1 Symb. aur. mens., p. 592. [Cf. Mysterium Coniunctionis, pars. 276ft.]

2 Ibid., p. 600.

3 Dorn, in Theatr. chem., I (1659), p. 547.

4 Khunrath, Hyl. Chaos, p. 233.

5 Ripley, in Theatr. chem., II (1659), p. 113.

6 Mus. herm., p. 738.

7 Symb. aur. mens., p. 386.

8 Theatr. chem., IV (1659), p. 673.

9 Also in the form of the boy showing the way and the “age-old son of the mother.”

10 Ripley, Opera, pp. 421ff.

11 “Introit. apert.,” Mus. herm., p. 653.

12 Theatr. chem., II (1659), facing p. 109.

13 P. 67.

14 E.g., Codex Rhenoviensis, Zurich, and Codex Vossianus, Leyden.

15 For this motif see Symbols of Transformation, pp. 209f.

16 Alchemische Lehrschriften und Märchen bei den Arabern, pp. 77f.

17 Belletête, trans., Contes tures.

18 κνανoειδῇ or κνανoειδῇ. Hippolytus, Elenchos, V, 20, 6 and 7 (ed. Wendland) has the latter reading. The alchemical equivalents of this strange mythologem support both possibilities: Dog as Logos, psychopomp, and filius canis coelici coloris (puppy of celestial hue), all referring to Mercurius. [Cf. Mysterium Coniunctionis, pars. 174ff.]

19 Elenchos, V, 7, 29.

20 The duality of the Mercurius concept has a parallel in the syncretist views of the Naassenes, who sought to grasp and express the psychological experience of the paradoxical First Cause. But I must be content with this hint.

21 Bousset, Hauptprobleme der Gnosis, pp. 43, 55, 142.

22 Rosarium, in Art. aurif., II, p. 243.

23 “Beginnings and ends/Touch hands.”

24 Theatr. chem., I (1659), p. 601.

25 “Tractatus aureus cum scholiis,” ibid., IV, p. 608.

26 “Aurelia occulta,” ibid., p. 507.

27 Ibid., p. 489.

28 [This paragraph originally ended the monograph.—EDITORS.]