[16] Ibid., p. 379.
[17] Probably corrosive sublimate.
[18] Probably calomel.
[19] Mangeti Bibliothecæ Chemicæ Præfatio.
[20] Whoever wishes to enter more particularly into the processes for making the philosopher’s stone contrived by the alchymists, will find a good deal of information on the subject in Stahl’s Fundamenta Chemiæ, vol. i. p. 219, in his chapter De lapide philosophorum: and Junker’s Conspectus Chemiæ, vol. i. p. 604, in his tabula 28, De transmutatione metallorum universali: and tabula 29, De transmutatione metallorum particulari.
[21] Kircher, in his Mundus Subterraneus, has an article on the philosopher’s stone, in which he examines the processes of the alchymists, points out their absurdity, and proves by irrefragable arguments that no such substance had ever been obtained. Those who are curious about alchymistical processes may consult that work.
[22] Mem. Paris, 1722, p. 61.
[23] The original author, whom all who have given any account of the alchymists have followed, is Olaus Borrichius, in his Conspectus Scriptorum Chemicorum Celebriorum. He does not inform us from what sources his information was derived.
[24] Sprengel’s History of Medicine, iv. 368.
[25] It is curious that Olaus Borrichius omits Albertus Magnus in the list of alchymistical writers that he has given.