could dispose her to favour the doctrine, who was by birth a queen,
and by temper despotic.

That Salmasius was, from the appearance of Milton's book, treated
with neglect, there is not much proof; but to a man, so long
accustomed to admiration, a little praise of his antagonist would be
sufficiently offensive, and might incline him to leave Sweden, from
which however he was dismissed, not with any mark of contempt, but
with a train of attendants scarce less than regal.

He prepared a reply, which, left as it was imperfect, was published
by his son in the year of the Restoration. In the beginning, being
probably most in pain for his Latinity, he endeavours to defend his
use of the word persona; but, if I remember right, he misses a
better authority than any that he has found, that of Juvenal in his
fourth satire:


- Quid agis cum dira et foedior omni
Crimine persona est?


As Salmasius reproached Milton with losing his eyes in the quarrel,
Milton delighted himself with the belief that he had shortened
Salmasius's life, and both perhaps with more malignity than reason.
Salmasius died at the Spa, Sept. 3, 1653; and, as controvertists are
commonly said to be killed by their last dispute, Milton was
flattered with the credit of destroying him.

Cromwell had now dismissed the parliament by the authority of which