"Scientists" can only be said to have existed since the scientific method. "Natural philosophers" (as Aristotle) made statements about reality based on logic, rather than experimentation; anyone practical was a mere technologist (a bit how nuclear physicists feel about lab assistants). Obviously, with less knowledge about, you need less specialisation, so some of them will have had practical knowledge as well, but in the main, it was obvious that heavy objects fell faster than lighter ones; you didn't require experiments to prove it so.
And with the decrease in specialisation, "natural philosophy" covered everything not spiritual; Physics, to be sure, but mathematics, chemistry, astronomy, no little biology, all mixed up, There were useful things that came out of it, but saying it was "physics" is like calling a man a lemur because they have a common ancestor.
Furthermore, there has never been a grand unified theory of magic; some of it was very experimental, and has given rise to many useful technologies, while others (the ones based on demon raising or miracles in particular) haven't yet.
So, though an Isaac Newton might, while developing his laws of motion, been enthusiastic about alchemy and non-material beings, his different roles can be separeted with hindsight.
And with the decrease in specialisation, "natural philosophy" covered everything not spiritual; Physics, to be sure, but mathematics, chemistry, astronomy, no little biology, all mixed up, There were useful things that came out of it, but saying it was "physics" is like calling a man a lemur because they have a common ancestor.
Furthermore, there has never been a grand unified theory of magic; some of it was very experimental, and has given rise to many useful technologies, while others (the ones based on demon raising or miracles in particular) haven't yet.
So, though an Isaac Newton might, while developing his laws of motion, been enthusiastic about alchemy and non-material beings, his different roles can be separeted with hindsight.
