Transmutation of Matter in Byzantium: The Caseof Michael Psellos, the Alchemist

Gianna Katsiampoura

Published online: 31 October 2007� Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2007

Abstract There is thus nothing paradoxical about the inclusion of alchemy in the

ensemble of the physical sciences nor in the preoccupation with it on the part of learned

men engaged in scientific study. In the context of the Medieval model, where discourse on

the physical world was ambiguous, often unclear, and lacking the support of experimental

verification, the transmutation of matter, which was the subject of alchemy, even if not

attended by a host of occult features, was a process that was thought to have a probable

basis in reality. What is interesting in this connection is the utilization of the scientific

categories of the day for discussion of transmutation of matter and the attempt to avoid, in

most instances in the texts that survive, of methods reminiscent of magic.

Keywords Alchemy � Byzantine era � History of science � Michael Psellus

1 The Physical Sciences in Byzantium

When one speaks of views on science, i.e. systems of thought pertaining to the physical

world, in previous historical periods, one should bear in mind that there are dangers

lurking: particular care should be taken not to bring contemporary data into our

interpretation of scientific discussions of a bygone age, so as to avoid a posteriori

judgments and evaluations in terms of present-day knowledge. Not only is such an

anachronistic approach not conducive to comprehension of the period in question; it

can introduce an added element of confusion and make the landscape of the past even

murkier.

Thus, when examining views of nature as formulated in the Byzantine period, we

must remember a number of basic facts: First, scientific observation of nature, precise

description of what is observed and experiment in accordance with a strict methodology,

G. Katsiampoura (&)Byzantine Studies, Foundation of the Hellenic World, Mavromihali 49, Athens 10680, Greecee-mail: katsiampoura@yahoo.gr

123

Sci & Educ (2008) 17:663–668DOI 10.1007/s11191-007-9113-7

were unknown to the Byzantines. Second, the physical sciences were of secondary

significance in Byzantine thought. Following the Aristotelian division of the world into

superlunary and sublunary, emphasis was placed—in accordance with Christian dogma—

on the superlunary which, being seen as imperishable and eternal (sempiternal) was

immutable and so could be interpreted through deployment of mathematic principles. It

embodied the wisdom of the Creator. The sublunary—i.e. material—world, precisely

because of its perishable nature and amenability to change, was not what primarily

attracted the learned. In consequence the physical sciences were separated entirely from

the mathematical and accorded much less respect (Hunger 1978). The third element that

must be taken into account is the close link between the sciences and what would today

be called pseudo-sciences (Katsiampoura 2004). The occultism that today constitutes a

criterion for distinguishing between science and pseudo-science was in the Byzantine

period an integral element in studies of the physical world (Stefanidis 1923), something

true later also of the West, above all from the 12th century onwards, when the scholarly

world began to concern itself with such questions.

2 Alchemy in the Byzantine Period

There is thus nothing paradoxical about the inclusion of alchemy in the ensemble of the

physical sciences nor in the preoccupation with it on the part of learned men engaged in

scientific study. In the context of the Medieval model, where discourse on the physical

world was ambiguous, often unclear, and lacking the support of experimental verification,

the transmutation of matter, which was the subject of alchemy, even if not attended by a

host of occult features, was a process that was thought to have a probable basis in reality.

What is interesting in this connection is the utilization of the scientific categories of the day

for discussion of transmutation of matter and the attempt to avoid, in most instances in the

texts that survive, of methods reminiscent of magic (Hunger 1978).

However, alchemy was perceived as an involvement with magic and this is evident by

its prohibition even at a very early stage, with a decree by Diocletian in approximately 290

(Lafont 2000).

In spite of all these, during the Byzantine Period involvement with alchemy remained

one of the scholars’ interests, even of church officials. With Alexandria as a centre, and

representatives a lot of scholars, like Synesios of Cyrene, it was transferred to Con-

stantinople. With main objective the transmutation of metals into gold and silver

alchemy continued to interest the scholars, not, as we have already said, as a magical art

but as a science (Lafont 2000). In this framework, a characteristic text was the one by

Synesios of Cyrene, who is mainly known as a historian and philosopher, student of

Hypatia, who converted to Christianity (Katsiampoura 2004). The text of Synesios of

Cyrene deals with gold and silver making based on the principles and materials of nature

(Synesius 1888). Besides, from Late Antiquity a body of texts was composed and their

study didn’t stop throughout the thousand years of the Byzantine Period, at times as an

acceptable occupation and at times entailing the risk of accusations or even prosecutions

(possibly this was the case with the Iconoclast John VII the Grammarian, Lemerle 1979).

What is worth mentioning is that in Byzantine manuscripts many philosophers of

Antiquity were included among the alchemists (Lafont 2000), in all probability for

legitimizing this specific field.

664 G. Katsiampoura

123

3 Michael Psellos and Study of the Physical World

Precisely because of their object of investigation and the evaluative rank to which they had

been assigned in the field of knowledge, as was mentioned before, the physical sciences in

Byzantium were slow to attract the interest of scholars. Although as early as the 9th

century there had been some isolated attempts to investigate the physical world, the victory

of the supporters of icon worship and the fact that such activities were associated with the

ancient Greek past and thus with paganism meant that they could be, and were, rapidly

drawn into disrepute (Lemerle 1971). Interest in the physical world essentially made its

appearance in the mid-11th century (Kazhdan and Warton Epstein 1985) and was asso-

ciated with a more general secularization of Byzantine thought and ideology. One of the

scholars who attached particular importance to study of the physical world, and indeed as a

subject for teaching, was Michael Psellos. A scholar in the imperial court, head of the

philosophy school under Constantine IX Monomachos (1042–1055) with the rank of

supreme philolosopher, ‘‘polyhistor’’ on account of his multiplicity of interests, in his work

‘‘Didaskalia Pantodapi’’ (published as Omnifaria Doctrina) he attempted to bring together

in its chapters the hitherto scattered and fragmentary knowledge of the physical world

(Westerink 1948).

Following the inherited scholarly models, Michael Psellos also favoured a specific

hierarchical ordering of studies, placing at a first and foremost level the physical—sub-

lunary—world; at the second the study of mathematical sciences, which are used in

interpreting the superlunary world, at the third theology and metaphysics, leading to a yet

higher stage, that of philosophy (Sofroniou 1967). Even if the study of the physical world

is assigned a lower place in the hierarchy of value, it is nevertheless considered essential,

because it leads to discovery of the ‘‘apocrypha’’, the secrets of nature, through the

application of a specific method. Thus evaluated, teaching about the physical world

according to Psellos should aim at highlighting the causes of phenomena; it should in other

words, in accordance with Aristotelian principles (Sofroniou 1967), follow a course of

investigating what has caused something to come into existence. This is a view that in the

12th century was also to be posited as an objective by Albert the Great, one of the first in

the West to become engaged with the study of physical phenomena (Thuiller 2005).

Knowledge must therefore commence from the perceptible, from the objects of the

physical world, and proceed through seeking out the general principles that inform it, so as

to proceed to the next stage of mathematical sciences. Psellos includes in the ensemble of

physical science investigations a number of sectors as presented in his most extensive

relevant work, the Omnifaria Doctrina (Westernink 1948) as well as in other smaller works

(e.g. Opuscula logica, physica, allegorica, alia, Duffy, O’Meara 1981–1992, Philosophicaminora, Duffy 1992): from physical phenomena such as earthquakes and wind, thunder,

hail, etc. and the structure of the heavens to questions pertaining to matter and its

transformations.

4 Michael Psellos: On Gold Making

References to matter, the particular powers of physical bodies and their transformations are

to be found throughout the works of Michael Psellos. The first chapter of ‘‘Didaskalia

Pantodapi’’ is devoted to an examination of the nature of matter, concluding that it is what

remains if the special characteristics of Aristotle’s four elements of nature (fire, earth,

water, air) are removed. In the same work he devotes a chapter to the processes of fusion

Transmutation of Matter in Byzantium 665

123

and constitution of bodies, and in Philosophica minora he was to attribute special powers

to stones. Psellos’ interest in alchemy, one of the aforementioned secrets of nature, is not

unrelated to these matters which preoccupy him, and to a number of other subjects per-

ceived as occult on the basis of contemporary scientific classification (e.g. it is known that

he was a student of the arithmology of Iamblichos (Hunger 1978) and of a series of mystic

prophecies called the ‘‘Chaldaean Oracles’’, Opuscula psychologica, theologica, daemo-nologica, O’Meara 1989). The text ‘‘On gold making’’ (Bidez 1928) is a letter by Psellos to

the Patriarch Michael Kerullarios, in which the writer, still relatively young, discusses the

production of gold, outlining a number of possible methods. The production of gold, in any

case, through transmutation of other baser metals, was the principal goal of the alchemist

tradition, up until the Renaissance and perhaps later. In his letter Psellos for a start insists

that the basic principle for approaching the physical world, as previously indicated, is that

of attempting to discover the reasons for things. In this framework, he explains that he

searches out the reasons for transformation of material things in changes of proportion of

the four basic elements that comprise them, as is indeed appropriate for the physical

sciences, in his opinion. And to prove the soundness of this interpretation of transforma-

tions in things, he cites the example of the roots of an oak tree, which has been transformed

into stone. He explains this phenomenon through change in proportions of the four ele-

ments that comprise it as a result of the action of a lightning bolt that has minimized the

presence of the elements of water and air. According to Psellos, then, things mutate for

physical reasons and not on account of ‘‘monstrous or other unmentionable factors’’.

Thus, on the basis of the principle that the cause of transformations in things must be

sought in nature, he goes on to present and analyze the methods for producing gold,

emphasizing that for him himself the question of transmutation of stones is of equal

interest. However, owing to the particular interest of the patriarch in production of gold

(from love of learning, he hastens to clarify, not from avarice) he limits discussion on the

one hand to methods for production of gold, on the other to directions for doubling of its

existing quantity, improvement of its quality, and heightening of its lustre.

She first method he proposes is the production of gold from sea sand. Through heating

and then cooling, with the use of silver and sulphur, sand according to Psellos, will finally

yield gold. It is interesting to note the detailed instructions for heating, with particular

emphasis on the time required by the process. The second method is based on the use of

minerals such as sandarac and cinnabar, arsenic and sulphur, which when mixed together

and heated are transmuted into gold.

The following methods are based on the use of magnesia1 and oil, iron, or lead, sulphur,

stypteria2 and cinnabar, in accordance with traditional alchemical endeavours (Hunger

1978).

For doubling of the existing quantity of gold, the method proposed is to mix it with

pyrite3 and ebony scrapings while to add lustre the suggestion is to use pyrite, iron and

vinegar.

According to Psellos himself, there is nothing arcane or godlike about the methods he

employs. They are based on the use of elements of nature and the corresponding knowl-

edge. For his remuneration he requests that the patriarch should show him the sublime

blessings of heaven upon the earth.

1 Magnesia: magnesium oxide.2 Stypteria: a sulphurous salt of aluminium and potassium.3 Pyrite: ‘‘fool’s gold’’

666 G. Katsiampoura

123

We do not intend to address the matter of the power or futility of the alchemical

methods proposed by Psellos for transmutation of ‘‘stones and grasses’’, as he writes, into

gold. The answer to any such question is obvious, and in any case experimental verifi-

cation, as mentioned before, was not presupposed in the thinking of Byzantine scholars.

Nevertheless it is worth noting some elements, as they emerge from the ‘‘On gold making’’

text, that serve to highlight certain aspects of the thinking of the Byzantine period.

1. To begin with it is impressive to observe the attempt at demystifying older methods

and citing a new framework: that of scientific method for interpretation of the physical

world, based on a search for the natural causes of things. The mystagogy that

accompanied the alchemists’ methods in their quest to produce gold retreats before the

stance that all phenomena in nature have a specific cause, which cannot be

metaphysical.

2. Precisely this insistence on defending the relation between cause and effect in the

physical world is what really impresses. At no point in text are there to be found

references to the divine will. Presentation and interpretation of the issues is

transparently secular. The basic interpretative device, the relationship between cause

and effect, claims universal validity insofar as hermeneutic approaches to the physical

world are concerned.

3. It is significant that a patriarch took an interest in aspects of the issue pertaining to the

physical world and scientific interpretation of it. Psellos himself, as previously

indicated, addresses the letter to him, emphasizing his love of learning. The authority

that is attributed to reason, to the content of the letter and its legitimacy, is obvious if

one takes into account the identities both of the sender and the recipient of the letter.

We are thus confronted by a period in which the endeavour to achieve a rationalistic and

secular interpretation of experience is extended into what are quintessentially irrationalistic

areas by present-day standards, but also by the standards of the past, irrespective of the

later evolution of that first attempt, which is directly linked to the history of that specific

political formation. This latter is of particular interest for the history of science, high-

lighting an entire framework of scientific rhetoric and thought in its complexity and in its

social and spiritual commitments and side-effects, which warrant further analysis.

References

Bidez J (1928) Michel Psellus, L’Epitre sur la Chrysopee, Catalogue des Manuscrits Alchimiques Grecs,vol. VI. Bruxelles

Boissonade JF (1838) Michael Psellos, De Operatione Daemonum. NurnbergBokaris EP (2000) Epistemology and history of chemistry. Univerity of Ioannina, Ioannina (in Greek)Duffy JM (1992) Michael Psellus, Philosophica minora. Teubner, LeipzigDuffy JM, O’Meara D (1989–1991) Michael Psellus, Opuscula logica, physica, allegorica, alia. Teubner,

LeibzigHunger H (1978) Die hochsprachliche profane Literatur der Byzantiner. Beck, MunchenKatsiampoura G (2004) Proslipsi, metadosi kai leitourgia ton epistimon sti mesi byzantini periodo kai to

Quadrivium tou 1008. PHD dissertation, Panteion University of Social and Political Sciences, Athens(Perception, transmission and function of science in middle Byzantine era and the Quadrivium of 1008)(in Greek)

Kazhdan AP, Wharton Epstein A (1985) Change in the Byzantine culture in the eleventh and twelfthcenturies. University of California Press, Berkeley, Los Angeles, London

Lafont O (2000) De l’alchimie a la chimie. Ellipses Edition Marketing S.ALemerle P (1971) Le premier humanisme byzantin. PUF, ParisO’Meara DJ (1989) Michael Psellus, Opuscula psychologica, theologica, daemonologica. Teubner, LeipzigSofroniou SA (1967) Michael Psellos’ theory of science. Athena 29:78–90

Transmutation of Matter in Byzantium 667

123

Stefanidis MK (1923) The mathematics of the Byzantines. Athena 35:206–218 (in Greek)Synesius (1888) Sunesiou filosofou pros Dioskoron eis tin Biblon Dimokritou. In: Berthelot M, Ruelle CE

(eds) Collection des anciens alchimistes grecs, vol. 2. Steinheil, Paris, pp 56–69 (repr. 1963)Thuillier P (2005) I ekdikisi ton magisson. Leader Books, Athens (The revenge of the witches. Irrationality

and scientific thought) (in Greek)Westerink LG (1948) Michael Psellus, De omnifaria doctrina. Centrale Drukkerij N.V., Nijmegen

Author Biography

Gianna Katsiampoura is researcher of History and History of Science in the Byzantine Era and she hastaught at the University of Crete, Greece. Her Ph.D. Dissertation is about Perception, Transmission andFunction of Science in Middle Byzantine Era and the Quadrivium of 1008, Department of Sociology,Panteion University of Social and Political Science, Athens 2004. She has published papers in referredjournals on History and Philosophy of Science in Byzantium. Her research interests include history andphilosophy of science, history of education and the relation between history of science and political andeconomic history of Byzantium.

668 G. Katsiampoura

123