Version." Middleton, in 1721, published, 5, "Remarks, Paragraph by Paragraph, upon the Proposals, &c. ;" and at setting out," only desires his readers to believe, that they were not drawn from him by personal spleen or envy to the author of them, but by a serious conviction, that he had neither talents nor materials proper for the work he had undertaken." Middleton's motto to this piece was very happily chosen, and deserves to be transcribed. It is taken from an oration of Peter Burman, who, with a view of defending his brother critic against his adversaries, says, in a strain of irony*, "Doctus criticus et adsuetus urere, secare, inclementer omnis generis libros tractare, apices, syllabas, voces, dic tiones confodere, et stylo exigere, continebitne ille ab integro et intaminato divinæ sapientiæ monumento crudeles ungues?" Bentley defended his "Proposals" against these "Remarks," which, however, he did not ascribe to Middleton, but to Dr. Colbatch, a learned Fellow of his College, and Casuistical Professor of Divinity in the University. He very well knew the true author, but was resolved to dissemble it, for the double pleasure it would give him, of abusing Colbatch, and shewing his contempt of Middleton. He did, indeed, abuse Colbatch to that degree, that the Vice-chancellor and heads of the University, at a meeting in February 1721, pronounced his book to be a most scandalous and malicious libel, and resolved to inflict a proper censure upon the author, as soon as he should be discovered: for no names had yet appeared in the controversy. Middleton then published, with his name, an answer to Bentley's Defence, intituled, 6, "Some farther Remarks, Paragraph by Paragraph, upon Proposals lately published for a new Edition of a Greek and Latin Testament, by Richard Bentley, 1721." His motto, "Occupatus ille eruditione secularium literarum scripturas omnino sanctas ignoraverit †, &c.” * Petri Burmani Orationes, Lugd. Bat. 1720. † Hicron. These These two pieces against Bentley are written with great acuteness and learning; and though the Critic affected greatly to despise them, yet they destroyed the credit of his Proposals so effectually, that his intended publication of the New Testament came to nothing. Upon the great enlargement of the Public Library at Cambridge, by the addition of 30,000 volumes, which had been collected by Dr. Moore, late Bishop of Ely, the erection of the new office of Principal Librarian was first voted, and then conferred upon Dr. Middleton; who drew up a plan for disposing of the books together in the new-projected building, intituled, "Bibliothecæ ordinandæ Methodus," which is printed among his Works. After the decease of his first wife, he travelled through France into Italy, and arrived at Rome early in the year 1724. Much leisure, with an infirm state of health, was the cause of his journey to Italy; where, though his character and profession were well known, he was yet treated with particular respect by persons of the first distinction both in Church and State. The author of his Life in the " 'Biographia Britannica" relates, that, on his first coming there, he got himself introduced in his character of Principal Librarian to his Brother Librarian at the Vatican, "Which had been offered to the Earl of Oxford for 8000 1, and were afterwards purchased for 6000 guineas, by King George I, and by him presented to the University. The Bishop had collected this noble library by plundering those of the Clergy in his diocese. Some he paid with Sermons, or more modern books; others with, Quid illiterali cum libris ?” Mr. Gough; see British Topography, vol. II. p. 224. "This was quite a party action, and pushed on by Dr. Gooch to plague Bentley, by rewarding his opponent. The late worthy Dr. Symonds of Bury (father to the Professor of Modern History in Cambridge), then fellow of St. John's college, with five or six more of that house, formed the whole number that had sense, honesty, and courage enough to vote against the creating an useless place on such an occasion; but so high did party run, and so low had it descended, that the very mob in the street hooted them all their way home." T. F. who who received him with great politeness; but, upon his mentioning Cambridge, said, he did not know before that there was any University in England of that name; and at the same time took notice, that he was no stranger to that of Oxford, for which he expressed a great esteem. Our new Librarian took some pains to convince his Brother not only of the real existence, but of the real dignity of his University of Cambridge. At last the Keeper of the Vatican acknowledged, that he had indeed heard of a celebrated School of that name in England, where youth were prepared for their admission at Oxford; and Dr. Middleton left him at present in that sentiment *. But this unexpected indignity made him resolve to support his residence at Rome in such a manner, as should be a credit to his station at Cambridge; and accordingly he agreed to give 400l. per annum for a hotel, with all accommodations, fit for the reception of persons of the first rank in Rome; which, joined to his great fondness for antique curiosities, occasioned him to trespass a little upon his fortune. He returned through Paris towards the end of the year 1725, and arrived at Cambridge before Christmas. In December 1731 Dr. Middleton was presented by Colonel King, Dr. Woodward's executor, to the professorship then recently founded by Dr. Wood "This story, it must be allowed, is highly improbable. How could Cambridge be unknown to any man of letters at Rome, when that University had produced, before the Reformation, so many persons of celebrity in the history of the Romish Church? And with regard to later times, was it likely that the name and writings of such a critic, for instance, as Dr. Bentley, had not reached the Vatican? If the Librarian was so ignorant as is represented, he was very ill qualified for his office." T. F. "The particular respect shewed him [the Library-story], and his expence at Rome for the honour of Cambridge, are believed to have been puffs of the Doctor's when he came back, in order to induce the members of the Senate to create this place for him, as an indemnification for the expences he had incurred in defence of their fame and honour.-This may deserve attention, though it contradicts the story in the Biographia Britannica, which supposes him then actually Librarian, and that he was to live and shew off like the Cardinal Protobibliothecarius of the Vatican." T. F. ward; ward; and in July 1732 published his "Inauguration Speech." Reading lectures upon fossils, however, was not an employment suited to his taste, or to the turn of his studies; and he resigned it in 1734. The resignation, however, might probably be owing to his second marriage, as the professorship was tenable only by a single man. The salary certainly was an object to him. In 1735 he published "A Dissertation concerning the Origin of Printing in England," of which I shall have occasion to speak further hereafter. Soon after this, he married a second wife, Mary, a daughter of the Rev. Conyers Place, of Dorchester; and, upon her death, a third, Anne, daughter of John Powell, esq. of Boughroyd, near Raduor. In 1741 came out his great work, "The History of the Life of M. Tullius Cicero *," in two * Wolfius, in his edition of the Four controverted Orations of Cicero, Berlin, 1801 (see Gent. Mag. vol. LXXI. p. 913), observes, that this "Life" by Middleton, with all its high praises, has three great faults: first, that the Hero is frequently set-off beyond the bounds of truth; secondly, that he is represented more as a political than a literary character; and, thirdly, that too little critical attention is paid to the historical facts. Tunstall took up this third; and in 1741 arraigned the authenticity of the Letters of Cicero to Brutus and of Brutus to Cicero. To which Dr. Middleton replied, in 1743, by an English Translation of these Letters; to which he prefixed a Dissertation in defence of their genuineness, which convinced many who had inclined to his antagonist, and was inserted in the French translation of these Letters by Prevost the following year, 1744; when Tunstall, by new Observations, in English, completed the detection of their spuriousness; and Markland t†, in an English Dissertation also, 1745, confirmed the opinion of Tunstall, and proved the Orations to be the mere declamations of a Rhetorician. That Middleton maintained his opinion against all their arguments can only be ascribed to the pertinacity of his countrymen, who cannot give up their early impressions. Ross's Dissertation on the Defence of P. Sulla is considered by Wolfius as a burlesque of Markland's insinuations against the genuineness of antient composition, as if by the same test other writings of Cicero could be affected; and Ross is called a new Har + “Jer. Marklandus magnå vir auctoritate, quippe qui aliquot editis monumentis interioris doctrinæ pluribusque parandis et expoliendis tum maximè Ricardi Bertleii gloriam proximus quamquam aliquo intervallo assequebatur." Wolfius, Præf. p. viii. volumes, 4to, published by subscription, and dedicated to Lord Hervey, who was much the author's duin, whose sceptical irony seemed not to have been fully understood by the writer of a Dissertation, 1746, supporting Markland's opinion. Of succeeding critics, some who agreed with Tunstall in opinion about the Epistles rejected the opinion of Markland as to the Orations. Runkhenius took the side of Tunstall, but entertained no doubts of the Orations; Wyttenbach and Saxius decided against Markland; and Gesner confuted him in two dissertations, intituled "Cicero restitutus,” 1753 and 1754, inserted in the third volume of the Commentaries of the Royal Society of Gottingen. Markland's silence on this subject is construed by Wolfius into conviction. Ernest took no notice of the dispute; and the four Orations have maintained their ground in subsequent editions. Wolfius has here published them from the most correct editions, and the last collated MSS. at Oxford and Naples, and preferred such readings as were most Ciceronian. The notes are not loaded from various commentators, but the sentiments of Markland and Gesner are contrasted, and their arguments stated, in the introduction, or in their proper places. He wished to have translated into Latin the first part of Markland's book, with Tunstall's observations, and the other objections to the Epistles; but this he hoped would soon be done by one of his old friends. The characteristics of Cicero's Orations are, grammar, logical truth of sentences, elegance, and other rhetorical qualifications, all shewn by Markland to be wanting in these Orations; historical exactness, civil prudence, and the character peculiar to such works. After the Editor's preface follow those of Markland and Gesner; and then the Orations, with notes from both.-The generally-received opinion, so strongly upheld by the lexicographer Gesner against the objections of the profound Markland, having been since adopted by scholars well versed in the knowledge of the Roman history and language, to wit, Dav. Runkenius, President de Brosses, Adam Ferguson, and others, it cannot fail to prove highly interesting to behold the result of our ingenious Editor's enquiries. In his examination of these picces he analyses every passage that tends to elucidate this literary problem. What still more enhances the importance of his discussion, and the difficul ties of his process, is this: Many of the antients, such as Valerius Maximus, Asconius, Quintilian, Servius Honoratus, and the Latin Panegyrists, have partly cited and partly imitated these harangues as Cicero's. If, therefore, they turn out to be supposititious, they must necessarily be assigned to a period of time nearly coëtaneous with the Roman Orator's existence. The Editor pretends not to plume himself upon a grammatical interpretation of the work before us. Manutius, Hotoman, Grævius, and several other translators, have fulfilled this task: he rather. chose to accompany the deep lucubrations of the Englishman, and the shrewd hints of Gesner, with a copious commentary. In executing |