"Jole Shackelford's sweeping and penetrating study of the design and reception of Petrus Severinus's Idea medicinae philosophicae (1571) convincingly establishes Severinus as one of the most important figures among those articulating Paracelsian traditions. [...] Shackelford's discussion makes sometimes-difficult concepts both coherent and accessible, and pierces well into the intellectual details of Severinus's Idea. This alone would make the study a valuable contribution to the history of natural philosophy and medicine in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. However the treatment of Severinus extends even further and establishes the relationships that contributed to a supportive environment for Paracelsian ideas in Denmark, and comprehensively surveys the reception and application of Severinus's thinking thereafter. [...] Shackelford's book will stand for years as the most authoritative source for Severinus and his influence. It is among the best of fruits cultivated from long-term effort, intellectual talent, and serious scholarship." - Bruce T. Moran, University of Nevada, Reno
"Jole Shakelford's biography of Severinus is an enviable achievement. He has followed some very vague leads and patiently unraveled many tangled ideas, all without pedantry or obscurity. He offers a comprehensive view of the learned world of the sixteenth century, a world where many of our assumptions and expectations do not apply." - James L. Larson, University of California, Berkely, Scandinavian Studies, 77.3 (Fall 2005)
"In short, Shackelford's study cuts across many boundaries. It is, of course, a much-needed account of Severinus and his systhesis of Paracelsian thought. For some readers it will also serve as an introduction to the meaning of Paracelsianism in the late sixteenth and early seventeenth centuries. However, in addition, the author examines this influence in many national settings, creating a survey of the key figures of European chemical philosophy. Historians of medicine have always had an interest in early modem developments, but Paracelsian studies have been relatively uncommon. This book is a welcome exception and should be considered required reading for anyone interested in that period." - Allen G. Debus, University of Chicago, Bulletin of the History of Medicine, 2005, 79