369 Strictures on the Accounts which various Writers have given of the Admirable Crichton.-By Dr Kippis *. HE accounts which have been diligent examination of the treatife Tivace the Admirable Crich- which contains the memorials con cerning Crichton would fhew that it ton, by Sir Thomas Urquhart, Sir G. Mackenzie, and other writers, is ftrictly true. But of his total dif are so very extravagant and wonder- regard to truth there is inconteftible ful, that it feems an object of import- evidence in another work of his, enance to examine, fomewhat more ac- tituled, The true Pedigree, and Licurately and extensively than hath neal Defcent, of the most ancient hitherto been done, what measure of and honourable Family of the Urfaith is to be allotted to their narra-quharts in the houfe of Cromarty, tives. In the first place, then, it must be obferved, that no credit can be granted to any facts which depend upon the fole authority of Sir Thomas Urquhart. Sir John Hawkins, indeed, feems to think that the ftories told of Crichton by this writer may be confidered as fufficiently authenticated to all the purposes of historical information. Mr Pennant, likewife, fpeaks of him with approbation; and Dr Samuel Johnson laid a ftrefs on his veracity, in the account of Crichton which he dictated to Dr Hawkfworth, inferted in the eighty-firft number of the Adventurer; of which account it may obferved, that it is only an elegant fummary of the life written by Mackenzie. But, with all deference to thefe refpectable names, 1 muft declare my full perfuafion that Sir Thomas Urquhart is an author whofe teftimony to facts is totally unworthy of regard; and it is furprifing that a perufal of his works does not ftrike every mind with this conviction. His productions are fo inexpreffibly abfurd and extravagant, that the only rational judgment which can be pronounced concerning him is, that he was little, if at all, better than a madman. To the character of his having been a madman must be added that of his being a liar. Severe as this term may be thought, I apprehend that a VOL. X. No. 60. 3 A from the Creation of the World un'til the Year of God, 165.' In this work it is almoft incredible what a number of falfities he has invented, both with refpect to names and facts. Perhaps a more flagrant inftance of impofture and fiction was never exhi bited; and the abfurdity of the whole pedigree is beyond the power of words to exprefs. It can only be felt by thofe who have perufed the Tract itfelf. Such a man, therefore, can juftly be entitled to no degree of credit, efpecially when he has a purpose to ferve, as was the cafe with Sir Tho mas Urquhart. His defign was to exalt his own family and his own nation at any rate. With refpect to his own nation, there was no occafion for having recourse to fiction, in order to difplay the luftre of Scotland, in the eminent men whom it has produced in Arms and Literature. The Pencil of Truth alone would have been amply fufficient for that purpofe. So far, therefore, as Sir Thomas Urquhart's authority is concerned, the wonderful exhibitions of Crichton at Paris, his triumph at Rome, his com bat with the Gladiator, his writing an Italian Comedy, his fuftaining fifteen characters in the reprefentation of that Comedy, the extraordinary story of the Amour which is described as the caufe of his death, the nine months mourning for him at Mantua, and the Biog, Brit. vol. IV. just published, Poems mas, Poems hung round his hearfe to the Stephen Pafquier, and which he conquantity of Homer's works, must be fiders as the teftimony of an eye-witregarded as in the highest degree nefs. But the whole of what has been doubtful, or rather as abfolutely falfe. built upon it, by Mackenzie, and fucI cannot forbear mentioning two cir- ceeding Biographers, is founded on a cumstances, which fhew how much mittake. In the quotation from the Sir Thomas Urquhart was deftitute of Difquifitiones, the name of Crichton is prudence, as well as of fcrupulofity in not mentioned, and the author doth his violations of truth. He fays that not appear to have been perfonally the Duke of Mantua was pleafed to prefent at the exhibitions of the exconfer upon the young lady that was traordinary youth there defcribed. The Crichton's mistress, and future wife, a expreflions which are supposed to carpenfion of five hundred ducats a year; ry that meaning may well be referred and that the Prince alfo beftowed as not to the writer himfelf, but to his much upon her, during all the days of countrymen the French, before whom his life, which was, adds Sir Tho- the young man is faid to have difplaybut fhort; for he did not long ed his furprifing talents. But the • enjoy himself after the crofs fate of difcuflion of this point is totally needfo miferable an accident.' Now it lefs, because the paffage in queftion is is well known that Vincenzo di Gon- not an original authority. The book zaga fucceeded his father in the duke- entitled, Stephani Pafchieri Difquifitiodom of Mantua, in 1587, and that henes, is only an abridgment, in Latin, of did not die till the year 1612; which Pafquier's Des Recherches de la was almost, if not entirely, thirty France. Now in this last work years after Crichton's decease. The there is, indeed, an account of a wonother inftance of the imprudence of derful youth, fuch as is related in Sir Thomas Urquhart in the contri- Mackenzie's quotation, and from vance of his fictions, occurs at the con- which that paffage was formed. But clufion of his narrative, where he af- this wonderful youth, whoever he ferts that the verity of the story which might be, was not the Admirable he hath related concerning the incom- Crichton; for Pafquier, who does not parable Crichton, may be certified tell his name, exprefsly fays, that he by two thoufand men. yet living, appeared in the year 1445 t. The who have known him.' Two thou- evidence, therefore, produced by Macfand men yet living! that is, in 1652, kenzie falls entirely to the ground. Sixty-nine, or feventy years after Indeed, if the flory of Crichton's exCrichton's death, for fuch was the ploits at Paris had been true, no man time of Sir Thomas's publication. was more likely to be acquainted with Our author would have been fadly them than Stephen Pafquier, who li puzzled to collect together thefe two ved at the time, and who would thoufand living witneffes, who could be fond enough of recording tranfeertify the verity of his story. actions fo extraordinary. With regard, however, to the account which is given of the prodigious exertions of Crichton, both corporal and mental, at Paris, Mackenzie imagines that he has found a full confirmation of them in a paffage produced by him from the Difquifitiones of It may farther be obferved, that Thuanus, who was likewife a contemporary, and who in his own life is very particular in what relates to learned men, nakes no mention of Crichton The only authority for his having ever refided in France at all (Sir Thomas Urquhart This matter has lately been fet in a clear light, by a learned and judicious writer, in the Edinburgh Magazine, for May 1787. Urquhart excepted) is that of Dr John Johnston, who fays, "Gallia Pectus excolit." But this amounts to no proof of the truth of the tranfactions related by Urquhart. The * whole which can be deduced from it is, that Crichton, in the courfe of his travels, might make fome ftay in France, for the purpofe of improvement. Even this, however, doth not agree with the narration of Imperialis, who informs us, that when troubles arole in Scotland on account of religion, and Queen Mary fell into fo many calamities, Crichton was fent by his father directly from that country to Venice, as a place of fecurity. It is acknowledged by Sir John Hawkins, that Sir Thomas Urquhart bas produced no authorities in fupport of his furprifing narrations. But this defect Sir John thinks is fupplied in the life of Crichton which is given in Mr Pennant's Tour. I am under the neceffity of faying, that this is by no means the cafe. The article in Pennant was not drawn up by that ingenious and learned gentleman, but is the transcript of a pamphlet that was printed fome years ago at Aberdeen; and which pamphlet is nothing more than a re-publication, with a few yerbal alterations of the life of Crichton, written by Mackenzie. It doth not, therefore, furnish a single additional teftimony in confirmation of Sir Thomas Urquhart's ftories, excepting in the mistaken inftance from Pafquier. In other refpects, it only borrows facts from Sir Thomas Urquhart, without establishing them upon fresh proofs, It is obfervable, that the earlier biographers of Crichton had no knowledge of most of the tranfactions enlarged upon by this extravagant writer; for, if they had known them, they would have been eagerly difpofed to relate them, and to do it with every circumftance of exaggeration. How much this was the character of Thomas Dempfter, with regard to his own countrymen, is fufficiently understood, and hath frequently been remarked; and yet his account of Crichton is uncommonly modeft, compared with those of fucceeding authors. The extravagance of Imperialis in refpect to Crichton has already appeared. There feems, indeed, to have been an univerfal tendency in the writers of this young Scotfman's life to produce wonder and aftonilkment. Mackenzie remarks, that Imperialis could not but know the truth of all, or at least of most of the things he has related concerning Crichton, fince he lived upon the places in which they were tranfacted, and had them from an eye and ear-witnefs, even his own father. It is, however, to be remembered, that Imperialis's Mufcum Hiftoricum, was not publithed till 1640, nearly fixty years after the events recorded by him happened; to which may be added, that the information he derived from his father was probably very imperfect. Imperialis the elder was not born till 1568, and confequently was only thirteen years old when Crichton difplayed his talents at Padua. What real dependence, therefore, could there be on the accuracy of the account given by a youth of that age? He could only relate, and perhaps from inadequate intelligence, the things which were talked of when he was a boy. Befides, his authority is appealed to for no more than a fingle fact, and that a doubtful one, fince it does not accord with Manutius's narrative: and who ever heard of the famous philofopher Arcangelus Mercenarius? The truth of the matter is, that, fome flight circumftances excepted, neither Dempfter nor Imperialis have produced any evidences of Crichton's extraordinary abilities befides those which are recorded by the younger Aldus Manutius. He, therefore, is to be regarded as the only living authority upon the fubject. Manutius was contemporary with Crichton; he 3 Aa was. was clofely connected with him in friendship; and he relates feveral things on his own perfonal knowledge. He is a pofitive and undoubted witnefs with respect to our young Scotf man's intellectual and literary exertions at Venice and at Padua ; and from him it is that our account of them is given above. Nevertheless, even Aldus Manutius is to be read with fome degree of caution. Dedications are apt to affume the ftile of exaggeration, and this is the cafe with Manutius's Dedication of the Paradoxa Ciceronis to Crichton. In addition to the general language of fuch addreffes, he might be carried too far by his affection for his friend, which appears to have been very great: nor was the younger Aldus eminent for fteadinefs and confiftency of character. It is even faid that, by his imprudencies, he fell into contempt and mifery. But independently of any confiderations of this kind, it may be observed, that Manutius's narrative, previously to Crichton's arrival at Venice, could not be derived from perfonal knowJedge. For that part of it (which is fufliciently erroneous) he was probably indebted to Crichton himfelf. Neither does he appear to have been an eye-witnefs of the whole of the difputations which were held at Padua; for fpeaking of his young friend's praife of ignorance, he relates that thofe who were prefent told him afterwards how much they were ftruck with that Oration. However, at the other Dif. putation, which lafted three days, Manutius feems certainly to have attended; for he concludes his accounts of with faying, that he was not only the adviser but the fpectator of Crich ton's wonderful contests. It is evi dent, however, from the Dedication, that his extraordinary abilities were not univerfally acknowledged and admired. Some there were who detracted from them, and were displeased with Manutius for fo warmly fupporting his reputation. As to the real cause and manner of our young Scotsman's death, both of them ftill remain in fome degree of obfcurity. That he was killed in a rencounter at the Carnival at Mantua, is teftified by too many authors to be reafonably doubted. But whether there was that particular malignity on the part of Vincenzo di Gonzaga, which is commonly afcribed to him, may be confidered as uncertain. One important method yet remains, by which we may be enabled to form a judgment of Crichton's genius, and that is, from a perufal of the four poems of his which are still preferved, It is, however, to be feared, that these will not exhibit him in a very high point of view. . Some fancy, perhaps, may be thought to be difplayed in the longest of his poems, which was written on occafion of his approach to the city of Venice. He there reprefents a Naiad as rifing up before him, and, by the order of the Mufes and of Minerva, directing him how to proceed. But this is a fentiment which fo eafily prefents itself to a claffical reader, that it can scarcely be confidered as deferving the name of a poetical invention. The three other poems of Crichton have ftill lefs to recommend them. Indeed, his verses will not fland the test of a rigid examination even with regard to quantity †. +We shall here infert two of these poems, What, Prefixed to the Cato Major of Cicero in the Edition of Aldus Manucius, 1583. JACOBI CRITONII, SCOTI, Ad Clariffimum Virum, Patritium Venetum Jobanném Donatum, O D E. DUM cupidus, tumidufque Dea tuo dicere facta, Donate, quæro maxime ; Men What, then, is the opinion, which, on the whole, we are to form of the Admirable Crichton? It is evident that he was a youth of fuch lively parts as excited great prefent admiration, and high expectations with regard to his future attainments. He appears to have had a fine perfon, to Mens defideriis ardet; fed lenta fatiscit Non tenui tentanda videns freta turbida velo, Compreffo fervore femel fub pectore anhelo Sed nihil intonfus fruftra mihi Cinthius unquam Ergo Deum, et doctas fæpe in mea vota camænas Tum mente evehitur multa feu candidus aura Præpetibufque petit volitans fublimia pennis, Victorem armate flammis fi Mufa Chimera Sive trucidantes immania monftra, vel ipfum Aut Anchific 'en Priameiumque Hectora grande Si vivunt Theronque Hieronque, atque Ithæus ille, Quos nunquam obfcura fub nube filentia condent Obliviofa Tartari, Hoc opus o veftrum, Mufæ eft; mihi cingite frontem Tempufque lauro Apollinari *. Nec deerit divos inter regefque, Deorum Genus, Donato gloria. Prefixed to the Lælius of Cicero, have * F. Apollinis. A. Manucius in his Dedication Laurentio Massa, Reip. Veneta Secretario. "Me ftudiorum paritas, virtutis amor, communifque animorum ardor, quo Crito"nium noftrum, divinum plane juvenem, profequimur, fubigit, ut te æque ac ipfum amem, et, quæ ipfe de te cecinit, in primifque ea, quæ hic fubfcripfi, dulcis "utriufque veftrum memoria ergo fæpe, ac libenter ufurpem. Vale Venetiis, Id. ib. Jun. C15.xxc." JACOBI CRITON II, SCOTI, Ad Laurentium Massam, O D E. ERRANTEM ab oris me Caledoniis Vexit, volentem, mox remotos Sævis obarmatum procellis Hoftile per ferrum, per ignes Probably for fic. Si |