MARTINEAU-MARTLET. it affords a remarkable example of the good gifts which necessity, the hard mother, has sometimes in store for her children. Had this lady remained in affluence, or unvisited by physical affliction, it is probable that England would have been without, if not its greatest, certainly its most remarkable female writer. The subjects upon which her pen has been exercised are of the most varied kind, including some--such as politics-which have rarely been before attempted by women. Her first volume, entitled Devotions for Young People, appeared in 1823; and was followed in 1824 by Christmas Day, a tale, and by The Friend, a sequel, the year after. In 1826, she published Principle and Practice, and The Rioters; and for two years thereafter she was busily engaged writing stories and a series of tracts on social matters, adapted mainly for the perusal of the working-classes. In 1830, she produced her Traditions of Palestine. During the same year, the Association of Unitarian Dissenters awarded her prizes for essays on the following subjects: The Faith as unfolded by many Prophets, Providence as Manifested through Israel, and The Essential Faith of the Universal Church. Her next important literary venture was unique, and in one of the softer sex almost audacious, The Illustrations of Political Economy, a series of tales, which met with great and deserved success, and was followed by others illustrative of Taxation, and Poor-law and Paupers. In 1835, she crossed the Atlantic, and published her Society in America in 1837. In 1839, she published Deerbrook, which was followed by The Hour and the Man. She afterwards produced a series of tales for the young, the best known of which are Feats on the Fiord, and The Crofton Boys. About 1839, and on till 1844, she was an invalid more or less, and during this period she wrote Life in the Sick-room. On her recovery she published Forest and Game-law Tales. In 1846, she visited Palestine, and collected materials for Eastern Life, Past and Present, which she published on her return. Afterwards, she completed Mr Knight's History of England during the Thirty Years' Peace -her best and most useful work, perhaps, on the whole. In 1851, in conjunction with Mr H. G. Atkinson, she published a series of Letters on the Laws of Man's Social Nature and Development, convulsing the literary coteries with the boldness of her speculations. The long catalogue of her literary labours may be closed by her translation of Comte's Positive Philosophy. While the foregoing works were in progress, M. was a constant contributor to the larger reviews, and the daily and weekly press. At present, she resides at Ambleside, writing when her state of health permits. He He MARTINEAU, JAMES, brother of the preceding, was born in Norwich about 1807. was educated for the ministry in connection with the Unitarian body of Christians, and was pastor of congregations in Dublin and Liverpool. has been for many years Professor of Mental and Moral Philosophy in Manchester New College; and that institution having been removed to London, he resigned his pastoral charge in Liverpool in 1858, and transferred his residence to the metropolis, where he became joint-pastor of the Unitarian Church of Little Portland Street. He is understood to have been one of the projectors of the National Review, and has been a frequent contributor to its pages. This periodical may be taken as generally representing his theological views. M. is one of the most earnest and lofty of living religious writers. He is deeply read in German theology and philosophy, and is remarkable for strong grasp of thought and power of subtle analysis. He is a master of English style, and in the power of giving form and substance to the most abstract thought, has seldom been surpassed. His principal works are the Rationale of Religious Inquiry (1836), Endeavours after the Christian Life (1843), Miscellanies (1852), and Studies of Christianity (1858). by the natives MADIANA, one of the Lesser Antilles, is more than 4000 feet above sea-level. There are six MARTINMAS, in Scotland, is one of the four quarter-days for paying rent-viz., 11th November. MARTIUS, CARL FRIEDRICH PHILIPP VON, one of the most distinguished of modern travellers and naturalists, born at Erlangen 1794. He studied medicine at Erlangen, and had published two botanical works, when he was induced to proceed to Brazil as a member of a scientific expedition sent out by the Austrian and Bavarian governments, and by his researches in that country acquired a reputation inferior perhaps to that of no scientific traveller except Humboldt. He was specially intrusted with the botanical department, but his researches extended to ethnography, statistics, geography, and natural science in general; and his works published after his return exhibit a poet's love of nature and great powers of description. These works are: Reise nach Brasilien (3 vols. Munich, 1824-1831); Nova Genera et Species Plantarum (3 vols. Munich, 1824 1832); and Icones Plantarum Cryptogamicarum Director of the Botanic Garden at MARTOS-MARY. fourth son. It is also otherwise used as a charge. The martlet was originally meant for the martin, and in the earliest heraldry, it is not deprived of its feet. MA'RTOS, a town of Andalusia, Spain, 16 miles south-west of the city of Jaen, on a steep hill crowned by an old castle. It is resorted to for its mineral waters. Pop. stated at 11,000. anity, called the 'proto-martyr,' was the deacon Stephen, whose death is recorded Acts vi. and vii. The proto-martyr of Britain was Alban of Verulam, who suffered under Diocletian in 286 or 303. published by authority of Gregory XIII., with a critical commentary by the celebrated Cardinal Baronius in 1586. A still more critical edition was issued by the learned Jesuit, Herebert Rosweid. MARUT is, in Hindu Mythology, the god of wind; his wife is Anjana, and his son Hanuman (q. v.). Bhima, the second of the Pân'd'u princes (see MAHABHARATA), is likewise considered as an offspring of this god." MARVEL OF PERU. See JALAP. MARTYROLOGY, a calendar of martyrs and other saints arranged in the order of months and days, and intended partly to be read in the public services of the church, partly for the guidance of the devotion of the faithful towards the saints and MARTYR (Gr. martyr, a witness), the name martyrs. The use of the martyrology is common given in ecclesiastical history to those who, by their both to the Latin and to the Greek Church, in the fearless profession of Christian truth, and especially latter of which it is called Menologion (from Mēn, by their fortitude in submitting to death itself a month), or month-calendar.' The earliest extant rather than abandon their faith, bore the witness' Greek martyrology or menology dates from the 9th of their blood to its superhuman origin. Of the same century. It was published in 1727 by Cardinal use of the word, there are some examples also in Urbini. The oldest Latin martyrology is that the New Testament, as in Acts xxii. 20, Apoc. ii. attributed to St Jerome, published in the 11th 13, and xvii. 6. But this meaning, as its technical volume of the collected edition of his works by and established signification, is derived mainly from Vallars; but the genuineness at least of some por ecclesiastical writers. During the Persecutions (q.v.) tions of it is more than doubtful. In the medieval of the Christians in the first three centuries, con- period, martyrologies were issued in England by temporary writers, as well pagan as Christian, record Venerable Bede; in France by Florus, Ado, and that many Christians preferring death to apostasy, Usuard; and in Germany by St Gall, Nolter, and became martyrs or witnesses in blood to the faith, Rabanus Maurus. The so-called 'Roman Martyroften in circumstances of the utmost heroism. Theology' is designed for the entire church, and was courage and constancy of the sufferers won the highest admiration from the brethren. It was held a special privilege to receive the martyr's benediction, to kiss his chains, to visit him in prison, or to converse with him; and, as it was held that their great and superabundant merit might, in the eyes of the church, compensate for the laxity and weakness of less perfect brethren, a practice arose by which the martyrs gave to those sinners who were undergoing a course of public penance, letters of commendation to their bishop, in order that their course of penance might be shortened or suspended altogether. See INDULGENCE The day of martyrdom, moreover, as being held to be the day of the martyrs' entering into eternal life, was called the 'natal' or 'birth' day, and as such was celebrated with peculiar honour, and with special religious services. Their bodies, clothes, books, and the other objects which they had possessed were honoured as RELICS (q. v.), and their tombs were visited for the purpose of asking their intercession. See INVOCATION. The number of martyrs who suffered death during the first ages of Christianity has been a subject of great controversy. The ecclesiastical writers, with the natural pride of partisanship, have, it can hardly be doubted, leaned to the side of exaggeration. Some of their statements are palpably excessive; and Gibbon, in his well-known 16th chapter, throws great doubt even on the most moderate of the computations of the church historians. But it is clearly though briefly shewn by Guizot in his notes on this celebrated chapter (see Milman's Gibbon's Decline and Fall, i. 598), that Gibbon's criticisms are founded on unfair and partial data, and that even the very authorities on which he relies demonstrate the fallaciousness of his conclusions. Those who are interested in the subject will find it discussed with much learning and considerable moderation in Ruinart's Acta Primitiva et Sincera Martyrum. Considerable difference of opinion also has existed as to what, in the exploration of the ancient Christian tombs in the Roman catacombs, are to be considered as signs of martyrdom. The chief signs, in the opinion of older critics, were (1), the letters B. M.; (2), the figure of a palmtree; and (3), a phial with the remains of a red liquor believed to be blood. Each of these has in turn been the subject of dispute, but the last is commonly regarded as the conclusive sign of martyrdom. The first recorded martyr of Christi Other MARVELL, ANDREW, an English writer and politician, was born 15th November 1620 at Hull, in Yorkshire, where his father was master of the grammar-school and lecturer of Trinity Church. He studied at Trinity College, Cambridge, and afterwards spent several years in various parts of the continent, to very good purpose,' according to Milton. He returned to England about 1653, and was employed by Oliver Cromwell as tutor to a Mr Dutton; in 1657, he became assistant-secretary to Milton; and in 1660, was chosen by his native town to represent it in parliament. M.'s parliamentary career was both singular and honourable. Without fortune or influence, possessing no commanding talent as a speaker, nor, indeed, brilliant intellectual qualities of any kind, he maintained a character for integrity, so genuine and high that his constituency felt itself honoured by his conduct, and allowed him to the end of his life a handsome pension.' wise, it would have occasionally fared ill with this incorruptible patriot, for he was often reduced to great pecuniary straits. Charles II. made many but fruitless efforts to win him over to the court-party. The story of the interview between M. and the Lord Treasurer Danby, who had found out the patriot's lodgings (with difficulty) up two pair of stairs, in one of the little courts in the Strand,' is believed to be essentially true, and indicates a certain noble republican simplicity of nature, which M. died 16th cannot be too highly admired. August 1678, not without suspicion of poison. His writings, partly in verse, and partly in prose, are satirical, sharp, honest, and pithy (like his talk), but they relate to matters of temporary interest, and are now well-nigh forgotten. An edition of them was published, along with a life of the author, by Captain Edward Thompson, London, 1776. MARY, THE BLESSED VIRGIN (Heb. Miriam, Gr. Maria or Mariam), called in the New Testament 'the mother of Jesus' (Matt. ii. 11, Acts i. 14), as the MARY-MARY I. mother of our Lord according to the flesh, is held in high honour by all Christians; and her intercession is invoked with a higher religious worship and a firmer confidence than that of all the other saints, not only in the Roman Church, but in all the Christian churches of the East-the Greek, the Syrian, the Coptic, the Abyssinian, and the Armenian. Of her personal history, but few particulars are recorded in Scripture. Some details are filled up from the works of the early Fathers, especially their commentaries or deductions from the scriptural narrative; some from the apocryphal writings of the first centuries, and some from medieval or modern legendaries. The twofold genealogy of our Lord (Matt. i. 1—16, and Luke iii. 23-38) contains the only statement regarding the family of M. which the sacred writers have left. The genealogy of our Lord in St Matthew is traced through Joseph; and as it is plainly assumed that M. was of the same family with her husband Joseph, the evidence of the descent of the latter from David is equivalently an evidence of the origin of M. from the same royal house. But the genealogy of Christ as traced in St Luke is commonly held to be the proper genealogy of his mother in the flesh, Mary. Hence it is inferred that the Heli of this genealogy (Luke iii. 23) was the father of M.; and it may be added, in confirmation of this inference, that M. is called in the Talmud the daughter of Heli,' and that Epiphanius (Hor. lxxviii. n. 17) says her parents were Anna and 'Joachim,' a name interchanged in Scripture (as 2 Chron. xxxvi. 4) with Eliachim, of which name Eli or Heli is an abridgment. The incidents in her personal history recorded in Scripture are few in number, and almost entirely refer to her relations with our Lord. They will be found in Matt. i., ii., xii.; Luke i., ii.; John ii., xix.; and Acts i., where the last notice of her is of her 'persevering in prayer' with the disciples and the holy women at Jerusalem after our Lord's ascension (Acts i. 14), Beyond the few leading facts which will be found under these references, the Scripture is silent as to the life of M. during the presence of our Lord on earth; nor of her later life is there any record in the canonical Scriptures. The apocryphal gospels, entitled 'The Gospel of the Nativity of Mary,' and the 'Protovangeleon of the Birth of Christ,' contain some additional, but, of course, unauthentic particulars as to the lineage, birth, and early years of M.; among which is the miraculous story of her betrothal with Joseph, immortalised by the pencil of Raphael, according to which narrative Joseph was selected from among all who had been proposed as suitors for the hand of M. by the supernatural sign of a dove issuing from his rod and alighting upon his head. See Protovangeleon, cap. viii. As to her history after the ascension of her son, the traditions differ widely. A letter ascribed to the Council of Ephesus speaks of her as having lived with John at that city, where she died, and was buried. Another epistle, nearly contemporaneous, tells that she died and was buried at Jerusalem, at the foot of the Mount of Olives. Connected with this tradition is the incident which has so often formed a subject of sacred art, of the apostles coming to her tomb on the third day after her interment, and finding the tomb empty, but exhaling an exceeding sweet fragrance. On this tradition is founded the belief of her having been assumed into heaven, which is celebrated in the festival of the Assumption. The date of her death is commonly fixed at the year of our Lord 63, or, according to another account, the year 48. Another tradition makes her survive the crucifixion only 11 years. Many theological questions regarding the Virgin M. have been raised among Christians of the various churches, which would be quite out of place here. One of these, which possesses present interest, has been treated under a separate head. See IMMACULATE CONCEPTION. The perpetual virginity of M. is not explicitly attested in Scripture, and there are even certain phrases which at first sight seem to imply that children were born of her after the birth of Jesus, as that of his being called (Matt. i. 25, Luke ii. 7) her firstborn son,' and that of James and others being more than once called 'brothers of the Lord.' On the latter argument, no critic acquainted with the wide scriptural use of the word 'brother' would ever rely. The former, which was urged anciently by Helvidius and others, but was rejected by the unanimous voice of tradition, is founded on a phrase susceptible of equal latitude of interpretation. The perpetual virginity of M. is held as a firm article of belief in the Roman and Eastern churches. Protestants hold nothing positively on the subject. The controversies regarding the Virgin M. have reference to the lawfulness of the worship which is rendered to her in some Christian communities. See MARIOLATRY. MARY I., queen of England, daughter of Henry VIII. by his first wife, Catharine of Aragon, was born at Greenwich on the 18th of February 1517. She was in her early years a great favourite with her father, who had her carefully educated after the masculine fashion of her time. Erasmus praises particularly the style of her Latin letters. At the age of seven, she was betrothed to the Emperor Charles V.; but when Henry sought a divorce from Queen Catharine, the Spanish monarch broke off the engagement. Her father then tried to marry her to Francis I. of France, but his design did not succeed. Francis, however, asked her for his second son, the Duke of Orleans, but Henry in turn refused. After the birth of Elizabeth, Henry's affections were diverted to that princess; and when James V. of Scotland sought the hand of M., it was refused, on the ground that the issue of such union might imperil the right of Anne Boleyn's children to the crown. This was virtually condemning M. to celibacy, and doubtless had the effect of making her still more attached to the Catholic party, to which, on account of her training, her natural tendencies, and the wrongs of her mother, she was already closely allied. Several other matrimonial negotiations, with the Prince of Portugal, the Duke of Cleves, and the Duke of Bavaria, also came to nothing. About this time, she was in great danger of losing her life, on account of her strong attachment to her mother's interests. Towards the close of Henry's reign, better prospects opened out for ner; in 1544, she was restored to her place in the line of succession, of which she had been deprived, and she lived on very good terms with Catharine Parr, the last of her father's numerous wives. During the reign of her half-brother, Edward VI., she lived in retirement, but had three more offers of marriage-from the Duke of Brunswick, the Markgraf of Brandenburg, and the Infante of Portugal -none of which was accepted. On the death of Edward in 1553, she was proclaimed queen; and after a brief and imbecile struggle on the part of those who advocated the claims of Lady Jane Grey, was crowned in October of the same year by Stephen Gardiner, Bishop of Winchester. A fierce spirit in favour of the papacy soon began to shew itself, although it does not appear that M. herself was at first disposed to be severe; she even occasionally interfered to mitigate the cruelties of Gardiner and Bonner; but after her marriage with Philip of Spain (July 25, 1554), to whose father she had been betrothed many years before, a worse spirit took possession of her, or at least worse counsels MARY (ST) AND ALL SAINTS-MARY STEWART, QUEEN OF SCOTS. prevailed; and those bloody persecutions began in Brittany, whence she was at once conveyed to which have given her an odious name in history. St Germain-en-Laye, and there affianced to the Her domestic life was wretched; Philip, whom Dauphin. she loved with a morbid passion, proved a sour, selfish, and heartless husband; at once a bigot and a brute. No children followed their union, and exasperation and loneliness working upon a temper naturally obstinate and sullen, without doubt rendered her more compliant to the sanguinary policy of the reactionary bishops. Fortunately for England, her reign was brief. She died -after suffering much and long from dropsy and nervous debility-November 17, 1558. MARY (ST) AND ALL SAINTS, LINCOLN, commonly called LINCOLN COLLEGE, Oxford, was founded for a rector and seven fellows, in 1427, by Richard Fleming, Bishop of Lincoln. In 1475, Thomas Scot, commonly called Rotheram, from the place of his birth, then Bishop of Lincoln, afterwards Archbishop of York, finished the building, added five fellowships, and gave statutes to the society. The object of both founders was to extirpate the Wycliffite heresy, by training up theologians for that purpose. The fellowships were restricted to the dioceses of Lincoln, York, and Wells. By the ordinances under 17 and 18 Vict. c. 81, they are thrown open, the rector and fellows are empowered to reduce the number to ten, as vacancies occur, should this seem expedient, and their value is not to exceed £300. Various benefactors have bestowed scholarships on the college to the number of 22. By the ordinances, 16 of these are thrown open, of value £50 per annum, and tenable for 16 terms from matriculation, which may be extended to 20 if the rector and fellows think fit. This college presents to 10 benefices. MARY HALL (ST), Oxford. In 1239, Henry Kelpe, a citizen of Oxford, presented a tenement, on the site of the present St Mary Hall, to the rector of St Mary's Church, to be the parsonage house. In 1325, Edward II. gave the church, together with the parsonage, to Oriel College. The college converted the parsonage into a place of education, and it gradually grew into an independent Hall. It possesses 4 scholarships of £75 per annum, tenable for four years, and 1 exhibition. MARY STEWART, QUEEN OF SCOTS. This beautiful and accomplished, but most unhappy princess, was the daughter of King James V. of Scotland by his second wife, Mary of Lorraine, daughter of Claude, Duke of Guise, and widow of Louis of Orleans, Duke of Longueville. She was born at Linlithgow, on the 8th of December 1542. Her misfortunes may be said to have begun with her birth. Its tidings reached her father on his deathbed at Falkland, but brought him no consolation. The devil go with it!' he muttered, as his thoughts wandered back to the marriage with Bruce's daughter, which brought the crown of Scotland to the Stewarts-it came from a woman, and it will end in a woman!' Mary became a queen before she was a week old. Before she was a twelvemonth old, the Regent Arran had promised her in marriage to Prince Edward of England, and the Scottish parliament had declared the promise null. War with England followed, and at Pinkie Cleuch the Scots met a defeat only less disastrous than Flodden. But their aversion to an English match was unconquerable; they hastened to place the young queen beyond the reach of English arms, in the island of Inchmahome, in the Lake of Monteith, and to offer her in marriage to the eldest son of Henry II. of France and Catharine of Medicis. The offer was accepted; and in July 1548 a French fleet carried Mary from Dumbarton, on the Clyde, to Roscoff, Her next ten years were passed at the French court, where she was carefully educated along with the king's family, receiving instructions in the art of making verses from the famous Ronsard. At a somewhat later period, she had the great Scottish scholar Buchanan for her Latin master. On the 24th of April 1558, her marriage with the Dauphin, who was about two years younger than herself, was celebrated, with every circumstance of pomp and splendour, in the Church of Notre-Dame, at Paris. It was agreed, on the part of Scotland, that her husband should have the title of King of Scots; but this was not enough for the grasping ambition of France, and Mary was betrayed into the signature of a secret deed, by which, if she died childless, both her Scottish realm and her right of succession to the English crown (she was the great-grand-daughter of King Henry VII.) were On the 10th of July 1559, conveyed to France. the death of the French king called her husband to the throne by the title of Francis II. government passed into the hands of the queen's kinsfolks, the Duke of Guise and the Cardinal of Lorraine; but their rule was short-lived. The feeble and sickly king died on the 5th of December 1560, when the reins of power were grasped by the queenmother, Catharine of Medicis, as regent for her son, Charles IX. Mary must have been prepared, under almost any circumstances, to quit a court which was now swayed by one whom, during her brief reign, she had taunted with being a merchant's daughter. But there were other reasons for her departure from France. Her presence was urgently needed The in Scotland, which the death of her mother, a few months before, had left without a government, at a moment when it was convulsed by the throes of the Reformation. Her kinsmen of Lorraine had ambitious projects for her marriage; great schemes were based on her nearness of succession to the English crown; and both these, it was thought, might be more successfully followed out when she was seated on her native throne. She sailed from Calais on the 15th, and arrived at Leith on the 19th of August 1561, having escaped the English ships-of-war which Elizabeth despatched to intercept her. She wept as the shores of France faded from her sight, and her tears flowed anew when she beheld the rudeness and poverty of Scotland. Her government began auspiciously. The Reformation claimed to have received the sanction of the Scottish parliament, and if Mary did not formally acknowledge the claim, she was at least content to leave affairs as she found them, stipu lating only for liberty to use her own religiona liberty which Knox and a few of the more extreme Reformers denounced as a sin against the law of God. She is said to have rejected the violent counsels of the Roman Catholics; it is certain that she surrounded herself with Protestant advisers, her chief minister being her illegitimate brother, James Stewart, an able if ambitious statesman, whom she soon afterwards created Earl of Murray. Under his guidance, in the autumn of 1562, she made a progress to the north, which, whatever was its design, ended in the defeat and death of the Earl of Huntly, the powerful chief of the Roman Catholic party in Scotland. Meanwhile, the courts of Europe were busy with schemes for Mary's marriage. The king of Sweden, the king of Denmark, the king of France, the Archduke Charles of Austria, Don Carlos of Spain, the Duke of Ferrara, the Duke of Nemours, the Duke of Anjou, the Scottish Earl of Arran, and the MARY STEWART, QUEEN OF SCOTS. English Earl of Leicester were proposed as candidates for her hand. Her own preference was for Don Carlos, the heir of what was then the greatest monarchy in Christendom; and it was not until all hopes of obtaining him were quenched, that she thought seriously of any other. Her choice fell, somewhat suddenly, on her cousin, Henry Stewart, Lord Darnley, son of the Earl of Lennox, by his marriage with a granddaughter of King Henry VII. of England. He was thus among the nearest heirs to the English crown, and his claims to the succession were believed to have the support of the great body of English Roman Catholics. But except this, and his good-looks, he had no other recommendation. He was weak, needy, insolent, and vicious; his religion, such as it was, was Roman Catholic; his house had few friends and many enemies in Scotland; and he was two or three years younger than Mary. Her best friends, both Roman Catholic and Protestant, warned her against him, but in vain. The marriage was celebrated at Holyrood on the 29th July 1565. It was the signal for an insurrection by Murray and the Hamiltons, who hoped to be joined by the whole Protestant party. But their hope was disappointed; and the queen, taking the field in person, at once quelled the revolt, and chased the rebels beyond the Tweed. Her triumph was scarcely over, when her eyes began to open to the great mistake of her marriage. Her husband's worthlessness and folly became only too apparent; she was disgusted by his debauchery, and alarmed by his arrogance and ambition. She had given him the title of king, but he now demanded that the crown should be secured to him for life, and that if the queen died without issue, it should descend to his heirs. Mary hesitated to comply with a demand which would have set aside the settled order of succession; and what she refused to grant by favour, the king prepared to extort by force. the crown. Mary's chief minister, since Murray's rebellion, had been David Riccio, a mean-looking Italian, of great ability and many accomplishments; but generally hated beyond the palace walls as a base-born foreigner, a court favourite, and a Roman Catholic. The king and Riccio had been sworn friends, sharing the same table, and even sleeping in the same bed; but the king was now persuaded that it was Riccio who was the real obstacle to his designs upon In this belief, he entered into a formal compact with Murray, Ruthven, Morton, and other chiefs of the Protestant party, undertaking, on his part, to prevent their attainder, or procure their pardon, and to support and advance the Protestant religion; while they, on the other part, bound themselves to procure the settlement of the crown upon him and his heirs, and to take and slay, if need were, even in the queen's palace and presence, every one who opposed it. The result of this conspiracy was the murder of Riccio on the 9th of March 1566, the king leading the way into the queen's cabinet, and holding her in his grasp, while the murderers dragged the poor Italian into an ante-chamber, and mangling his body with more than fifty wounds, completed what they believed, and Knox pronounced to be, a just act, and most worthy of all praise.' When Mary learned what had been done, she broke out in reproaches against the king, as to blame for all. I shall be your wife no longer,' she told him, and shall never like well till I cause you have as sorrowful a heart as I have at this present.' As had been agreed beforehand among the conspirators, Mary was kept prisoner in Holyrood; while the king, of his own authority, dismissed the parliament which was about to forfeit Murray and his associates in the late insurrection. The plot was thus far successful; but Mary no ་ sooner perceived its objects, than she set herself at work to defeat them. Dissembling her indignation at her husband's treachery and the savage outrage in which he was the ringleader, she succeeded by her blandishments in detaching him from the conspirators, and in persuading him not only to escape with her from their power by a midnight flight to Dunbar, but to issue a proclamation in which he denied all complicity in their designs. The conspiracy was now at an end; Ruthven and Morton fled to England, while Murray, by renouncing their cause, hastened to make his peace with the queen; and the king, hated by both sides, because he had betrayed both sides, became an object of mingled abhorrence and contempt. not It was an aggravation of the murder of Riccio that it was committed, if not in the queen's presence, at least within a few yards of her person, only three months before she gave birth (on the 19th June 1566) to the prince who became King James VL As that event drew near, the queen's affection for her husband seemed to revive; but the change was only momentary; and before the boy's baptism, in December, her estrangement from the king was greater than ever. Divorce was openly discussed in her presence, and darker designs were obscurely hinted at among her friends. The king, on his part, spoke of leaving the country; but before his preparations were completed, he fell ill of the small-pox at Glasgow. This was about the 9th of January 1567. On the 25th, Mary went to see him, and travelling by easy stages, brought him to Edinburgh on the 31st. He was lodged in a small mansion beside the Kirk of the Field, nearly on the spot where the south-east corner of the University now stands. There Mary visited him daily, and slept for two nights in a room below his bedchamber. She passed the evening of Sunday the 9th of February by his bedside, talking cheerfully and affectionately with him, although she is said to have dropped one remark which gave him uneasy forebodings-that it was much about that time twelvemonth that Riccio was murdered. She left him between ten and eleven o'clock to take part in a masque at Holyrood, at the marriage of a favourite valet. The festivities had not long ceased in the palace, when, about two hours after midnight, the house in which the king slept was blown up by gunpowder; and his lifeless body was found in the neighbouring garden. The chief actor in this tragedy was undoubtedly James Hepburn, Earl Bothwell, a needy, reckless, vainglorious, profligate noble, who, since Murray's revolt, and still more since Riccio's murder, had enjoyed a large share of the queen's favour. But there were suspicions that the queen herself was not wholly ignorant of the plot, and these suspi cions could not but be strengthened by what followed. On the 12th of April, Bothwell was brought to a mock-trial, and acquitted; on the 24th, he intercepted the queen on her way from Linlithgow to Edinburgh, and carried her, with scarcely a show of resistance, to Dunbar. On the 7th of May, he was divorced from the young and comely wife whom he had married little more than a twelvemonth before; on the 12th, Mary publicly pardoned his seizure of her person, and created him Duke of Orkney; and on the 15th-only three months after her husband's murder--she married the man whom every one regarded as his murderer. This fatal step at once arrayed her nobles in arms against her. She was able to lead an army against them, but it melted away without striking a blow on the field of Carberry (15th June), when nothing was left to her but to abandon Bothwell, and surrender herself to the Confederated Lords. They |