This article analyses the various ways in which the virtues of alchemy were promoted within Petrine Russia. More specifically, three particular ways in which alchemy was advocated are examined. First, an in-depth study is undertaken of...
moreThis article analyses the various ways in which the virtues of alchemy were promoted within Petrine Russia. More specifically, three particular ways in which alchemy was advocated are examined. First, an in-depth study is undertaken of the manner in which Laurentius Blumentrost the Elder and Daniel Hurczyn sought royal favour for a Russian translation of a pharmacopeia originally composed by the former in 1667. This work is effectively a compendium of recipes that draw on Paracelsian forms of alchemical medicine. The introduction to this translation, written in 1698, seeks to frame alchemy as a worthy endeavour supported by wise sovereigns, such as Rudolf II, and Biblical rulers, including Moses and Solomon. Second, an analysis is carried out of the largely positive attitude to alchemy present in the first course in natural philosophy taught by Feofilakt Lopatinskii at the Moscow Academy in 1705. Lastly, the fascinating correspondence between a Dutch alchemical projector, Johannes de Wilde, and Robert Erskine, the tsar’s chief physician, which took place in 1717, is studied. This correspondence provides extraordinary insights into how alchemical projectors, such as de Wilde, were still able to convince leading tsarist servitors of the potential benefits that their alchemical schemes could bestow upon the Russian sovereign and his realm. Far from being anachronistic, it is argued that this receptive, if not enthusiastic, approach to alchemy, was in line with contemporary attitudes in a number of European courts and even among many leading chymists, who still harboured beliefs in the possibility of metallic transmutation.
