The alchemists like to dwell on the process of procreation, and on infantile sexual theories. The deep interest that they show in these matters, and without which they would not have used them so much in their hieroglyphics, the meaning that these things must have, in order to be regarded as worthy to illustrate the processes of the great work, and finally, the meaning that in some form or other they actually have in the emotional life of every man, all of this makes it evident that the line of imaginative speculations with which we have become acquainted, deserves independent treatment. In practice there was a fission, and procreation becomes an independent problem for alchemists. Yet the followers of the art did learn from nature, in order that their art might follow the works of nature even to improve on her; what wonder then if many of them set themselves to the artificial creation—generation—of man? Yet the belief in generatio equivoca has not long been dead. Must it not have seemed somehow possible, in view of the supposed fact that they saw insects develop out of earth, worms out of dung, etc., that they should by special artificial interposition, be able to make higher forms of life come out of lifeless matter? And of all the substances not one was indeed completely lifeless for the “animated” metals even, grew and increased. In short, if we regard the matter somewhat more closely, it is after all not so extraordinary that they made serious attempts to create the homunculus. Generally Paracelsus is regarded as the author of the idea, which to the somewhat uncritical, could not, in my opinion, help being in the air. There are different views regarding the part played by Paracelsus. The instructions that he gives for the production of the homunculus are found in a work (De natura rerum) whose authorship is not settled. And supposing that Paracelsus was the writer, it must be considered whether he does not lay before the inquisitive friend to whom the work is dedicated merely a medley of oddities from the variegated store that he had collected from all sources on his travels among vagrant folk. We must accept the facts as we find them; the question as to whether it was Paracelsus or not would be idle. Enough that there is a book by some writer who describes the work and describes it in such a way that naïve scholarship could have thought it quite consistent. The idea as such has appeared conceivable to us. Its form in the book mentioned appears clearly determined by alchemistic ideas. The reader will immediately perceive it himself as I give here some passages from the book. (Cf. the Strassb. Folio Ausg. des Paracelsus, Vol. I, pp. 881-884.) A consideration of the production of the homunculus appears important to me because it shows the main content of alchemistic ideas in enlarged form and complete development, a content that gives, moreover, the very thing that psychoanalysis would here look for.