Ne'er shall his memorable virtue die,
Tho' cold in earth, immortal as the sky;
He for his country fought, for her expired:
Oh would all imitate whom all admired!

But if he sleep not with the mighty dead,
And living laurels wreathe his mighty head,
By old, by young, adored, he gently goes
Down a smooth path way to his long repose;
Unaltering friends still love his hairs of snow,

*

And rising elders in his presence bow. pp. 190, 191. They who could thus exhort to valiant deeds could likewise perpetuate the memory of them by patriotic songs.

In myrtle my sword will I wreathe,
Like our patriots, the noble and brave,
Who devoted the tyrant to death,
And to Athens equality gave!

Lov'd Harmodius, thou never shall die!
The poets exultingly tell

That thine is the fulness of joy,

Where Achilles and Diomed dwell.
In myrtle my sword will I wreathe,
Like our patriots, the noble and brave,
Who devoted Hipparchus to death,
And buried his pride in the grave.
At the altar the tyrant they seized,
While Minerva he vainly implored,
And the goddess of wisdom was pleased
With the victim of liberty's sword.
May your bliss be immortal on high,
Among as your glory shall be,

Ye doom'd the usurper to die,

And bade our dear country be free!'† pp. 123, 124.

Among the sepulchral' inscriptions we do not know that there is any one more amiable than the following:

Think not, whoe'er thou art, my fate severe;

Nor o'er my marble stop to shed a tear!
One tender partner shared my happy fate,
And all that imposes, but its weight.
Three lovely girls in nuptial ties I bound,
And children's children smiled my board around,
And, often pillow'd on their grandsire's breast,
Their darling offspring sunk to sweetest rest.
Disease and death were strangers to my door,
Nor from the arms our blooming infant tore.

*From the Elegies of Tyrtæus, i. 48, &c.
+ Callistratus, Scol. 7. i. 155.

All, all survived, my dying eyes to close,

And hymn my spirit to a blest repose.'* p, 293.

We can now only afford room, from the serious part of the volume, for the following simple and beautiful stanzas. They are by Mr. Bland.

• I would not change for cups
of gold
This little cup that you behold:
'Tis from the beech that gave a shade
At noon-day to my village maid.
I would not change for Persian loom
The humble matting of my room;
'Tis of those very rushes twined
Oft pressed by charming Rosalinde.
I would not change my lowly wicket
That opens on her favourite thicket,
For portal proud, or towers that frown,
The monuments of old renown.

I would not change this foolish heart,
That learns from her to joy or smart,
For his that burns with love of glory,
And loses life to live in story.

Yet in themselves, my heart, my cot,
My mat, my bowl, I value not;
But only as they, one and all,

My lovely Rosalinde recall' pp. 438, 439.

Our readers may like to know something of the fates of a few of these authors. Mr. B. has presented us with a strange bill of mortality.

Menander was drowned in the harbour of Piræus. (A, C. 293.) Euripides and Heraclitus were torn to pieces by dogs. Theocritus ended his career by the halter. Empedocles was lost in crater of Mount Etna. Hesiod was murdered by his secret enemies; Archilochus and Hychus by banditti. Sappho threw herself from a precipice. Eschylus perished by the fall of a tortoise. Anacreon (as may be expected) owed his death to the fruit of the vine. Cratinus and Terence experienced the same fate with Menander. Seneca and Lucan were condemned to death by a tyrant, cut their veins, and died repeating their own verses; and Petronius Arbiter met a similar catastrophe. Lucretius, it is said, wrote under the delirium of a Philter administered by his mistress, and destroyed himself from its effects Poison though swallowed under very different circumstances, put short the days both of Socrates and Demosthenes; and Cice o fell under the protection of the Triumvirate.' pp xxxviii, xxxix,

We had almost forgotten to remark, that the volume before

*Carphylides, 2. ii. 401.

us is not so much, strictly speaking, a new work, as an oid one re-cast. It was originally published in 1806, under the title of "Translations from the Greek Anthology with Miscellaneous Poems." The alterations and additions, however, have been very considerable, and the arrangement has been entirely changed. Instead of being placed chronologically, according to the era of their respective authors, the pieces are now classed under the several heads of amatory, convivial, moral, funeral, and monumental, descriptive, dedicatory, and humorous and satirical. They are fenced in by a prologue and epilogue; and introduced by a preface, containing a sprightly sketch of their literary history. We wish however that the authors had confined themselves to their epigrams, and not launched out into criticism and invective against the poets of the present day. To persons apparently so prejudiced it would be in vain to mention the names of Campbell and Montgomery, Scott and Baillie, and above all Southey, as a band of worthies not to be matched in any age since the days of Queen Elizabeth. It may better serve our purpose to observe, that the collectors themselves frequently make quotations from the metrical volumes of two writers of the day---Mr. Hodgson and Mr. Bland.

On taking a final survey of this Miscellany, we cannot avoid bestowing a remark or two on that prevailing shade of melancholy which is diffused over almost every part of it. The burden of the love song and the elegy, of the convivial lay and the moral sentiment, is alike---"eat, drink, for to morrow we die." Life, among the most polished nations of antiquity, unless perhaps during those occasional agitations which called into exercise the loftier powers and passions of the mind, appears to have been regarded as a scene of amusement rather than of duty, and to have been valued only as it afforded facilities more or fewer for the gratification of the sensual appetites, The great mass of the people, as to any apparent purpose of utility, existed only to perpetuate the circulation of a certain red fluid in the body; and even the more sage and philosophical part of the community, were, in every interval of thoughtfulness, oppressed with the consideration of the utter vanity of human pursuits. They had no definite perception of the supreme and ultimate good, no clear and satisfactory view of a state of existence beyond the present. At every turn their attention was forcibly arrested by the fugitive nature of life, and the still greater transiency of its pleasures ;-a reflection which made the banquet tasteless, jarred among their gayest strains, and turned their very smiles into sadness. How can we sufficiently prize that revelation which has brought immortality to light; which while it shews man his degraded

state, teaches him the true dignity of his nature, which renders every moment precious by connecting it with a long futuri y, and which can triumphantly exclaim, "O death where is thy sting, O grave where is thy victory?"

Art. IV. A Letter to the Rev. Herbert Marsh, D.D. F.R.S. Margaret Professor of Divinity in the University of Cambridge, in confutation of his opinion that the Dissenters are aiming at the subversion of the religious establishment of this country, in order to possess its honours and emoluments, and to establish their own forms of worship. By a Protestant Dissenter and a Layman, 8vo. pp. 12. price 6d. Black and Co. 1813.

Art V. A Letter of Explanation to the Dissenter and Layman, who has lately addressed himself to the Author on the views of the Protestant Dissenters: in which the Author's opinion, as it was stated by himself, is contrasted with the opinion ascribed to him, and the authorities are produced on which his opinion was founded. By Herbert Marsh, D.D. F.R.S. Margaret Professor of Divinity in the University of Cambridge. 8vo. pp. 20. Rivingtons. 1813. Art. VI On the Influence of Sectaries and the Stability of the Church; a Charge delivered to the Clergy of the Archdeaconry of Stafford, on the days of Visitation at Cheadle, Stafford, and Walsall, in June, 1812. By the Rev. Robert Nares, M.A. F.R.S. and F.A.Ş. Archdeacon of Stafford. 4to. pp. 40. Rivingtons. 1813.

Is the Church in danger? This is a question frequently agitated, and variously determined, no doubt, according to the principles, reflections, and temperament of different men. It is, however, a question of sufficient importance to make every considerate person take an interest in its decision; and to render the opinions of distinguished individuals upon it, matters at least of curiosity. On these grounds the present tracts deserve a degree of attention to which their magnitude hardly seems to entitle them. We shall give a short view of their contents, interweaving such comments of our own as occasion may require. If the Church be exposed to external danger, it must be from the dissenters or the methodists. Of the pamphlets before us the two former relate to the views and temper of the dissenters. In the postscript of his Letter' to Mr. Gandolphy, Dr. Marsh laid it down, that all dissenters 'wish to make their own the established religion;' and that, being desirous of obtaining the honours and emoluments, which are now exclusively enjoyed by the ministers of the established church,' were they admitted to the full benefits of the constitution, it would be impossible to resist the encroachments they would make on those honours and emoluments. (pp. 23-24.) From these positions the inference seemed obvious, that the dissenters really do aim at the subversion of the religious establishment of this country, in

order to seize on its 'honours and emoluments,' and establish their own modes of worship on its ruins. It was of importance to expose the inaccuracy and groundless nature of this opinion. Accordingly, a Lay Dissenter' of Cambridge, in a polite and friendly letter to Dr. Marsh, has shewn, with great credit to himself, that Dr. Marsh's imputations on the Dissenters are totally unfounded. You appear,' says he to the Professor, to confound various parties very distinct from each other, the Protesstant dissenters of the present age, with the Presbyterians of the Commonwealth: because they sought for the establishment of Presbyterianism, dissenters are now aiming at the same thing.' (p. 5.) That dissenters of the present age, however, have no such views, is obvious, he remarks, as well from their principles, which disapprove of religious establishments altogether, as from the very frame of their societies, which are distinct and independent of each other. Both their principles and discipline, therefore, he contends, must be subverted, before they can aspire to the bonours and emoluments of the religious establishment of this country.'

This statement taken generally, is, we think, sufficiently correct. It may be expedient, however, to be a little more particular. While it is undeniable that many of the dissenters object to establishments in general, as incompatible with the genius of the Christian religion, it is equally true that some of them entertain no such objections; and indeed by a little relaxation in the terms of communion, such as has been proposed by some of the greatest, best, and most dignified members of the Church, might be easily comprehended in her pale. Others, who are hostile to establishments in general, look nevertheless with gratitude and veneration on the Protestant establishment of this country. It has been for ages, they think, like a noble stream which, though in parts become stagnant and noxious, has powerfully contributed to enrich, fertilize, and adorn the soil. Conversant with the great writers of the Church, daily nourished by the genius and intellect of her Hookers, Halls, Chillingworths, Taylors, Barrows, Hornes, Butlers, and Paleys, they wish to cast a veil over her blemishes, and take a pleasure in the perpetuity of an establishment in which such mighty minds found leisure and encouragement to mature their productions. They are in habits of intimacy and friendship with some of the best and most useful of her members, and the good will which they bear to them, extends, in a degree, to the Church herself. It is their conviction that some religious party must prevail, and they despair of seeing their own triumphant. From experience of the past therefore, from an aversion to great untried innovations, from an apprehension of the effects likely to result from