Over the course of the sixteenth century, English alchemists shaped their science in a distinctly English way, forging for themselves an Anglocentric alchemical history by favoring texts that were written by English authors. In particular, they championed the sericonian alchemy of George Ripley, the fifteenth-century Canon of Bridlington, who drew heavily on the writings of (pseudo)Raymond Lull, the thirteenth-century Majorcan polymath. Alchemists working within this sericonian branch of alchemy sought to produce the so-called vegetable stone out of a metallic substance that Ripley called “sericon”—probably red lead. This branch of alchemical thought was popular not least because the vegetable stone was thought to have many enticing prospects, such as the ability to heal bodies, prolong life, transmute metals, and make gold. For generations of successive alchemists, this wealth of prospective uses and outcomes proved appealing, drawing in practitioners from an array of social backgrounds who could use these attractive prospects to make their appeals for patronage all the more tempting.

In The Experimental Fire: Inventing English Alchemy, 1300–1700, Jennifer Rampling traces this sericonian branch of alchemy through its highs and lows from the medieval to the early modern periods, emphasizing that alchemy was not a homogenous or static discipline but rather one that underwent a series of subtle yet important changes. Beginning with the works of pseudo-Lull and tracing their various transmutations through the Ripley corpus and distillations in early modern England and beyond, Rampling uncovers the emergence of a distinctively English—and largely sericonian—alchemical practice. Through a cycle of invention and reinvention, Rampling argues, alchemy in England, was shaped and defined by the interpretations of its students and the experiments of its practitioners. Rampling calls this process “practical exegesis” (6)—showing that alchemical texts and experiments existed in a co-dependent and symbiotic relationship. She demonstrates, for example, that Ripley's reinterpretations of the pseudo-Lullian corpus were driven by his inability to square his experimental experience with the Lullian texts, thus prompting the need for a new reading of the works; his practice both informed and was informed by his reading of alchemical texts.

At the heart of this reshaping of English alchemy, and indeed of The Experimental Fire, is patronage. Through an extensive use and thorough analysis of patronage suits, Rampling demonstrates that it is possible to trace the emergence of this distinctly English alchemy that relied so heavily on the sericonian theories of Lull and Ripley by considering the ways in which alchemy was made to be appealing and attractive to prospective patrons. In doing so, Rampling uncovers the intellectual undercurrents that directed alchemical interests, revealing for example the persuasive powers of alchemical gold at times of national economic crisis and alchemical medicine in times of sickness. Rampling also draws upon ideas of self-fashioning here, considering not only the ways in which alchemists sought to entice their patrons but also the manner in which they presented themselves, and indeed the history of alchemy more broadly. This further illuminates Rampling's suggested shift towards an English alchemy by underlining the ways in which English alchemists actively shaped both their science and themselves.

The Experimental Fire is organized into three sections: the medieval origins of alchemy, the golden age of alchemy, and the legacy of alchemy. Common themes, such as patronage, self-presentation, and practical exegesis, run throughout these sections, helping to guide readers through centuries of alchemical practice and offering them a clear and considered framework against which to judge change over time. In the first section, readers are introduced to the social and legal background of alchemy through discussions of princely and ecclesiastical patronage, the philosophy of alchemy, and the legal complexities of alchemy stemming largely from fiscal concerns. In the second section, Rampling explores these themes as they played out in the sixteenth century, focusing largely on bids for patronage and what these bids can reveal about how alchemists perceived themselves and their science. In the final section, Rampling traces the legacy of Ripley's Bosome Book, and indeed the works of Ripley and Lull more broadly, in the late sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, analyzing the ways in which these works were transported abroad and shaped the compilations of English antiquarians such as Elias Ashmole and owners of alchemical compendia such as Thomas Robson alike.

Combining extensive new archival material with elements from Rampling's previous publications, The Experimental Fire stands out as a triumph in the recent historiography of alchemy. While not shying away from complex matters such as the multiple meanings of mercury or the intricacies of Ripley's alchemical theory, The Experimental Fire remains an accessible read for alchemy specialists and nonspecialists alike. One of the core strengths of the monograph is the way in which Rampling demonstrates the interconnectivity of theory and practice, revealing their codependent relationship and using this as a means of explaining change. Rampling brings a strikingly human voice to the history of alchemy, valuing the ways in which readers interacted with alchemical texts as much as the texts themselves and exploring the importance of human understanding, networks, and desires in the shaping of the science. Rampling also provides a strong argument for the importance of patronage in shaping English alchemy, drawing upon the relationship between alchemists and patrons across all three sections of the book. Due to the extensive breadth of the monograph, however, some areas lack depth, a shortcoming that Rampling openly admits in the introduction (18). Discussions of the impact of the Reformation, for example, are underdeveloped in comparison to the rest of the text. Furthermore, Rampling's focus on sericonian alchemy occludes other branches of English alchemy that would have added nuance to her account. While Rampling persuasively and powerfully demonstrates the importance of the sericonian branch of alchemy, it was nevertheless still only one of many strands of thought that contributed to English alchemy. Overall, however, this is a thoroughly researched and eloquently written book proffering a new and important analysis of the changing face of alchemy in England between 1300 and 1700.