koptische Literatur gleichwohl in bedeutender Weise bereichert.â
Cf. Eliade, Die hellenistische; Gundel, Alchemie; Merkur, A study; Plessner, Vorsokratische; Riess, Alchemie; Reitzenstein, Zur Geschichte; Vereno, Studien 16â21; Viano, Gli alchimisti and Viano, Alchimie.
Garbers and Weyer, Quellengeschichtliches 64â71; Hamarnehi, Arabic-Islamic; Kraus, JÄbir Ibn ḤayyÄn II 30â42; Landfester, Berger and Priesner, Chemie/alchemie; Rex, Zur Theorie; Sezgin, Geschichte 10â11; Ullmann, Die Natur- und Geheimwissenschaften 148â152; Ullmann, al-KÄ«miya; Vereno, Studien 21â31; Weyer, Alchemie.
Partington, The chemistry; Sezgin, Geschichte 275â282; Ullmann, Die Natur- und Geheimwissenschaften 210â213.
Kraus, Der Zusammenbruch; Kraus, JÄbir Ibn ḤayyÄn I xxxviâxlv; Kraus, Alchemie 27â46 and 47â70; cf. Capezzone, Jabir ibn ḤayyÄn; Plessner, JÄbir ibn ḤayyÄn; Ruska, Arabische 428â430; Ullmann, Die Natur- und Geheimwissenschaften 198â208.
Against Krausâ hypothesis, cf. e.g. Haschmi, The beginning; Holmyard, Alchemisten; Sezgin, Das Problem, Sezgin, Geschichte 132â269, and Sezgin, Wissenschaft 99â108.
So Charles Burnett and Wilferd Madelung in personal communications, Fuat Sezgin in a letter from 28Â April 2005, and Manfred Ullmann in a letter from 21 May 2005.
Cf. the verdict of Vereno, Studien 22: âDas auf Arabisch vorliegende Handschriftenmaterial ist gewaltig. Die beiden Handbücher Fuat Sezgins (GAS IV; 1971) und Manfred Ullmanns (NGI; 1972) bezeugen dies eindrucksvoll. Doch dieses Handschriftenmaterial ist, von wenigen Ausnahmen abgesehen, weder durch Editionen zuverlässig erschlossen noch lexikalisch bearbeitet. Ein guter Teil ist womöglich noch nicht einmal katalogisiert. Sich einen halbwegs vollständigen Ãberblick zu verschaffen, ist daher zum gegenwärtigen Zeitpunkt nicht möglich. Trotz einiger hervorragender Arbeiten ist die arabische Alchemie als Ganzes noch als weitgehend unerforscht zu betrachten.â Cf. Ullmann, Die Natur- und Geheimwissenschaften 150â151.
Kraus, JÄbir Ibn ḤayyÄn I xxvâxxvii.
Cf. Kraus, JÄbir Ibn ḤayyÄn I 91, nº (378); 106, nº (553); 113, n. 3 ad nº (947); 121, nº (972); 122, nº (974); 125â126, nº (988); 133, nº (1056); 143, nº (1800); 156, nº (2145); 171, nº (2958). Among the writings of JÄbir ibn ḤayyÄn quoted in the KitÄb al-Fihrist, one title of the collection âThe 112 booksâ is called KitÄb al-á¹¢Ädiq. Paul Kraus, JÄbir Ibn ḤayyÄn 37 ad nº 101, raised the question: âLe titre se rapporte-t-il à JaÊ¿far al-Ṣâdiq?â However the text iteself is not preserved, or at least, is not available or not yet identified among the extant Arabic manuscripts. A related phenomenon is mentioned by Kraus, JÄbir Ibn ḤayyÄn 65 à propos the KitÄb Muá¹£aḥḥaḥÄt iflÄá¹Å«n (Le livre des Rectifications de Platon): âContrairement à la plupart des écrits jÄbiriens, le k. muá¹£aḥḥaḥÄt IflÄá¹Å«n est conservé dans une rédaction postérieure. Presque dans chaque chapitre lââ¯auteur est introduit à la troisième personne: âJÄbir ditâ; âJÄbir ibn ḤayyÄn ditâ; âle maître (ustÄdh) JÄbir ibn ḤayyÄn ditâ; une fois même on lit âal-imÄm JÄbirâ, expression que ne se trouve que dans des textes tardifs.â But even the âle maître ditâ is still different from phrases such as âI saw the master,â even leaving aside other difficulties.
Ullmann, Die Natur- und Geheimwissenschaften 4; cf. also Kraus, JÄbir Ibn ḤayyÄn I xxviiâxxx, xxxiâxxxiii.
Another interpretation of this striking passage was proposed by James Montgomery and should not be left out here: he posited an âopt-out clauseâ anticipating the unavoidable failure of many of the experiments: âIt may be worth remembering that as these experiments were never successful, the treatises are bound to conclude some epistemological mechanism which acts like an opt-out clause. âGod will give it into the heart of the master, that he will let me know the machine (too)â is one such opt-out clause, it seems to meâ (letter from 29.09.2006).
Cf. Kraus, JÄbir Ibn ḤayyÄn I xxxiâxxxiii on the method of âdispersion of knowledgeâ elsewhere in antique and mediaeval secret traditions.
I am grateful to Emilie Savage-Smith and James Montgomery for sharing their erudition with me.
Cf. the studies by Gregor Schoeler on the âlecture noteâ phenomenon in the early Islamic sciences, now available in Schoeler, The oral, the knowledge of which I owe to James Montgomery.
As far as I know, the earliest known Arabic manuscripts on alchemy come from the eleventh century, cf. Sezgin, Wissenschaft 109 (a manuscript of al-KindÄ«âs KitÄb KÄ«miyÄâ al-Ê¿iá¹r dated to 405/1014, ed. Garbers 1948) and von Lippmann, Entstehung; the great bulk of manuscripts is, however, much younger.
As for this, cf. Bain, ÎελανίÏιs γή; Daumas, Lââ¯Alchimie; Derchain, Lââ¯Atelier; Fowden, The Egyptian Hermes and Lindsay, The origins.
Chassinat, Un papyrus médical; cf. Till, Die Arzneikunde.
Drescher, A Coptic.
Bouriant, Fragment.
Cf. Agius, The Arab; Al-Hassan, The Arabic, Burnett, The astrologerâs, Halleux, Les textes alchimiques; Newman, The summa; Ryding, The heritage.
Bibliography
Ibn al-NadÄ«m (d. 384/995 or 387/998), KitÄb al-Fihrist, ed. G. Flügel, 2 vols., Leipzig 1872â1877.
Abt, T., W. Madelung and T. Hofmeier, Muḥammad Ibn-Umail: KitÄb Ḥall al-rumÅ«z Book of the explanation of the symbols (Corpus alchemicum arabicum vol. 1), Zürich 2003.
Agius, D.A., Arabic literature as a source of documentation for technical terms of the material culture (Islamkundliche Untersuchungen 98), Berlin 1984.
â (ed.), The Arab influence in medieval Europe, Reading 1996.
Al-Hassan, A.Y. The Arabic original of liber de compositione alchemiæ: The epistle of Maryânus, the hermit and philosopher, to Prince KhÄlid ibn YazÄ«d, in Arabic Sciences and Philosophy 14 (2004), 213â231.
Anawati, G., Arabic alchemy, in R. Rashed (ed.), Encyclopedia of the history of Arabic science, vol. 3, Technology, alchemy and life sciences, London 2000, 853â885.
Bain, D., ÎελανίÏÎ¹Ï Î³á½µ, an unnoticed Greek name for Egypt: New evidence for the origins and etymology of alchemy?, in D.R. Jordan, H. Montgomery and E. Thomasson (eds.), The world of ancient magic. Papers from the first international Samson Eitrem seminar at the Norwegian Institute at Athens, May 1997, Bergen 1999, 205â226.
Beltz, W., Katalog der koptischen Handschriften der Papyrus-Sammlung der Staatlichen Museen zu Berlin, in Archiv für Papyrusforschung 26 (1978), 57â119.
Berthelot, M. and C.E. Ruelle, Collection des anciens alchimistes grecs. Paris 1888, repr. Osnabrück 1967.
Bouriant, P., Fragment dââ¯un manuscrit copte de basse époque ayant contenu les principes astronomiques des Arabes, in Journal Asiatique, dixième série, 4 (1904), 117â123.
Burnett, C., The astrologerâs essay of the alchemist: Early references to alchemy in Arabic and Latin texts, in Ambix. Journal of the society for the history of alchemy and chemistry 39 (1992), 103â109.
Caffaro, A. and G. Falanga, Il papiro di Leida. Un documento di tecnica artistica e artigianale del IV secolo d.C., Salerno 2004.
Caley, E.R., The Leyden papyrus X: An English translation with brief notes, in Journal of Chemical Education 2 (1926), 1149â1166.
â. The Stockholm papyrus: An English translation with brief notes, in Journal of chemical education 4 (1927), 979â1002.
Capezzone, L., Jabir ibn ḤayyÄn nella città cortese. Materiali eterodossi per una storia del pensiero della scienza nellââ¯Islam medievale, in Rivista degli studi Orientali 71 (1997), 99â146.
Chassinat, Ã., Un papyrus médical copte, (Mémoires publiés par les membres de lââ¯Institut français dââ¯archéologie orientale du Caire 32), Cairo 1921.
â. Le manuscrit magique copte Nº 42573 du Musée Ãgyptien du Caire. Bibliothèque dââ¯Ãtudes Coptes, tome IV, Cairo 1955.
Crum, W.E., Coptic manuscripts brought from the Fayyum by W.M. Flinders Petrie, London 1893.
â. Catalogue général des antiquités égyptiennes du musée du Caire, nos 8001â8741: Coptic Monuments, Cairo 1902.
â. Catalogue of the Coptic manuscript in the British Museum, London 1905.
â. Catalogue of the Coptic manuscripts in the collection of the John Rylands Library Manchester, Manchester 1909.
Dawson, W.R., E.P. Uphill and M. Bierbrier., Who was who in Egyptology, London 19953.
Daumas, F., Lââ¯Alchimie a-t-elle une origine égyptienne?, in Das römisch-byzantinische Ãgypten. Akten des Internationalen Symposions 26.-30. September 1978 in Trier (Aegyptiaca Treverensia II), Mainz 1983, 109â118.
Depauw, M., New light on gilding in Hellenistic Egypt. P. dem. Vindob. Barbara 58, in H. Harrauer and R. Pintaudi (eds.), Gedenkschrift Ulrike Horak (P. Horak). Papyrologica Florentina 34, Florence 2004, 233â246.
Derchain, P., Lââ¯Atelier des Orfèvres à Dendara et les origines de lââ¯Alchimie, in Chronique dââ¯Ãgypte 129 (1990), 219â242.
Dieleman, J., Priests, tongues, and rites. The London-Leiden magical manuscripts and translation in Egyptian ritual (100â300â¯CE) (Religions in the Greco-Roman world 153), Leiden 2005.
Dozy, R., Supplément aux dictionnaires arabes, Leiden 1881.
Drescher, J., A Coptic calculation manual, in Bulletin de la société dââ¯archéologie Copte 13 (1948/49), 137â160.
Eliade, M., Die hellenistische Alchemie, in Geschichte der religiösen Ideen, vol. 2, Freiburg, Basel and Vienna 1978, 258â262.
Erman, A., Ein koptischer Zauberer, in Zeitschrift für Ãgyptische Sprache und Altertumskunde 33 (1895), 43â46.
Faivre, A., The eternal Hermes. From Greek god to alchemical magus, Grand Rapids 1995.
Festugière, A.J., Alchymica, in Lââ¯antiquité classique 8 (1939), 71â95.
â. La révélation dââ¯Hermès Trismégiste, tom. 1: Lââ¯astrologie et les sciences occultes, Paris 1945/19502.
Flück, J.W., The Arabic literature on alchemy according to an-NadÄ«m (AD 987). A translation of the tenth discourse of the Book of the Catalogue (al-Fihrist) with introduction and commentary, in Ambix. Journal of the society for the history of alchemy and chemistry (1951), 81â144, repr. in F. Sezgin (ed.), Chemistry and alchemy 1, Frankfurt/Main 2001, 303â366.
Fowden, G., The Egyptian Hermes. A historical approach to the late pagan mind, Cambridge 1986.
Frantz-Murphy, G., A new interpretation of the economic history of medieval Egypt. The role of the textile industry 254â567/868â1171, in Journal of the economic and social history of the Orient 24 (1981), 274â297.
Ganzenmüller, W., Liber Florum Geberti. Alchemistische Ãfen und Geräte in einer Handschrift des 15. Jahrhunderts, in Quellen und Studien zur Geschichte der Naturwissenschaften und der Medizin 8 (1942), 273â303, repr. in F. Sezgin (ed.), Chemistry and alchemy 9, Frankfurt/Main 2001, 259â290.
Garbers, K. and J. Weyer, Quellengeschichtliches Lesebuch zur Chemie und Alchemie der Araber im Mittelalter, Hamburg 1980.
Genette, G., Narrative discourse. An essay in method, New York 1980.
Germer, R., Die Textilfärberei und die Verwendung gefärbter Textilien im Alten Ãgypten (Ãgyptologische Abhandlungen 53), Wiesbaden 1992.
Goltz, D., Studien zur Geschichte der Mineralnamen in Pharmazie, Chemie und Medizin von den Anfängen bis Paracelsus (Sudhoffs Archiv, Beiheft 14), Wiesbaden 1972.
Gundel, W., Alchemie, in T. Klauser (ed.), Reallexikon für Antike und Christentum 1, Stuttgart 1950, 239â259.
Halleux, R., Les textes alchimiques. Typologie des sources du moyen âge occidentale fasc. 32, Turnhout 1979.
â. Les alchimistes grecs, I: Papyrus de Leyde, papyrus de Stockholm, fragments des recettes, Paris 1981.
â. Indices chemicorum graecorum, vol. I: Papyrus LeidensisâPapyrus Holmiensis, Rome 1983.
â. Pigments et colorants dans la mappae clavicula, in Pigments et colorants de lââ¯antiquité et du moyen age. Actes du colloque international du CNRS, Paris 1990, 173â180.
â. Alchemy, in The Oxford classical dictionary3, Oxford and New York 1996, 53.
Hamarneh, S.K., Arabic-Islamic alchemy. Three intertwined stages, in Ambix. Journal of the society for the history of alchemy and chemistry (1982), 74â87.
Haschmi, M.Y., The beginning of Arab alchemy, in Ambix. Journal of the society for the history of alchemy and chemistry 9 (1961), 155â161.
Hofmeier, T., AlchemieâEinheit in der Vielfalt, in Alchemie in St. Gallen, St. Gallen 1999, 7â12.
Holmyard, E.J., The emerald table, in Nature 112 (1923), 525â526.
â. An alchemistic text ascribed to Mary the Copt, in Archeion 8 (1927), 161â167, repr. in F. Sezgin (ed.), Chemistry and alchemy 2, Frankfurt/Main 2001, 363â369.
â. Alchemisten des Islam im Mittelalter, in Endeavour 14 (1955), 117â125.
â. Alchemy, Harmondworth, Middlesex 1957 (19902).
Høyrup, J., Integration/non-integration of theory and practice in ancient, Islamic and medieval Latin contexts, in International workshop experience and knowledge structures in Arabic and Latin sciences, organized by Muhammad Abattouy and Paul Wenig, Berlin, December 16â17, 1996 (Max-Planck-Institut für Wissenschaftsgeschichte, Preprint 80), 1997.
Humphrey, J.W., J.P. Oleson and A.N. Sherwood, Greek and Roman technology: A source book, London 1998.
Jawad, J., Neue Aspekte zur alchemistischen Theorie bei ar-RÄzÄ«: Textstellen von ar-RÄzÄ« in den alchemistischen Werken von al-MajrÄ«á¹Ä« und al-JildakÄ«, Hamburg 1994.
Jödicke, A., Alchemie, in Religion in Geschichte und Gegenwart, 4th ed, Tübingen 1 1998, 274â278.
Kraus, P., Der Zusammenbruch der Dschabîr-Legende, in Anhang zum dritten Jahresbericht des Forschungsinstituts für Geschichte der Naturwissenschaften, Berlin 1930, 23â42.
â. JÄbir Ibn ḤayyÄn. Contribution à lââ¯histoire des idées scientifiques dans lââ¯Islam. Vol. I: Le corpus des écrits jâbiriens, Vol. II: JÄbir et la science grecque. Mémoires présentés à lââ¯institut dââ¯Ã©gypte et publiés sous les auspices de sa Majesté Farouk Ier, roi dââ¯Ã©gypte, 1942/1943, 45â46.
â. Alchemie, Ketzerei, Apokryphen im frühen Islam. Gesammelte Aufsätze, herausgegeben und eingeleitet von Rémi Brague, Hildesheim, Zürich and New York 1994.
Landfester, K., J. Berger and C. Priesner, VII. Chemie/Alchemie, in Der Neue Pauly 15/1 (2001), 852â874.
Letrouit, J., La chronologie des alchimistes grecs, in D. Kahn and S. Matton (eds.), Alchimie: art, histoire et mythes. Actes du 1er colloque international de la Société dââ¯Ãtude de lââ¯Histoire de lââ¯Alchimie, Paris, Collège de France, 14-15-16 mars 1991, Paris 1995, 11â93.
Linden, S.J. (ed.), The alchemy reader. From Hermes Trismegistus to Isaac Newton, Cambridge 2003.
Lindsay, J., The origins of alchemy in Graeco-Roman Egypt, London 1970.
von Lippmann, E.O., Entstehung und Ausbreitung der Alchemie, vol. IâIII, Berlin 1919/1931/1954.
â. Ein neues arabisches Manuskript über Alchemie aus der Zeit um 1000, in Proteus 1 (1931), 31â35.
Lory, P., Jabir ibn ḤayyÄn, Lââ¯Ã©laboration de lââ¯Ã©lixir suprême, Damascus 1988.
â. Alchimie et Mystique en terre dââ¯Islam, Paris2 1989/2003.
MacCoull, L.S.B., Coptic alchemy and craft technology in early Islamic Egypt: The papyrological evidence, in M.J.S. Chiat (ed.), The medieval mediterranean. Cross-cultural contacts. Medieval studies at Minnesota 3. St. Cloud, Minnesota 1988, 101â104.
Macuch, R., Greek technical terms in Arabic sciences, in Graeco-Arabica 1 (1982), 11â31.
Magen, B., Ludwig Stern, ein AÌgyptologe zwischen Keltologie und Bibliothek, in: S. Bickel et al., AÌgyptologen und AÌgyptologien zwischen Kaiserreich und GruÌndung der beiden deutschen Staaten (ZAÌS Beihefte 1), Berlin and New York 2013, 155-169.
Margoliouth, S., Arabic papyri of the Bodleian Library, London 1893.
Maspero, G., Ãtudes de mythologie et dââ¯archéologie égyptiennes, Paris 1893.
Merkur, D., A study of spiritual alchemy, mysticism, gold-making and hermeneutics, in Ambix. Journal of the society for the history of alchemy and chemistry (1990), 35â45.
Mertens, M., Une scène dââ¯initiation alchimique, la âLettre dââ¯Isis à Horusâ, in Revue de lââ¯Histoire des Religions 205 (1988), 3â23.
â. Pourquoi Isis est-elle appelée ÏÏοÏá½µÏá½µ?, in Chronique dââ¯Ãgypte 64 (1989), 260â266.
â. Alchemy, hermetism and gnosticism at Panopolis c. 300â¯AD: The evidence of Zosimus, in A. Egberts, B.P. Muhs and J. van der Vliet (eds.), Perspectives on Panopolis. An Egyptian town from Alexander the Great to the Arab conquest, Leiden, Boston and Cologne 2002, 165â175.
â. Zosime de Panopolis, Mémoires authentiques. Les alchimistes grecs IV,1, Paris 2002.
Meyer, K., Ludwig Christian Stern â , in Zeitschrift für celtische Philologie 8 (1912), 583â587.
Mitthof, F., Liste von Pigmenten und Farbstoffen für Malfarben, in H. Harrauer and R. Pintaudi (eds.), Gedenkschrift für Ulrike Horak (Papyrologica Florentina 34), Florence 2004, 181â183.
â. Pigmente und Farbstoffe für Malfarben im spätantiken Ãgypten. Die papyrologische Evidenz, in H. Harrauer and R. Pintaudi (eds.), Gedenkschrift für Ulrike Horak (Papyrologica Florentina 34), Florence 2004, 289â304.
Newman, W.R., The summa perfectionis of pseudo-Geber, Leiden 1991.
Nicholson, P.T., Egyptian faience and glass, Aylesnury 1993.
Nomanul Haq, S., Names, natures and things. The alchemist Jabir ibn Hayyan and his Kitab al-Ahjar (Book of Stones) (Boston studies in the philosophy of science, volume 158), Dordrecht 1994.
Partington, J.R., The Chemistry of RÄzÄ«, in Ambix. Journal of the society for the history of alchemy and chemistry 1 (1938), 192â196.
â. A history of chemistry, London and New York 1970.
Pfister, R., Teinture et alchimie dans lââ¯Orient hellénistique, in Seminarium Kondakovanium 7 (1935), 1â59.
Plessner, M., Neue Materialien zur Geschichte der Tabula Smaragdina, in Der Islam 16 (1927), 77â113, repr. in F. Sezgin (ed.), Chemistry and alchemy 3, Frankfurt/Main 2001, 261â297.
â. Hermes Trismegistos and Arab science, in Studia Islamica 2 (1954), 45â59.
â. JÄbir ibn ḤayyÄn und die Zeit der Entstehung der arabischen JÄbir-Schriften, in Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft 115 (1965), 23â35.
â. Vorsokratische Philosophie und griechische Alchemie in arabisch-lateinischer Ãberlieferung. Studien zu Text und Inhalt der Turba Philosophorum, Wiesbaden 1975.
Preisendanz, K., Papyri Graecae magicae, Bd. II, München and Leipzig, 2001.
Priesner, C. and K. Figala, Alchemie: Lexikon einer hermetischen Wissenschaft, München 1998.
Quack, J.F., Die Spur des Magiers Petese, in Chronique dââ¯Ãgypte 77 (2002), 76â92.
Rehm, A., Zur Ãberlieferung der griechischen Alchemisten, in Byzantinische Zeitschrift 39 (1940), 394â434.
Reiter, K., Die Metalle im alten Orient unter besonderer Berücksichtigung altbabylonischer Quellen (Alter Orient und Altes Testament 249), Münster 1997.
Rex, F., Zur Theorie der Naturprozesse in der früharabischen Wissenschaft. Das KitÄb al iḫrÄÄ Ã¼bersetzt und erklärt. Ein Beitrag zum alchemistischen Weltbild der ÄÄbir-Schriften (8./10. Jahrhundert n. Chr.) (Collection des travaux de lââ¯académie internationale dââ¯histoire des sciences 22), Wiesbaden 1975.
Reitzenstein, R., Zur Geschichte der Alchemie und des Mystizismus, in Nachrichten der Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften zu Göttingen, phil.-hist. Kl., 1919, 1â37.
â. Alchemistische Lehrschriften und Märchen bei den Arabern, in Religionsgeschichte Studien und Vorarbeiten 19.2 (1923), 61â86, repr. in F. Sezgin (ed.), Chemistry and alchemy 1, Frankfurt/Main 2001, 137â162.
Richter, T.S., Coptic, Arabic loanwords inâ, in Encyclopedia of Arabic language and linguistics. Leiden and Boston 2006 1, 495â501.
â. Miscellanea magica, III: Ein vertauschter Kopf? Konjekturvorschlag für P.Berlin P 8313 ro, col. II,19â20, in The journal of Egyptian archaeology 93 (2007), 259â263.
â. Neue koptische medizinische Rezepte, in Zeitschrift fuÌr AÌgyptische Sprache und Altertumskunde 141 (2014), 155-195.
Riess, E., Alchemie, in PaulyâWissowa, Realencyclopaedie 2 (1894), 1338â1355.
Ruska, J.R., Arabische Alchemisten, I: Châlid ibn Jazîd ibn Muʿâwiya, II: Jaʿ far al Ṣâdiq, der sechste Imâm, Heidelberg 1924, repr. Wiesbaden 1967.
â. Tabula Smaragdina. Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der hermetischen Literatur, Heidelberg 1926.
â. Die bisherigen Versuche das Dschabîr-Problem zu lösen, in Anhang zum dritten Jahresbericht des Forschungsinstituts für Geschichte der Naturwissenschaften, Berlin 1930, 9â22.
â. Arabische Alchemie, in Archeion 14 (1932), 425â435, repr. in F. Sezgin (ed.), Chemistry and alchemy 1, Frankfurt/Main 2001, 275â285.
â. Alchemy in Islam, in Islamic Culture 11 (1937), 30â36, repr. in F. Sezgin (ed.), Chemistry and alchemy 1, Frankfurt/Main 2001, 286â292.
Ryding, K.C., The heritage of Arabic alchemy: The multicultural matrix, in A. Hasnawi, A. Elamrani-Jamal and M. Aouad (eds.), Perspectives arabes et médiévales sur la tradition scientifique et philosophique grecque. Actes du colloque de la Société internationale dââ¯histoire des sciences et de la philosophie arabes et islamiques, Paris, 31 marsâ3 avril 1993. Orientalia Livaniensia Analecta 79, Leuven and Paris 1997, 235â248.
Schoeler, G., The oral and the written in early Islam, trans. U. Vagelpohl, ed. J.E. Montgomery, London 2006.
Sezgin, F., Das Problem des JÄbir ibn ḤayyÄn im Lichte neu gefundener Handschriften, Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft 114 (1964), 255â268.
â. Geschichte des arabischen Schrifttums. Bd. IV: Alchimie, Chemie, Botanik, Agrikultur bis ca. 430 H, Leiden 1971.
â (ed.), Chemistry and alchemy, texts and studies collected and reprinted, vol. 1â9 (= Natural sciences in Islam, vol. 55â63), Frankfurt/Main 2001.
â (ed.), Wissenschaft und Technik im Islam. vol. 4: 7. Medizin, 8. Alchemie, 9. Mineralien, Frankfurt/Main 2003.
Siggel, A., Arabisch-Deutsches Wörterbuch der Stoffe aus den drei Naturreichen, die in arabischen alchemistischen Handschriften vorkommmen, nebst Anhang: Verzeichnis chemischer Geräte, Berlin 1950.
â. Decknamen in der arabischen alchemischen Literatur, Berlin 1951.
Stapleton, H.E., The antiquity of alchemy, in Ambix 5 (1953), 1â43, repr. in F. Sezgin (ed.), Chemistry and alchemy 2, Frankfurt/Main 2001, 163â205.
Stern, L., Fragment eines koptischen Tractates über Alchimie, in Zeitschrift für Ãyptische Sprache und Altertumskunde 23 (1885), 102â119.
Stern, M. and B. Schlick-Nolte, Early glass of the ancient world. 1600â¯B.C.âA.D. 50: Ernesto Wolf collection, Ostifildern 1994.
Stolzenberg, D., Unpropitious tinctures: Alchemy, astrology and gnosis according to Zosimos of Panopolis, in Archives Internationales dââ¯Histoire des Sciences 142 (1999), 17â31.
Tait, J., Theban magic, in S.P. Vleeming (ed.), Hundred-gated Thebes. Acts of a colloquium on Thebes and the Theban area in the Graeco-Roman period. P.L.Bat. 27, Leiden, New York and Cologne 1995, 169â182.
Till, W.C., Die Arzneikunde der Kopten, Berlin 1951.
Tylecote, R.F., A history of metallurgy, London 1992.
Ullmann, M., Die Natur- und Geheimwissenschaften im Islam (Handbuch der Orientalistik I/6,2), Leiden 1972.
â. Katalog der arabischen alchemistischen Handschriften der Chester Beatty Library, Teil I: Beschreibung der Handschriften, Wiesbaden 1974.
â. Katalog der arabischen alchemistischen Handschriften der Chester Beatty Library, Teil II: Wörterverzeichnis, Wiesbaden 1976.
â. KhÄlid ibn YazÄ«d und die Alchemieâeine Legende, in Der Islam 55 (1978), 181â218.
â. al-KÄ«miya, in Encyclopédie de lââ¯Islam, nouvelle édition, tome 5. Leiden and Paris 1986, 112â118.
Vereno, I., Studien zum ältesten alchemistischen Schrifttum. Auf der Grundlage zweier erstmals edierter arabischer Hermetica (Islamkundliche Untersuchungen 155), Berlin 1992.
Viano, C., Gli alchimisti greci e lââ¯âacqua divinaâ, in F. Calascibetta (ed.), Atti del VII Convegno Nazinale di Storia e Fondamenti della Chimica. Accademia nazionale delle Scienze detta dei XL, serie V, XXI, II: 2 1997, 61â70.
â. Alchimie gréco-alexandrine, in Dictionnaire critique de lââ¯Ã©sotérisme, Paris 1998, 55.
Wahrmund, A., Handwörterbuch der neu-arabischen und deutschen Sprache. Vol. IâII. Graz 1898.
Wehr, H., Arabisches Wörterbuch für die Schriftsprache der Gegenwart, Leipzig 1952.
Wessely, C., Neue griechische Papyri aus This und Panopolis, in Wiener Studien 7 (1885), 122â139.
Weyer, J., Alchemie, in Der Neue Pauly vol. 1 (1996), 445â448.
Wiedemann, E., Zur Alchemie bei den Arabern, in Journal für praktische Chemie, N.F. 76 (1907), 65â123.
Wilson, C.A., Pythagorean theory and Dionysian practice: The cultic and practical background to chemical experimentation in Hellenistic Egypt, in Ambix. Journal of the society for the history of alchemy and chemistry (1998), 14â32.
â. Distilling, sublimation, and the four elements: The aims and achievements of the earliest Greek chemists, in C.D. Tuplin and T.E. Rihll (eds.), Science and mathematics in ancient Greek culture, Oxford 2002, 306â322.
Zoëga, G., Catalogus codicum Copticorum manuscriptorum, Rome 1810.