[michael247]

For some time now I have been puzzling over the apparent disappearance of the interest in alchemy within the Byzantine Empire and then in the lands of Eastern Orthodoxy. After an initial flowering, up to circa 1000 AD and best represented by the writings of Stephanos of Byzantium, this subject simply disappears from among the scholarly pursuits of the Orthodox philosophers. This stands very much in contrast to what was about to happen in Western Europe from circa 1130 AD on. Can anyone suggest a factual explanation of this phenomenon? ("factual" in this case meaning the opposite of vague generalizations such as "alchemy is a pseudoscience", etc., in which I am not interested.)

[dserbokim]

Dear Stephanos,

Perhaps this has something to do with the betrayal of the roman-catholic church, their anathema and the war they started against the true church? They destroyed Constantinopel stole everything which was good and golden and burned down the rest and after that they sold the prisoners to the muslims!

Christos voskrese! Nicolaj

[WapSaibian]

Dear Nicolaj,

Thank you for your reply. Your suggestion could perhaps explain a disappearance of some alchemical writings but not the total absence of this tradition after the 10th century AD.

[CitsMoise17]

From what I've read, both before and after the sack of Constantinople in 1204, and continuing until the Turkish conquest in 1453, many scholars from what remained of the Byzantine empire fled to Europe with pretty much anything they could salvage from their libraries. The loss of writings wasn't just due to destruction, but to attempts at preservation.

Western Europe already had many similar writings, since the Arabs were fascinated by Greek philosophy and science (including alchemy -- the word comes from the Arabic "al-kimiya") and had already translated many Greek works, in addition to writing many of their own. Much of this learning spread into Morocco and Spain under Arab rule; when this territory was retaken, a great deal of literature was captured and eventually translated, leading eventually to the flourishing of the sciences in Europe at that time (as well as helping fuel the rise of Scholasticism).

I don't have anything to account for the period between 1000 AD and 1200 AD. Perhaps friction with the Arabs and with Europe (the Great Schism occurred during this period) distracted the attention of many who might otherwise have pursued such studies. Some of the sources I've read suggested that advances in alchemical (and other types of scientific) learning were almost exclusively in the hands of the Arabs between the seventh and twelfth centuries anyway, but I don't know how much truth or exaggeration there is in that.

In Christ,
Mike

[portoskins]

Thank you, Mike. This is all absolutely true. I've mentioned the years 1000 to 1200 only as an example (and in relation to the previous posting) but the fact remains that alchemy does not seem to have been practised anywhere in the Eastern Orthodox lands after roughly 1000 AD! This is strange not only in comparison with the Western flowering of alchemy between c. 1130 and 1700 AD, but also with its parallel development in the Islamic countries, Turkey included. It is as if Orthodoxy - which is otherwise very open to the ideas of transmutation, transsubstantiation, perfecting, deification, etc. - for some strange reason rejected this philosophical path.

[tyclislavaify]

This is an odd topic, to say the least. And an odd post, which implies that there is no contradiction between Orthodoxy and alchemy, and, oh, by the way, let's not even address that problem! -- which reminds me of the Marxist prohibition of questions.

A lot of things went on in the so-called Byzantine Empire that was inconsistent with Orthodoxy. Orthodoxy existed alongside all kinds of paganistic beliefs and practices for a long time -- including the circus. To imply that there was a legitimate philosophical tradition of alchemy because it may have existed within the Orthodox Empire is quite a stretch.

I see nothing in Patristic writings that would confuse the Christian doctrine of deification or divinization with the alchemical belief in divinization. The two are quite contradictory. Alchemy is the belief that humans can control the cosmos and transform its basic elements. I know of no explicit Patristic critique of alchemy, probably because the mere idea of alchemy would be an absurdity for the Church Fathers. Plato wrote the definitive critique of alchemy, which is found in The Symposium. It is not so much a critique per se, but the alternative.

[Dynasty]

Hello Owen,

With due respect, your response is non sequitur. I have asked a simple question which does not imply anything anti-Orthodox, and I have no wish to get involved into any controversy.

[dxpfmP0l]

This is, after all, an Orthodox forum. So I think in fairness any discussion of the history of alchemy ought to be conducted within that context.

[Thorwaywhobia]

This is, after all, an Orthodox forum. So I think in fairness any discussion of the history of alchemy ought to be conducted within that context.

True, but let's be honest -- this thread didn't set any records for distance away from the forum's purpose. Though, admittedly, our farthest wanderings off are usually rabbit trails within other threads, not threads of their own.

That said, it would be an interesting study to see what (if any) relationship existed between the Byzantine alchemists and the Orthodox Church during that era.

Mike

[Arkadiyas]

I can't imagine any scholarly studies extant on the subject...There is far more available on the subject matter stemming from the Italian Renaissance. But even then, it is an open, fertile field.

[esdfsdflast]

Regarding alchemy vis-a-vis Orthodox Christianity, I think it's a bit hard to come up with a definitive answer as to whether they are compatible, as there are many forms of alchemy. Alchemy was not a monolithic body of thought/ practice; some of it is clearly pagan or Gnostic in nature, but there also exist some strains with a sincere desire to serve God and neighbor by more closely understanding God's creation and thereby deriving practical methods of healing. In this respect, I would say alchemy is somewhat comparable to traditional Chinese medicine or to Indian ayurveda- there are philosophical elements and practical elements, and I think the practical part may still have some usefulness.

[PaulCameron]

The Philosopher's Stone: Alchemy and the Secret Research for Exotic Matter

About the Author:-
Joseph P. Farrell was born and raised in Sioux Falls, South Dakota. His early placement in an accelerated mathematics program continued until college when he received a PhD in Patristics from the University of Oxford. Prolific author Farrell ... initiates his Feral House association with The Philosopher's Stone, in which he demonstrates the connections of modern physics and ancient alchemy by investigating monatomic gold, the work of Russian astrophysicist Nikolai Kozyrev, and the fuel for the mysterious Nazi "Bell" device, Serum 525.

[animilius]

Perhaps the lack of alchemy is due to hesychasm, which is the most sublime of alchemies: THe complete transmutation of mortality to immortality, of death, to life, of lead into the gold of the divine energies (by grace).

Much of the alchemical symbolism to me sounds very similar to what hesychasm DOES accomplish in the lives of the saints. Perhaps the paradigm requiring a need for alchemy disappeared?