A Cultural History of Chemistry in the Eighteenth Century (vol. 4)

Abstract

as well as in Dutch genre painting, showing, for instance, how “alchemy’s impact on family life offered painters an outlet for humour as well as pathos” (p. 215). A painting by Hendrick Heerschop (ca. 1660–1680), The Alchemist’s Experiment Takes Fire, depicts an experiment gone badly wrong: a flask exploding, the alchemist in tattered clothing reacting with terror. His wife in the background, however, is engaged in more prosaic but necessary activities, wiping a child’s soiled bottom. Whilst the scatology in this painting was certainly part of a larger message about the futility of alchemy and Dutch moral topoi, as Drago indicates, it may have also been a satiric comment about the use of faeces in alchemical preparations. As Agnieszka Rec noted, there was a lot of dung in the early modern laboratory; dried horse manure was used for heating; dung was mixed with clay for luting; the philosopher Morienus even described dung as the starting material for the Philosopher’s Stone. “Faeces” could describe distillation dregs. We may well ask, as the artist intended, where the true “gold” was in this alchemist’s life and practice. Needless to say, alchemy in the visual arts is a very fertile area of research (sorry), and any facetiousness aside, Drago’s chapter excels at demonstrating the art-alchemy connections, unearthing true intellectual gold in her erudite assessment of visual culture. This latest production in the Bloomsbury series is similarly golden. It is a nicely produced hardcover book, with attractive illustrations and very fine analyses. It provides an enjoyable introduction to early modern chymistry, whilst also offering something to specialists. I highly commend the volume authors and editors, as well as the series editors for creating a reference source of lasting value to the field.