JAMES, a Scots gentleman, who lived in the 16th century, and who, on account of his extraordinary endowments both of body and mind, obtained the appellation of the "admirable Crichton;" by which title he has been distinguished to the present day. The time of this celebrated person's birth is said, by the generality of writers, to have been in 1551; but according to some he was born in August 1560. There is a difference likewise between the biographers of this extraordinary man, with regard to his family, and the rank and situation of his father. By some it is asserted, that James Crichton's father was Robert Crichton of Clunie, in the county of Perth; and that this Robert Crichton commanded Queen Mary's army at the battle of Langside in the year 1568. But it is said by others, that this gentleman was of Ellock in the same county, and that he was lord advocate of Scotland in Queen Mary's reign from 1561 to 1573; part of which time he held that office in conjunction with Spens of Condie. The mother of James Crichton was Elizabeth Stuart, the only daughter of Sir James Stuart of Beath, who was a descendant of Robert duke of Albany the third son of King Robert the second, by Elizabeth Muir or More, as she is commonly called; so that when the admirable Crichton boasted (as he did abroad), that he was sprung from Scottish kings, he said nothing but what was agreeable to truth.

James Crichton is said to have received his grammatical education at Perth, and to have studied philosophy in the university of St Andrew's. His tutor in that university was Mr John Rutherford, a professor at that time famous for his learning, and who distinguished himself by writing four books on Aristotle's logic and a commentary on his poetics. According to Aldus Manutius, who calls Crichton first cousin to the king, he was also instructed, along with his majesty, by Buchanan, Hepburn, and Robertson, as well as by Rutherford; and he had scarcely arrived at the 20th year of his age, when he had run through the whole circle of the sciences, and could speak and write to perfection in ten different languages. Nor was this all; for he had likewise improved himself to the highest degree in riding, dancing, and singing, and in playing upon all sorts of instruments.

Crichton, being thus accomplished, went abroad upon his travels, and is said to have gone to Paris; of his transactions at which place the following account is given. He caused placards to be fixed on all the gates of the schools, halls, and colleges belonging to the university, and on all the pillars and posts before the houses of the most renowned men for literature in the city, inviting all those who were well versed in any art or science, to dispute with him in the college of Navarre, that day six weeks, by nine of the clock in the morning, where he would attend them, and be ready to answer to whatever should be proposed to him in any art or science, and in any of these 12 languages, Hebrew, Syriac, Arabic, Greek, Latin, Spanish, French, Italian, English, Dutch, Flemish, and Slavonian; and this either in verse or prose at the discretion of the disputant. During this whole time, instead of closely applying to his studies, he regarded nothing but hunting, hawking, tilting, vaulting, riding of a well managed horse, toiling the pike, handling the musket, and other military feats; or else he employed himself in domestic games, such as balls, concerts of music vocal and instrumental, cards, dice, tennis, and such like diversions of youth. This conduct so provoked the students of the university, that, beneath the placard which was fixed on the Navarre gate, they caused the following words to be written: "If you would meet with this monster of perfection, to make search for him either in the tavern or bawdy-house is the readiest way to find him." Nevertheless, when the day appointed arrived, Crichton appeared in the college of Navarre, and acquitted himself beyond expression in the disputation, which lasted from nine o'clock in the morning till six at night. At length, the president, after extolling him highly for the many rare and excellent endowments which God and nature had bestowed upon him, rose from his chair, and accompanied by four of the most eminent professors of the university, gave him a diamond ring and a purse full of gold, as a testimony of their love and favour. The whole ended with the repeated acclamations and huzzas of the spectators; and henceforward our young disputant was called "the admirable Crichton." It is added, that he so was little fatigued with the dispute, that he went on the very next day to the Louvre, where he had a match of tilting (an exercise then in much request), and in the presence of some of the princes of the court of France, and a great many ladies, carried away the ring 15 times successively.

About two years after this we find him at Rome, where he affixed a placard upon all the eminent places of the city, in the following terms: Nos Jacobus Crichtonus Scotus, cuicumque rei propofitae ex improviso respondebimus. In a city which abounded in wit, this bold challenge, to answer to any question that could be proposed to him without his being previously advertised of it, could not escape the ridicule of a populace. It is said, however, that being nowise discouraged, he appeared at the time and place appointed; and that, in the presence of the pope, many cardinals, bishops, doctors of divinity, and professors in all the sciences, he displayed such wonderful proofs of his universal knowledge, that he excited no less surprise than he had done at Paris. Boccaccio, who was then at Rome, gives something of a different relation According to this author, the pafquimade against Crichton, which was to the following effect, "And he that will see it, let him go to the sign of the Falcon and it shall be shown," made such an impression upon him, that he felt a place where he had been so grossly affronted as to be put upon a level with jugglers and mountebanks.

From Rome he went to Venice; where he contracted an intimate friendship with Aldus Manutius, Laurentius Maffia, Speron Speroni, Johannes Donatus, and various other learned persons, to whom he presented several poems in commendation of the city and university. At length he was introduced to the doge and senate, in whose presence he made a speech, which was accompanied with such beauty of eloquence, and such grace of person and manner, that he received the thanks of that illustrious body, and nothing was talked of through the whole city but this rara in terris avis, this prodigy of nature. He held, likewise, disputations on the subjects of theology, philosophy, and mathematics, before the most eminent professors, and large multitudes of people. His reputation was so great, that the desire of seeing and hearing him brought together a vast concourse of persons from different quarters to Venice. It may be collected from Manutius, that the time in which Crichton exhibited these demonstrations of his abilities was in the year 1580.

During his residence at Venice, he fell into a bad state of health, which continued for the space of four months. However, before he was perfectly recovered, he went, by the advice of his friends, to Padua, the university of which city was at that time in great reputation. The next day after his arrival, there was a meeting of all the learned men of the place, at the house of Jacobus Aloysius Cornelius; when Crichton opened the assembly with an extemporary poem in praise of the city, the university, and the company who had honoured him with their presence. After this, he disputed for six hours with the most celebrated professors on various subjects of learning; and he exposed, in particular, the errors of Aristotle and his commentators, with so much solidity and acuteness, and at the same time with so much modesty, that he excited universal admiration. In conclusion, he delivered extempore an oration in praise of ignorance, which was conducted with such ingenuity and elegance, that his hearers were astonished. This exhibition of Crichton's talents was on the 14th of March 1581.

Soon after he appointed a day for another disputation to be held at the palace of the bishop of Padua; not for the purpose of affording higher proofs of his abilities, for that could not possibly be done, but in compliance with the earnest solicitations of some persons who were not present at the former assembly. However, several circumstances occurred which prevented this meeting from taking place. Such is the account of Manutius: but Imperialis relates, that he was informed by his father, who was present upon the occasion, that Crichton was opposed by Archangelus Mercenarius, a famous philosopher; and that he acquitted himself so well as to obtain the approbation of a very honourable company, and even of his antagonist himself.

Amidst the discourses which were occasioned by our young Scotsman's exploits, and the high applause that were bestowed upon his genius and attainments, there were not wanting some who endeavoured to detract from his merit. For ever, therefore, to confound these injurious impugners of his talents, he caused a paper to be fixed on the gates of St John and St Paul's church, wherein he offered to prove before the university, that the errors of Aristotle, and of all his followers, were almost innumerable; and that the latter had failed both in explaining their master's meaning, and in treating on theological subjects. He promised likewise to refute the dreams of certain mathematical professors; to dispute in all the sciences, and to answer to whatever should be proposed to him or objected against him. All this he engaged to do, either in the common logical way, or by numbers and mathematical figures, or in 100 sorts of verses, at the pleasure of his opponents. According to Manutius, Crichton sustained this contest, without fatigue, for three days; during which time he supported his credit, and maintained his propositions, with such spirit and energy, that from an unusual concourse of people, he obtained acclamations and praises, than which none more magnificent were ever heard by men.

From Padua, Crichton set out for Mantua; where there happened to be at the time a gladiator, who had foiled in his travels the most famous fencers in Europe, and had lately killed three who had entered the lists with him in this city. The duke of Mantua was much grieved at having granted this man his protection, as he found it to be attended with such fatal consequences. Crichton being informed of his highness's concern, offered his service, not only to drive the murderer from Mantua, but from Italy; and to fight him for 1500 pistoles. Though the duke was unwilling to expose such an accomplished gentleman to so great a hazard; yet relying upon the report he had heard of his warlike achievements, he agreed to the proposal; and the time and place being appointed, the whole court attended to behold the performance. At the beginning of the combat Crichton stood only upon his defence; while the Italian made his attack with such eagerness and fury, that, having overacted himself, he began to grow weary. Crichton now seized the opportunity of attacking his antagonist in return; which he did with so much dexterity and vigour, that he ran him through the body in three different places, of which wounds he immediately died. The acclamations of the spectators were loud and extraordinary upon this occasion; and it was acknowledged by all of them, that they had never seen Art grace Nature, or Nature second the precepts of Art, in so lively a manner as they had beheld these two things accomplished on that day. To crown the glory of the action, Crichton bestowed the prize of his victory upon the widows of the three persons who had lost their lives in fighting with the gladiator.

It is asserted, that in consequence of this and his other wonderful performances, the duke of Mantua made choice of him for preceptor to his son Vincentio di Gonzaga, who is represented as being of a riotous temper and a dissolute life. The appointment was highly pleasing to the court. Crichton, to testify his gratitude to his friends and benefactors, and to contribute to their diversion, framed, we are told, a comedy wherein he exposed Crichton and ridiculed all the weaknesses and failures of the several employments in which men are engaged. This composition was regarded as one of the most ingenious satires that ever was made upon mankind. But the most astonishing part of the story is that Crichton sustained 15 characters in the representation of his own play. Among the rest, he acted the divine, the philosopher, the lawyer, the mathematician, the physician, and the soldier, with such inimitable grace, that every time he appeared on the theatre he seemed to be a different person.

From being the principal actor in a comedy, Crichton soon became the subject of a dreadful tragedy. One night, during the time of carnival, as he was walking along the streets of Mantua, and playing upon his guitar, he was attacked by half a dozen people in masks. The assailants found that they had no ordinary person to deal with, for they were not able to maintain their ground against him. In the illuse, the leader of the company being disarmed, pulled off his mask, and begged his life, telling him that he was the prince his pupil. Crichton immediately fell upon his knees and expressed his concern for his mistake; alleging, that what he had done was only in his own defense, and that if Gonzaga had any design upon his life, he might always be master of it. Then taken his own sword by the point, he presented it to the prince, who immediately received it, and was so irritated by the affront which he thought he had sustained in being foiled with all his attendants, that he instantly ran Crichton through the heart.

Various have been the conjectures concerning the motives which could induce Vincentio di Gonzaga to be guilty of so ungenerous and brutal an action. Some have ascribed it to jealousy, alleging that he suspected Crichton to be more in favour than himself with a lady whom he passionately loved; and Sir Thomas Urquhart has told a story upon this head which is extravagant and ridiculous in the highest degree. Others, with great probability, represent the whole transaction as the result of a drunken frolic: and it is uncertain, according to Imperialis, whether the meeting of the prince and Crichton was by accident or design. However, it is agreed on all hands that Crichton lost his life in this rencontre. The time of his decease is said, by the generality of his biographers, to have been in the beginning of July 1583; but others fix it to the same month in the preceding year. There is a difference, likewise, with regard to the period of life at which Crichton died. The common accounts declare that he was killed in the 32nd year of his age; but Imperialis affirms that he was only in his 22nd year when that calamitous event took place; and this fact is confirmed by other writers.

Crichton's tragic end excited a very great and general lamentation. If Sir Thomas Urquhart is to be credited, the whole court of Mantua went three quarters of a year into mourning for him; the epitaphs and elegies that were composed upon his death and stuck upon his hearse, would exceed, if collected, the bulk of Homer's works; and, for a long time afterwards, his picture was to be seen in most of the bedchambers and galleries of the Italian nobility, representing him on horseback, with a lance in the one hand and a book in the other. The same author tells us, that Crichton gained the esteem of kings and princes, by his magnanimity and knowledge; of noblemen and gentlemen, by his courtliness and breeding; of knights, by his honourable deportment and pregnancy of wit; of the rich, by his affability and good fellowship; of the poor, by his munificence and liberality; of the old, by his constancy and wisdom; of the young by his mirth and gallantry; of the learned, by his universal knowledge; of the soldiers, by his undaunted valour and courage; of the merchants and artificers by his upright dealing and honesty; and of the fair sex, by his beauty and handsomeens, in which respect he was a masterpiece of nature.

Joannes Imperialis, in his life of Crichton, says, that he was the wonder of the last age; the prodigious production of nature; the glory and ornament of Parnassus, in a stupendous and unusual manner; and that, in the judgment of the learned world, he was the phoenix of literature, and rather a shining particle of the Divine Mind and Majesty than a model of what could be attained by human industry. The same author, after highly celebrating the beauty of his person, affirms, that his extraordinary eloquence and his admirable knowledge of things testified that he possessed a strength of genius wholly divine. "What (adds this writer) can more exceed our comprehension, than that Crichton, in the 21st year of his age, should be matter of ten different languages, and perfectly well versed in philosophy, mathematics, theology, polite literature, and all other sciences?" Besides it was ever heard in the whole compass of the globe, that these extraordinary endowments of the mind, should be added a singular skill in fencing, dancing, fencing, riding, and in every exercise of the gymnastic art?" Nay, Imperialis, in his account of Crichton's death, declares, that the report of so sad a catastrophe was spread to the remotest parts of the earth; that it disturbed universal nature; and that in her grief for the loss of the wonder she had produced, she threatened never more to confer such honour upon mankind. Compared with these extravagancies, the affection of Bayle that Crichton was one of the greatest prodigies of wit that ever lived, and the testimony of Felix Aetolus concerning his wonderful memory, may be considered as modest encomiums.

Such are the accounts which, by a succession of writers, and particularly since the time of Mackenzie, have been given of the admirable Crichton. These accounts are indeed so wonderful, that many persons have been disposed to consider them as in a great measure, if not entirely, fabulous. We shall therefore subjoin from the Biographia Britannica the following observations of Dr Kippis, with a view to ascertain what portion of faith is due to the different parts of the preceding narrative, or at least to assist the reader in forming a proper judgment concerning them.

The doctor begins with observing, "That no credit can be granted to any facts that depend upon the sole authority of Sir Thomas Urquhart. Mr Pennant indeed speaks of him with approbation; and Dr Samuel Johnson laid a stress on his veracity, in the account of Crichton which he dedicated to Dr Hawkesworth, and is inserted in the 81st number of the Adventurer; of which account it may be observed, that it is only But with all deference to these respectable names, I must declare my full persuasion that Sir Thomas Urquhart is an author whose testimony to facts is totally unworthy of regard; and it is surprising that a perusal of his works does not strike every mind with this conviction. His productions are so inexpressibly absurd 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 diligent examination of the treatise which contains the memorials concerning Crichton would show that it is strictly true. But of his total disregard to truth there is incontestable evidence in another work of his, entitled, The True Pedigree and Lineal Descent of the most ancient and honourable Family of the Urquharts in the House of Cromarty, from the Creation of the World until the year of God 1652. In this work it is almost incredible what a number of futilities he has invented both with respect to names and facts. Perhaps a more flagrant instance of imposture and fiction was never exhibited; and the absurdity of the whole pedigree is beyond the power of words to express. It can only be felt by those who have perused the tract itself. Such a man therefore can justly be entitled to no degree of credit, especially when he has a purpose to serve, as was the case with Sir Thomas Urquhart. His design was to exalt his own family and his own nation at any rate. With respect to his own nation, there was no occasion for having recourse to fiction, in order to display the lustre of Scotland, in the eminent men whom it has produced in arms and literature. The pencil of truth alone would have been amply sufficient for that purpose.

"So far therefore as Sir Thomas Urquhart's authority is concerned, the wonderful exhibitions of Crichton at Paris, his triumph at Rome, his combat with the gladiator, his writing an Italian comedy, his sustaining fifteen characters in the representation of that comedy, the extraordinary story of the amour which is described as the cause of his death, the nine months mourning for him at Mantua, and the poems hung round his heart to the quantity of Homer's works, must be regarded as in the highest degree doubtful, or rather absolutely false. I cannot forbear mentioning two circumstances, which show how much Sir Thomas Urquhart was destitute of prudence, as well as of scrupulousness, in his violations of truth. He says that the duke of Mantua was pleased to confer upon the young lady that was Crichton's mistress and Crichton's future wife, a pension of five hundred ducats a year; and that the prince also bestowed as much upon her during all the days of his life, 'which was (adds Sir Thomas) but short; for he did not long enjoy himself after the cruel fate of so miserable an accident.'

Now it is well known that Vincenzo di Gonzaga succeeded his father in the dukedom of Mantua in 1587, and that he did not die till the year 1612; which was almost, if not entirely, thirty years after Crichton's decease. The other instance of the imprudence of Sir Thomas Urquhart in the contrivance of his fictions, occurs at the conclusion of his narrative, where he affirms that the verity of the story which he hath related concerning the incomparable Crichton, 'may be certified by two thousand men yet living who have known him.' Two thousand men yet living! that is, in 1652, sixty-nine or seventy years after Crichton's death, for such was the time of Sir Thomas's publication. Our author would have been sadly puzzled to collect together these two thousand living witnesses who could certify the verity of his story.

"With regard, however, to the account which is given of the prodigious exertions of Crichton, both corporeal and mental, at Paris, Mackenzie imagines that he has found a full confirmation of them in a passage produced by him from the Disquisitiones of Stephen Pafquier, and which he considers as the testimony of an eye-witness. But the whole of what has been built upon it by Mackenzie, and succeeding biographers, is founded on a mistake. In the quotation from the Disquisitiones, the name of Crichton is not mentioned, and the author doth not appear to have been personally present at the exhibitions of the extraordinary youth there described. The expressions which are supposed to carry that meaning may well be referred not to the writer himself, but to his countrymen the French, before whom the young man is said to have displayed his surprising talents. But the discussion of this point is totally needless, because the passage in question is not an original authority. The book entitled Stephani Pafchieri Disquisitiones is only an abridgment in Latin of Pafquier's Des Recherches de la France. Now, in this last work there is indeed an account of a wonderful youth, such as is related in Mackenzie's quotation, and from which that passage was formed. But this wonderful youth, whoever he might be, was not the admirable Crichton: for Pafquier, who does not tell his name, expressly says that he appeared in the year 1445. The evidence therefore, produced by Mackenzie falls entirely to the ground. Indeed, if the story of Crichton's exploits at

(A) This was probably meant as a satire, and not as a serious production. (B) This matter has been let in a clear light by the writer of the following letter.

"SIR,

"We are informed by Sir John Hawkins, that Dr Johnson dictated from memory that account of the person vulgarly named the Admirable Crichton, which is to be found in one of the papers of the Adventurer.

"That account is plainly an abridgment of the life of Crichton by Dr George Mackenzie. Dr Mackenzie supposes that Pafquier, the French lawyer and antiquary, was an eye-witness of the feats performed in arts as well as in arms by Crichton. This is one of the grossest errors in biography which has occurred to me in the course of my reading; and it is an error which I perceive is gaining ground daily, and bids fair in a short time to be received as an indisputable truth.

"The Paris had been true, no man was more likely to be acquainted with them than Stephen Pasquier, who lived at the time, and who would be fond enough of recording transactions so extraordinary. It may farther be observed, that Thuanus, who was likewise a contemporary, and who in his own life is very particular in what relates to learned men, makes no mention of Crichton. The only authority for his having ever resided in France at all (Sir Thomas Urquhart excepted) is that of Dr John Johnston, who says *Gallia pecus excolit*. But this amounts to no proof of the truth of the transactions related by Urquhart. The whole which can be deduced from it is, that Crichton, in the course of his travels, might make some stay in France for the purpose of improvement. Even this, however, doth not agree with the narration of Imperialis, who informs us, that when troubles arose in Scotland on account of religion, and Queen Mary fell into so many calamities, Crichton was sent by his father directly from that country to Venice as a place of security.

"It is acknowledged by Sir John Hawkins, that Sir Thomas Urquhart has produced no authorities in support of his surprising narrations. But this defect, Sir John thinks, is supplied in the Life of Crichton which is given in Mr Pennant's Tour. I am under the necessity of saying, that this is by no means the case. The article in Pennant was not drawn up by that ingenious and learned gentleman, but is the transcript of a pamphlet, that was printed some years ago at Aberdeen; and which pamphlet is nothing more than a republication, with a few verbal alterations, of the Life of Crichton written by Mackenzie. It doth not, therefore, furnish a single additional testimony in confirmation of Sir Thomas Urquhart's stories, excepting in the mistaken instance from Pasquier. In other respects it only borrows facts from Sir Thomas Urquhart, without establishing them upon fresh proofs. It is observable, that the earlier biographers of Crichton had no knowledge of most of the transactions enlarged upon by this extravagant writer; for if they had known them, they would have been eagerly disposed to relate them, and to do it with every circumstance of exaggeration. How much this was the character of Thomas Dempster, with regard to his own countrymen, is sufficiently underlaid, and hath frequently been remarked; and yet his account of Crichton is uncommonly modest, compared with those of succeeding authors. The extravagance of Imperialis in respect to Crichton has already appeared. There seems indeed to have been an universal tendency in the writers of this young Scotman's life to produce wonder and astonishment. 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, since he lived upon the places in which they were transacted, and had them from an eye and ear witness, even his own father. It is, however, to be remembered, that Imperialis's *Museum Historicum* was not published till 1640, nearly sixty 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 consequently was only thirteen years old when Crichton displayed 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. Besides, his authority is appealed to for no more than a single fact, and that a doubtful one, since it does not accord with Manutius's narrative; and whoever heard of the famous philosopher Archangelus Mercenario?

"The error seems to have arisen from the following circumstance: Dr Mackenzie had never read the original work of Pasquier, entitled *Recherches de la France*; what he quotes concerning the wonderful young man is taken from a Latin abridgement of that work; he refers to Steph. Pafch. Diquir. lib. v. cap. 23., and he gives his quotation in Latin; indeed it does not appear that Dr Mackenzie had ever heard of the original work. Now Pasquier, instead of saying that he was an eye-witness of the wonders exhibited by Crichton, says in the most unequivocal terms, that what he relates was taken 'from a manuscript which was occasionally used by him,' (*d'un livre écrit à la main, dont je m'aide selon les occurrences*). And he adds, 'I will represent the story in its own simple garb, without any artificial colouring, so that my readers may be the more inclined to give credit to it,' (*vous représentant cette histoire en sa simplicité, sans y apporter aucun fond pour ce que vous y adjoufferez plus de foy*). He then transcribes the narrative from the MS. which places the appearance of this phenomenon in the year 1445, a full century before the birth of our Crichton. See *Recherches de la France*, lib. vi. c. 38. 39.

"Dr Mackenzie, although he had not read the original of Pasquier, appears to have read an author who quotes the same story: 'The learned M. du Launoy (says he), in his History of the College of Navarre, finding the history of this dispute recorded in a MS. History of the College of Navarre, and the like account of a Spaniard in Trithemius, confounds the two together, and robs our author of the glory of this action, and places it in the year 1445; whereas it should be in the year 1571.' This charge of robbery is singular enough.

"Let me only add, that Pasquier transcribes some verses written by George Chastelain, a French poet in the reign of Charles VII. king of France, which allude to the same story; and that Pasquier himself was born at Paris in 1528, passed his life in that city, and was an eminent lawyer and pleader in 1571; so that it is impossible the feats of Crichton, had they been really performed at Paris, could have been unknown to him, and most improbable that, knowing them, he would have omitted to mention them: for, in the same lib. vi. c. 39. he is at pains to produce examples of great proficiency, displayed by men in a much humbler rank of life than that of philosophers and public disputants."

*Edin. Mag. 1757.* "The truth of the matter is, that some flight circumstances excepted, neither Dempter nor Imperialis have produced any evidences of Crichton's extraordinary abilities besides those which are recorded by the younger Aldus Manutius. He therefore is to be regarded as the only living authority upon the subject. Manutius was contemporary with Crichton; he was closely connected with him in friendship; and he relates several things on his own personal knowledge. He is a positive and undoubted witness with respect to our young Scotman'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 some degree of caution. Dedications are apt to assume the style of exaggeration, and this is the case with Manutius's dedication of the *Paradoxa Ciceronis* to Crichton. In addition to the general language of such addresses, 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 readiness and constancy of character. It is even said that by his imprudencies he fell into contempt and misery. But independently of any considerations of this kind, it may be observed, that Manutius's narrative, previous to Crichton's arrival at Venice, could not be derived from personal knowledge. For that part of it (which is sufficiently erroneous) he was probably indebted to Crichton himself. Neither does he appear to have been an eye-witness of the whole of the disputations which were held at Padua; for speaking of his young friend's praise of ignorance, he relates, that those who were present told him afterwards how much they were struck with that oration. However, at the other disputation, which lasted three days, Manutius seems certainly to have attended; for he concludes his accounts of it with saying, that he was not only the adviser but the spectator of Crichton's wonderful contests. It is evident, however, from the dedication, that his extraordinary abilities were not universally acknowledged and admired. Some there were who detracted from them, and were displeased with Manutius for so warmly supporting his reputation.

"As to the real cause and manner of our young Scotman's death, both of them still remain in some degree of obscurity. That he was killed in a rencontre at the carnival at Mantua, is testified by too many authors to be reasonably doubted. But whether there was that particular malignity on the part of Vincenzo di Gonzaga, which is commonly ascribed to him, may be considered 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 perusal of the four poems of his which are still preserved. 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 displayed in the longest of his poems, which was written on occasion of his approach to the city of Venice. He there represents a Naiad as rising up before him; and, by the order of the Muses and of Minerva, directing him how to proceed. But this is a sentiment which so easily presents itself to a classical reader, that it can scarcely be considered as deserving the name of a poetical invention. The three other poems of Crichton have still less to recommend them. Indeed his verses will not stand the test of a rigid examination even with regard to quantity.

"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 such lively parts as excited great present admiration, and high expectation with regard to his future attainments. He appears to have had a fine person, to have been adroit in his bodily exercises, to have possessed a peculiar facility in learning languages, to have enjoyed a remarkably quick and retentive memory, and to have excelled in a power of declamation, a fluency of speech, and a readiness of reply. His knowledge, likewise, was probably very uncommon for his years; and this, in conjunction with his other qualities, enabled him to shine in public disputation. But whether his knowledge and learning were accurate or profound, may justly be questioned; and it may equally be doubted whether he would have arisen to any extraordinary degree of eminence in the literary world. It will always be regretted that his early and untimely death prevented this matter from being brought to the test of experiment."

From the portraits which remain of Crichton, it appears that in his face and form he was beautiful and elegant, and that his body and limbs, though not muscular or athletic, were well proportioned and fitted for feats of agility. The following catalogue of Crichton's works is given by Dempster: 1. *Ode ad Laurentium Massam plures.* 2. *Laudes Patavinæ, Carmen extempore effusum, cum in Jacobi Moysti Corneli domo experimentum ingenii coram tota Academia frequentia, non sine multorum stupore, faceret.* 3. *Ignorantiae Laudatio, extemporale Thema ibidem redditum, post sex horarum disputationes, ut praefecte familiae potius favere quam rem se veram videre affirmarint, ait Manutius.* 4. *De Apulifu suo Venetiar.* 5. *Ode ad Aldum Manutium.* 6. *Epistolæ ad Divertos.* 7. *Prefationes solennes in omnes Scientias sacras et profanas.* 8. *Judicium de Philosophis.* 9. *Errores Ariftotelis.* 10. *Arma ad Litera Praefant, Controversia oratoria.* 11. *Refutation Mathematicorum.* 12. A Comedy in the Italian language.