Probably the number of private lordships of this kind is not now great; for, at the passing of the above statute, the majority were in the Crown; and if any have since been re-granted, it is most likely that their franchises and tenure would be so modified as to leave no vestige of the Marcher privileges in them. The statement of your correspondent suggests to me another doubt. How could any Lordship Marcher be "erected by Martin of Tours?" Every such lordship must be of the creation of the Crown, either shown or presumed. The date of the establishment of these marcherships is so ancient that, perhaps, no one may have actually seen any document to prove them but charters of confirmation and inquisitions post-mortem; still the _law_ refers their origin to specific Crown grants, and not to the act or authority of a mere subject. If, therefore, Martin, who was a tenant in capite of the Crown, founded the lordship of Kemes, he must have done--as the military invaders of Ireland in a subsequent reign did--conquered the territory with his own arms, and obtained palatine jurisdiction over it, with the assent and by the authority of the King. Let me add, that the MS. treatise in the Harleian Collection (referred to _ante_, p. 135.) is printed in Pennant's _Wales_, and, more correctly, in vol. ii. of the _Transactions of the Cymmrodorion Society_. It is much to be lamented that the treatise on the Lordships Marchers, bequeathed by Sir Matthew Hale to the Society of Lincoln's Inn, is not to be found in that library. If the work was composed by that eminent judge himself, it must be one of the highest value and authority. Does any one possess it, or a copy of it? E. SMIRKE. DOCTRINE OF THE RESURRECTION. (Vol. iii., p. 374.) "Can any of your readers inform me of any traces of the doctrine of the resurrection before the Christian era?" I shall endeavour as briefly as possible to do justice to this important subject by giving extracts from, and references to, various authors, especially Hody in his work _The Resurrection of the (Same) Body Asserted from the Traditions of the Heathens, &c._ The arguments derived from this source are as follow:-- 1. "The gross notions of the heathens concerning the soul in its state of separation, that it has all the same parts as the body has." Confer Farmer on the _Worship of Human Spirits in the Ancient Heathen Nations_, p. 419. _et seq._; _Æschyli Persæ_, v. 616.; and Blomfield's note; _Nicolaus de Sepulchris Hebræorum, &c._, cap. ix. and xiv. 2. "Their opinion concerning the transmigration of souls." Confer Vossii _Idololat._, lib. i. c. x. 3. "Their opinion concerning the duration of the soul as long as the body lasted, and its adherence to the body after death," v. Cicero, _Tuscul. Quæst._, lib. i.; _Lucret._, lib. iii. Concerning the opinion of the Egyptians, v. _Greenham on Embalming_. 4. "The belief that some men have ascended up into heaven in their bodies, there to remain for ever," v. Hody.