declaring that its true object was not the making of gold but
the preparation of medicines, and this union of chemistry with
medicine was one characteristic of the iatrochemical school
of which he was the precursor. Increasing attention was paid
to the investigation of the properties of substances and of
their effects on the human body, and chemistry profited by
the fact that it passed into the hands of men who possessed
the highest scientific culture of the time, Still, belief
in the possibility of transmutation long remained orthodox,
even among the most distinguished men of science. Thus it
was accepted, at least academically, by Andreas Libavius (d.
1616); by F. de la Boe Sylvius (1614-1672), though not by
his pupil Otto Tachenius, and by J. R. Glauber (1603-1668);
by Robert Boyle (1627-1691) and, for a time at least, by Sir
Isaac Newton and his rival and contemporary, G. W. Leibnitz
(1646-1716); and by G. E. Stahl (1660-1734) and Hermann Boerhaave
(1668-1738). Though an alchemist, Boyle, in his Sceptical
Chemist (1661), cast doubts on the ``experiments whereby
vulgar Spagyrists are wont to endeavour to evince their salt,
sulphur and mercury to be the true principles of things,''
and advanced towards the conception of chemical elements
as those constituents of matter which cannot be further
decomposed. With J. J. Becher (1635-1682) and G. E. Stahl,
however, there was a reversion to earlier ideas. The former
substituted for the salt, sulphur and mercury of Basil
Valentine and Paracelsus three earths--the mercurial, the
vitreous and the combustible--and he explained combustion
as depending on the escape of this last combustible element;
while Stahl's conception of phlogiston--not fire itself,
but the principle of fire--by virtue of which combustible
bodies burned, was a near relative of the mercury of the
philosophers, the soul or essence of ordinary mercury.
Perhaps J. B. van Helmont (1577-1644) was the last distinguished
investigator who professed actually to have changed mercury
into gold, though impostors and mystics of various kinds
continued to claim knowledge of the art long after his
time. So late as 1782, James Price, an English physician,
showed experiments with white and red powders, by the aid
of which he was supposed to be able to transform fifty
and sixty times as much mercury into silver and gold. The
metals he produced are said to have proved genuine on assay;
when, however, in the following year he was challenged to
repeat the experiments he was unable to do so and committed
suicide. In the course of the 19th century the idea that
the different elements are constituted by different groupings
or condensations of one primal matter--a speculation which,
if proved to be well grounded, would imply the possibility
of changing one element into another--found favour with
more than one responsible chemist; but experimental research
failed to yield any evidence that was generally regarded as
offering any support to this hypothesis. About the beginning
of the 20th century, however, the view was promulgated
that the spontaneous production of helium from radium may
be an instance of the transformation of one element into
another. (See RADIOACTIVITY; also ELEMENT and MATTER.)
See M. P. E. Berthelot, Les Origines de l'alchimie (1885);
Collection des anciens alchimistes grecs (text and
translation, 3 vols., 1887-1888); Introduction a l'etude de
la chimie des anciens et du moyen age (1889): La Chimie au
moyen age (text and translation of Syriac and Arabic treatises
on alchemy, 3 vols., 1893). Much bibliographical and other
information about the later writers on alchemy is contained
in Bibliotheca Chemica (2 vols., Glasgow, 1906), a catalogue
by John Ferguson of the books in the collection of James
Young of Kelly (printed for private distribution). (H. M. R.)
1 An alchemistical work bearing the name of Ostanes
speaks of a divine water which cures all maladies--an early
appearance of the universal panacea or elixir of life.
2 ``Some traditionary knowledge might be secreted in the
temples and monasteries of Egypt: much useful experience might
have been acquired in the practice of arts and manufactures,
but the science of chemistry owes its origin and improvement
to the industry of the Saracens. They first invented
and named the alembic for the purposes of distillation,
analyzed the substances of the three kingdoms of nature,
tried the distinction and affinities of alkalis and acids,
and converted the poisonous minerals into soft and salutary
remedies. But the most eager search of Arabian chemistry
was the transmutation of metals, and the elixir of immortal
health: the reason and the fortunes of thousands were
evaporated in the crucibles of alchemy, and the consummation
of the great work was promoted by the worthy aid of mystery,
fable and superstition.'' It may be noted that the word
``alembic'' is derived from the Greek ambix, ``cup,''
with the Arabic article prefixed, and that the instrument
is figured in the MSS. of some of the Greek alchemists.
3 Cf. Chaucer, Chanouns Yemannes Tale, where,
however, mercury figures both as a spirit and a body:--
``The firste spirit quik-silver called is,
The second orpiment, the thridde ywis
Sal armoniak, and the ferthe brimstoon.''
ALCIATI, ANDREA (1492-1550), Italian jurist, was born at
Alzano, near Milan, on the 12th of January 1492. He displayed
great literary skill in his exposition of the laws, and was
one of the first to interpret the civil law by the history,
languages and literature of antiquity, and to substitute original
research for the servile interpretations of the glossators. He
published many legal works, and some annotations on Tacitus.
His Emblems, a collection of moral sayings in Latin verse, has
been greatly admired, and translated into French, Italian and
Spanish. Alciati's history of Milan, under the title Rerum
Potriae, seu Historiae Mediolanensis, Libri IV., was published
posthumously at Milan in 1625. He died at Pavia in 1550.
ALCIBIADES (c. 450-404 B.C.), Athenian general and
politician, was born at Athens. He was the son of Cleinias and
Deinomache, who belonged to the family of the Alcmaeonidae.
He was a near relative of Pericles, who, after the death
of Cleinias at the battle of Coroneia (447), became his
guardian. Thus early deprived of his father's control, possessed
of great personal beauty and the heir to great wealth, which
was increased by his marriage, he showed himself self-willed,
capricious and passionate, and indulged in the wildest freaks
and most insolent behaviour. Nor did the instructors of
his early manhood supply the corrective which his boyhood
lacked. From Protagoras, Prodicus and others he learnt to
laugh at the common ideas of justice, temperance, holiness and
patriotism. The laborious thought, the ascetic life of his
master Socrates, he was able to admire, but not to imitate or
practise. On the contrary, his ostentatious vanity, his amours,
his debaucheries and his impious revels became notorious.
But great as were his vices, his abilities were even greater.
He took part in the battle of Potidaea (432), where his
life was saved by Socrates, a service which he repaid at
the battle of Delium (424). As the reward of his bravery,
the wealthy Hipponicus bestowed upon him the hand of his
daughter. From this time he took a prominent part in Athenian
politics during the Peloponnesian war. Originally friendly to
Sparta, he subsequently became the leader of the war party in
opposition to Nicias, and after the peace of 421 he succeeded
by an unscrupulous trick in duping the Spartan ambassadors,
and persuading the Athenians to conclude an alliance (420) with
Argos, Elis and Mantineia (Thuc. v. 56, 76). On the failure
of Nicias in Thrace (418-417) he became the chief advocate
of the Sicilian expedition, seeing an opportunity for the
realization of his ambitious projects, which included the
conquest of Sicily, to be followed by that of Peloponnesus
and possibly of Carthage (though this seems to have been an
afterthought). The expedition was decided upon with great
enthusiasm, and Alcibiades, Nicias and Lamachus were appointed
joint commanders. But, on the day before the expedition
sailed, there occurred the mysterious mutilation of the Hermae,
and Alcibiades was accused not only of being the originator
of the crime, but also of having profaned the Eleusinian
mysteries. His request for an immediate investigation being
refused, he was obliged to set sail with the charge still
hanging over him. Almost as soon as he reached Sicily
he was recalled to stand his trial, but he escaped on the
journey home and made his way to Sparta. Learning that he
had been condemned to death in his absence and his property
confiscated, he openly joined the Spartans, and persuaded
them to send Gylippus to assist the Syracusans and to
fortify Decelea in Attica. He then passed over to Asia
Minor, prevailed upon many of the Ionic allies of Athens to
revolt, and concluded an alliance with the Persian satrap
Tissaphernes. But in a few months he had lost the confidence
of the Spartans, and at the instigation of Agis II., whose
personal hostility he had excited, an order was sent for his
execution. Receiving timely information of this order he
crossed over to Tissaphernes (412), and persuaded him to
adopt the negative policy of leaving Athens and Sparta to
wear themselves out by their mutual struggles. Alcibiades
was now bent on returning to Athens, and he used his supposed
influence with Tissaphernes to effect his purpose. He entered
into negotiations with the oligarch Peisander, but when these
led to no result he attached himself to the fleet at Samos
which remained loyal to the democracy, and was subsequently
recalled by Thrasybulus, although he did not at once return to
Athens. Being appointed commander in the neighbourhood of the
Hellespont, he defeated the Spartan fleet at Abydos (411)
and Cyzicus (410), and recovered Chalcedon and Byzantium.
On his return to Athens after these successes he was welcomed
with unexpected enthusiasm (407); all the proceedings against
him were cancelled, and he was appointed general with full
powers. His ill success, however, at Andros, and the
defeat at Notium (407) of his lieutenant Antiochus, led the
Athenians to dismiss him from his command. He thereupon
retired to the Thracian Chersonesus. After the battle of
Aegospotami, and the final defeat of Athens, he crossed
the Hellespont and took refuge with Pharnabazus in Phrygia,
with the object of securing the aid of Artaxerxes against
Sparta. But the Spartans induced Pharnabazus to put him out
of the way; as he was about to set out for the Persian court
his residence was set on fire, and on rushing out on his
assassins, dagger in hand, he was killed by a shower of arrows
(404). There can be no doubt that his advice to Sparta in
connexion with Syracuse and the fortification of Decelea
was the real cause of his country's downfall, though it is
only fair to him to add that had he been allowed to continue
in command of the Sicilian expedition he would undoubtedly
have overruled the fatal policy of Nicias and prevented the
catastrophe of 413. His belated attempt to repair his fatal
treachery only exposed the essential selfishness of his
character. Though he must have known that his influence
over the Persian satraps was slender in the extreme, he
used it with the most flagrant dishonesty as a bait first to
Sparta, then to the Athenian oligarchs, and finally to the