Page:EB1911 - Volume 19.djvu/46

 (2 vols. fol., Modena, 1717); Vita e rime di F. Petrarca (1711), and Vita ed opere di L. Castelvetro (1727).

In biblical scholarship Muratori is chiefly known as the discoverer of the so-called Muratorian Canon, the name given to a fragment (85 lines) of early Christian literature, which he found in 1740, embedded in an 8th-century codex which forms a compendium of theological tracts followed by the five early Christian creeds. The document contains a list of the books of the New Testament, a similar list concerning the Old Testament having apparently preceded it. It is in barbarous Latin which has probably been translated from original Greek—the language prevailing in Christian Rome until c. 200. There is little doubt that it was composed in Rome and we may date it about the year 190. Lightfoot inclined to Hippolytus as its author. It is the earliest document known which enumerates the books in order.

The first line of the fragment is broken and speaks of the Gospel of St Mark, but there is no doubt that its compiler knew also of St Matthew. Acts is ascribed to St Luke. He names thirteen letters of St Paul but says nothing of the Epistle to the Hebrews. The alleged letters of Paul to the Laodiceans and Alexandrians he rejects, “for gall must not be mixed with honey.” The two Epistles of Peter and the Epistle of James are not referred to, but that of Jude and two of John are accepted. He includes the Apocalypse of John and also the Apocalypse of Peter. The Shepherd of Hermas he rejects as not of apostolic origin, but this test of canonicity is not consistently applied for he allows the “Wisdom written by the friends of Solomon in his honour.“ He rejects the writings of the Gnostics Valentinus and Basilides, and of Montanus.

The list is not an authoritative decree, but a private register of what the author considers the prevailing Christian sentiment in his neighbourhood. He notes certain differences among the Gospels, because not all the evangelists were eye-witnesses of the life of Jesus; yet Mark and Luke respectively have behind them the authority of Peter and of Paul, who is thus regarded as on a footing with the Twelve. The Fourth Gospel was written by John at the request of the other apostles and the bishops on the basis of a revelation made to Andrew. The letters of Paul are written to four individuals and to seven different churches, like the seven letters in the Apocalypse of John.

It is interesting to notice the coincidence of his list with the evidence gained from Tertullian for Africa and from Irenaeus for Gaul and indirectly for Asia Minor. Before the year 200 there was widespread agreement in the sacred body of apostolic writings read in Christian churches on the Lord’s Day along with the Old Testament.

 MURAVIEV, MICHAEL NIKOLAIEVICH, (1845–1900), Russian statesman, was born on the 19th of April 1845. He was the son of General Count Nicholas Muraviev (governor of Grodno), and grandson of the Count Michael Muraviev, who became notorious for his drastic measures in stamping out the Polish insurrection of 1863 in the Lithuanian provinces. He was educated at a secondary school at Poltava, and was for a short time at Heidelberg University. In 1864 he entered the chancellery of the minister for foreign affairs at St Petersburg, and was soon afterwards attached to the Russian legation at Stuttgart, where he attracted the notice of Queen Olga of Württemberg. He was transferred to Berlin, then to Stockholm, and back again to Berlin. In 1877 he was second secretary at the Hague. During the Russo-Turkish War of 1878 he was a delegate of the Red Cross Society in charge of an ambulance train provided by Queen Olga of Württemberg. After the war he was successively first secretary at Paris, chancellor of the embassy at Berlin, and then minister at Copenhagen. In Denmark he was brought much into contact with the imperial family, and on the death of Prince Lobanov in 1897 he was appointed by the Tsar Nicholas II. to be his minister of foreign affairs. The next three and a half years were a critical time for European diplomacy. The Chinese and Cretan questions were disturbing factors. As regards Crete, Count Muraviev’s policy was vacillating; in China his hands were forced by Germany’s action at Kiaochow. But he acted with singular légèreté with regard at all events to his assurances to Great Britain respecting the leases of Port Arthur and Talienwan from China; he told the British ambassador that these would be “open ports,” and afterwards essentially modified this pledge. When the Tsar Nicholas inaugurated the Peace Conference at the Hague, Count Muraviev extricated his country from a situation of some embarrassment; but when, subsequently, Russian agents in Manchuria and at Peking connived at the agitation which culminated in the Boxer rising of 1900, the relations of the responsible foreign minister with the tsar became strained. Muraviev died suddenly on the 21st of June 1900, of apoplexy, brought on, it was said, by a stormy interview with the tsar.

 MURCHISON, SIR RODERICK IMPEY (1792–1871), British geologist, was born at Tarradale, in eastern Ross, Scotland, on the 19th of February 1792. His father, Kenneth Murchison (d. 1796), came of an old Highland clan in west Ross-shire, and having been educated as a medical man, acquired a fortune in India; while still in the prime of life he returned to Scotland, where, marrying one of the Mackenzies of Fairburn, he purchased the estate of Tarradale and settled for a few years as a resident Highland landlord. Young Murchison left the Highlands when three years old, and at the age of seven was sent to the grammar school of Durham, where he remained for six years. He was then placed at the military college, Great Marlow, to be trained for the army. With some difficulty he passed the examinations, and at the age of fifteen was gazetted ensign in the 36th regiment. A year later (1808) he landed with Wellesley in Galicia, and was present at the actions of Roriça and Vimiera. Subsequently under Sir John Moore he took part in the retreat to Corunna and the final battle there. This was his only active service. The defeat of Napoleon at Waterloo seeming to close the prospect of advancement in the military profession, Murchison, after eight years of service, quitted the army, and married the daughter of General Hugonin, of Nursted House, Hampshire. With her he then spent rather more than two years on the Continent, particularly in Italy, where her cultivated tastes were of signal influence in guiding his pursuits. He threw himself with all the enthusiasm of his character into the study of art and antiquities, and for the first time in his life tasted the pleasures of truly intellectual pursuits.

Returning to England in 1818, he sold his paternal property in Ross-shire and settled in England, where he took to field sports. He soon became one of the greatest fox-hunters in the midland counties; but at last, getting weary of such pursuits and meeting Sir Humphry Davy, who urged him to turn his energy to science, he was induced to attend lectures at the Royal Institution. This change in the current of his occupations was much helped by the sympathy of his wife, who, besides her artistic acquirements, took much interest in natural history. Eager and enthusiastic in whatever he undertook, he was fascinated by the young science of geology. He joined the Geological Society of London and soon showed himself one of its most active members, having as his colleagues there such men as Sedgwick, W. D. Conybeare, W. Buckland, W. H. Fitton and Lyell. Exploring with his wife the geology of the south of England, he devoted special attention to the rocks of the north-west of Sussex and the adjoining parts of Hants and Surrey, on which, aided by Fitton, he wrote his first scientific paper, read to the society in 1825. Though he had reached the age of thirty-two before he took any interest in science, he developed his taste and increased his knowledge so rapidly that in the first