Particulars and Augmentations · Lexicon

From the book

Heinrich Khunrath’s Magnesia Catholica Philosophorum

Heinrich Khunrath · Diotimos Editions · 2026

Orientation

At a Glance

The wordParticularia are genuine limited works dependent upon the same ground as the universal Stone; Augmenta names the silver or gold increases associated with certain such works.
In KhunrathThe qualified concession on pages 74–752 is the first important place.
In this edition“Particulars” preserves the technical noun.
A reading distinctionThe cautious “as perhaps” introducing examples on page 81 matters.

Meaning

Particularia are genuine limited works dependent upon the same ground as the universal Stone; Augmenta names the silver or gold increases associated with certain such works. Khunrath refuses to let “particular” mean any profitable operation involving metals. The term’s legitimacy turns on a relation to the universal, not merely on a modest scale of gain.

Use in the book

The qualified concession on pages 74–752 is the first important place. Fine preparations of silver and gold may contribute to tinctures, elixirs and particulars, but only after they are brought into the proper pri-material field. Khunrath does not deny that preliminary labour can have use. He denies that its products, taken simply in themselves, furnish the indispensable ground of regeneration.

Pages 81–822 connect special Stones and lesser elixirs with particulars, mentioning cinnabar workings and operations involving corporeal metallic mercuries as possible examples associated with augmentations. The passage remains conditional within his doctrine: these do not bypass the catholic field, and the fact that a metallic material has useful powers does not identify it with that field.

The summary on page 103 then states the dependency in its strongest form. All true transmuting tinctures, elixirs and particulars flow from the ground of the universal, each in its own manner. “Universal” here is a common foundation, not a claim that each particular itself acts universally. The next pages use that principle to discriminate rather than merely to prohibit.

Page 105 excludes two profitable practices: separating silver or gold already present in minerals or metals, and fixing embryonic precious metals. The former brings something out rather than bringing it in; the latter is only ripening. Khunrath says these are not properly particulars because they are no particles of the universal. That verbal explanation is his own rule of usage. It explains why financial success, a recovered precious metal or a larger stable yield cannot by itself prove possession of the kind of particular the book defends.

Places to read

1599 p. 74Preparations are conditionally admitted as useful for tinctures, elixirs and particulars.
1599 p. 75The condition is entry into the pri-material field of regeneration.
1599 p. 81Possible particular workings and lesser elixirs are named before the augmentation clause continues on page 82.
1599 p. 103Every true particular is said to flow from the universal foundation.
1599 p. 105Separation and ripening are excluded from the proper meaning of particulars.

Translation in this edition

“Particulars” preserves the technical noun. “Augmentations” should not be flattened into a modern claim of yield improvement: the original is embedded in a disputed account of silver- and gold-making. Khunrath’s explanation through “particles of the universal” is reported as his conceptual distinction, not offered as an independently established etymology.

Source note

The cautious “as perhaps” introducing examples on page 81 matters. It prevents a list of named operations from becoming an unconditional endorsement of every process circulating under those labels.