WOBO: Search for words and phrases in the texts here...

Mr. Watson, in his history of Halifax, notices a William Ainsworth, curate of Lightcliffe, and some time lecturer of St. Peter’s, Chester, who, in 1650 published “Triplex memoriale, or the Substance of three commemoration Sermons, preached at Halifax in remembrance of Mr. Nathanael Wattehouse deceased.” This gentleman taught school in aid of his maintenance, which appears to have been very scanty, but whether related to our Lexicographer, cannot now be ascertained.

, vicar of Milford in Hampshire, was born at Clifton in Westmoreland, and admitted a student in Queen’s college, Oxford, in 1621; where having passed the servile offices, and taken the degree of M. A. Jie was elected a fellow. Soon after he went into holy orders, and in 1642 took the degree of B. D. He wrote “Fasciculus prseceptorum logicalium in gratiam Juventutis Academicse compositus;” besides a few other small pieces, the titles of which Wood has not recovered. He died the 18th of October, 1670, aged 69, and was buried in the chancel of his church of Milford, with an epitaph, which praises him as a vigilant vicar of that church, a gentleman of the greatest integrity, judgment, and learning, and who in the most difficult and troublesome times, adhered faithfully to his principles. Wood speaks of a Christopher Airay, nephew to Dr. Adam Airay, principal of Edmund hall, who ia 1660 contributed to enlarge the buildings of old Queen’s college. They were probably both related to the subject of the following article.

, provost of Queen’s college, Oxford, was born in Westmoreland in 1559, educated in grammatical learning under the care of Bernard Gilpin, usually called the Northern Apostle, and by him sent to St. Edmund’s hall, Oxford, in 1579. He was then 19 years of age, and was maintained at the university by Gilpin, who afterwards left him a handsome legacy by his last will. Mr. Airay soon removed from St. Edmund’s hall to Queen’s college, and in 1583, took his bachelor’s degree, was made tabarder, and in 1586 he commenced master of arts and was chosen fellow. About this time he went into orders, and became a constant preacher in the university, particularly in the church of St. Peter in the east. In 1594, he took the degree of B. D. and March 9, 1598-9, was elected provost of his college; and in 1606 he was appointed vice-chancellor. He wrote the following pieces: 1. “Lectures upon the whole Epistle of St. Paul to the Philippians,” London, 1618, 4to. 2. “The just and necessary Apology touching his Suit in Law, for the Rector of Charlton on Otmore, in Oxfordshire,” London, 1621, 8vo. 3. “A Treatise against bowing at the Name of Jesus.” The lectures were preached in the church of St. Peter in the east, and were published by Christopher Potter, fellow, and afterwards provost of Queen’s college, with an epistle of his own composition prefixed to them. Airay ranks among the zealous Puritans, who were mostly Calvinists, and was a great supporter of his party in the university, where he was considered as a man of sincere piety, integrity, and learning. In 1602 when Dr. Howson, then vice-chancellor, wished to repress the practice of some Puritan divines of Oxford who preached against the ceremonies and discipline of the church, Dr. Airay and one or two otherlj were ordered to make submission by the queen’s commissioners who had investigated the matter; and this the others did, but Dr. Airay, according to Ant. Wood, appears to have been excused. In 1604, when king James, in commemoration of his escape from the Gowrie conspiracy, not only appointed an anniversary, but that there should always be a sermon and service on Tuesdays throughout the year, Dr. Airay introduced this last custom into Oxford, first at All Saints church, and then at St. Mary’s, with a rule that the sermons should be preached by the divines of the colleges in their respective turns. In 1606, when vice-chancellor, he was one of the first to call Mr. Laud, afterwards the celebrated archbishop, to task for preaching sentiments which were supposed to favour popery. He died in Queen’s college, Oct. 10, 1616, aged fiftyseven, and was buried in the chapel. He bequeathed to the college some lands lying in Garsington, near Oxford.

, an eminent botanist, was born m 1731, at a small village near Hamilton, in Lanarkshire. He had been early initiated in horticulture; and in 1754, coming for employment to the southern parts of the kingdom, he attracted, in the following year, the notice of Mr. Philip Miller, author of the Gardener’s Dictionary, who was at that time superintendant of the botanical garden at Chelsea. The instructions which he received from that eminent gardener, it is said, laid the foundation of his futnre fortune. His attention to his profession procured for him a recommendation to the late princess dowager of Wales, and his present majesty. In 1759, he consequently was appointed to superintend the botanical garden at Kew, an opportunity for the exertion of his talents which was not neglected. The most curious plants were collected from every part of the world, and his skill in the cultivation of them was evinced by his attention to the various soils and degrees of warmth or cold which were necessary for their growth. The borders in the garden were enlarged for the more free circulation of the air where it was required, and the stoves were improved for the reception of plants, and, as near as it was thought possible, adapted to the climates from which they were produced. His professional abilities were not unnoticed by the most eminent botanists of the time; and in 1764 he became acquainted with sir Joseph Banks, when, equally honourable to both, a friendship commenced which subsisted for life. In 1783, Mr. Haverfield, having been advanced to a higher station, was succeeded by Mr. Aiton, in the more lucrative office of superintending the pleasure and kitchen gardens at Kew, with which he was permitted to retain his former post. His labours proved that his majesty’s favours were not injudiciously bestowed; forin 1789 he published an ample catalogue of the plants at Kew, with the title of “Hortus Kewensis,” 3 vols. 8vo. In this catalogue was given an account of the several foreign plants which had been introduced into the English gardens at different times. The whole impression of this elaborate performance was sold within two years, and a second and improved edition was published by his son William Townsend Aiton in 1810. Though active and temperate, Mr. Aiton had for some time been afflicted with a complaint which is thought by the faculty to be incurable. It was that of a scirrhous liver, nor was it to be surmounted by the aid of medicine, though every possible assistance was liberally bestowed. He died on February 1st, 1793, in the 63d year of his age, having left behind him a wife, two sons, and three daughters. He had been distinguished by the friendship of those who were most celebrated for their botanical science. The late earl of Bute, sir Joseph Banks, the late Dr. Solander, and Mr. Dryander, were the friends to whom he always was inclined to declare his acknowledgements for their kindness, and to the three latter for the assistance which they afforded hint in completing the “Hortus Kewensis.” He was assiduous in his employment, easy in his temper, and faithful to his duty. As a friend, a husband, and a father, his character was exemplary. On his burial in the church-yard at Kew, his pall was supported by those who knew and esteemed him; by sir Joseph Banks, the Rev. Dr. Goodenough, Mr. Dryander, Dr. Pitcairn, Mr. Dundas of Richmond, and Mr. Zoffany. The king, attentive to his faithful servants, demonstrated his kindness to Mr. Aiton, by appointing his eldest son to his father’s places. There is a portrait of our author in the library at sir Joseph Banks’ s, Soho square, which is thought a good likeness. He holds in his hand a plant called, in compliment to him, Aitonia, by the celebrated Thunberg.

, an English poet and physician, was born at Newcastle-upon-Tyne, Nov. 9, 1721. His father was a reputable butcher of that place. Of this circumstance, which he is said to have concealed from his friends, he had a perpetual remembrance in a halt in his gait, occasioned by the falling of a cleaver from his father’s stall. He received the first rudiments of his education at the grammar-school of Newcastle, and was afterwards placed under the tuition of Mr. Wilson, who kept a private academy. At the age of eighteen be went to Edinburgh to qualify himself for the office of a dissenting minister, and obtained some assistance from the fund of the dissenters, which is established for such purposes. Having, however, relinquished his original intention, he resolved to study physic, and honourably repaid that contribution, which, being intended for the promotion of the ministry, he could not conscientiously retain.

Akenside gave early indications of genius. Several of his poems were the produce of his youth. His capital performance, The Pleasures of Imagination, was first published in 1744; and, like most extraordinary productions, it was not properly appreciated till time had matured the public judgment. I have, savs our late eminent biographer, heard Dodsley, by whom it was published, say, that when the copy was offered him, the price demanded for it being such as he was not inclined to give precipitately, he carried the work to Pope, who having looked over it, advised him not to make a niggardly offer, for this was no every-day writer.

His poems, published soon after his death in 4to and 8vo, consist of the “Pleasures of Imagination,” two books of “Odes,” a Hymn to the Naiads, and some Inscriptions. “The Pleasures of Imagination,” as before observed, was first published in 1744; and a very extraordinary production it was, from a man who had not reached his 23d year. He was afterwards sensible, however, that it wanted revision and correction, and he went on revising and correcting it for several years; but finding this task to grow upon his hands, and despairing of ever executing it to his own satisfaction, he abandoned the purpose of correcting, and resolved to write the poem over anew upon a somewhat different and enlarged plan. He finished two books of his new poem, a few copies of which were printed for the use of the author and certain friends; of the first book in 1757, of the second in 1765. He finished also a good part of a third book, and an introduction to a fourth; but his most munificent and excellent friend, conceiving all that is executed of the new work, too inconsiderable to supply the place, and supersede the republication of the original poem, and yet too valuable to be withheld from the public, has caused them both to be inserted in the collection of his poems. Dr. Akenside, in this work, it has been said, has done for the noble author of the “Characteristics,” what Lucretius did for Epicurus formerly; that is, he has displayed and embellished his philosophic system, that system which has the first-beautiful and the first-good for its foundation, with all the force of poetic colouring; but, on the other hand, it has been justly objected that his picture of man is unfinished. The immortality of the soul is not once hinted throughout the poem. With regard to its merit as a poem, Dr. Johnson has done ample justice to it, while he speaks with more severity of his other poems. It is not easy to guess, says that eminent critic, why he addicted himself so diligently to lyric poetry, having neither the ease and airiness of the lighter, nor the vehemence and elevation of the grander ode. We may also refer the reader to an elegant criticism prefixed by Mrs. Barbauld to an ornamented edition of the “Pleasures of Imagination,” 12mo, 1795.

, a famous Rabbin, who flourished a little after the destruction of Jerusalem by Titus, was a Jew only by the mother’s side, and it is pretended that his father was descended from Sisera, general of the army of Jabin king of Tyre. Akiba, for the first forty years of his life, kept the flocks of Calba Schwa, a rich citizen of Jerusalem, whose daughter is said to have induced him to study in hopes of gaining her hand, if he should make any considerable progress. He applied himself accordingly to his studies with so much assiduity and success, for upwards of twenty years, that he was considered as one of the most able teachers in Israel, and was followed by a prodigious number of scholars. He declared himself for the impostor Barchochebas, and asserted that he was the true Messiah; but the troops which the emperor Hadrian sent against the Jews, who under the conduct of this false Messiah had committed horrid massacres, exterminated this faction, and Akiba was taken and put to death with great cruelty. He lived an hundred and twenty years, and was buried with his wife in a cave upon a mountain not far from Tiberias. The Jewish writers enlarge much upon his praises, and his sayings are often mentioned in the Mishnu and Talmud. When he died, they say, the glory of the law vanished away. This happened in the year 135. He was in truth a gross impostor, and the accounts handed down to us of him are entitled to very little credit. He is said to have forged a work under the name of the patriarch Abraham, entitled “Sepher Jezirah,” or, “The Book of the Creation,” which was translated into Latin by Postel, and published at Paris in 1552, 8vo, at Mantua in 4to, and at Basil in folio, 1587. Some charge him also with having altered the Hebrew text of the Bible, in order to contend with the Christians on certain points of chronology.

, an eminent Italian poet, was born of a noble family at Florence, in 1475, and passed the early part of his life in habits of friendship with Bernardo and Cosimo Rucellai, Trissino, and other scholars who had devoted themselves more particularly to the study of classical literature. Of the satires and lyric poems of Alamanni, several were produced under the pontificate of LeoX. In the year 1516, he married Alessandra Serristori, a lady of great beauty, by whom he had a numerous offspring. The rank and talents of Alamanni recommended him to the notice and friendship of the cardinal Julio de Medici, who, during the latter part of the pontificate of Leo X. governed on the behalf of that pontiff the city of Florence. The rigid restrictions imposed by the cardinal on the inhabitants, by which they were, among other marks of subordination, prohibited from carrying arms under severe penalties, excited the indignation of many of the younger citizens of noble families, who could ill brook the loss of their independence; and among the rest, of Alamanni, who, forgetting the friend in the patriot, not only joined in a conspiracy against the cardinal, immediately after the death of Leo X. but is said to have undertaken to assassinate him with his own hand. His associates were Zanobio Buondelmonti, Jacopa da Diaceto, Antonio Brueioli, and several other persons of distinguished talents, who appear to have been desirous of restoring the ancient liberty of the republic, without sufficiently reflecting on the mode by which it was to be accomplished. The designs of the conspirators, however, were discovered, and Alamanni was under the necessity of saving himself by flight. After many adventures and vicissitudes, in the course of which he returned to Florence, and took an active part in the commotions that agitated his country, he finally withdrew to France, where he met with a kind and honourable reception from Francis I. who was a great admirer of Italian poetry, and not only conferred on him the order of St. Michael, but employed him in many important missions.

This, however, did not disconcert Alamanni, who immediately made the following answer: “Sir, when I composed these lines, it was as a poet, who is permitted to use fictions; but now I speak as an ambassador, who is bound in honour to tell the truth. I spoke then as a youth, I speak now as a man advanced in years: I was then swayed by rage and passion, arising from the desolate condition of my country; but now I am calm and free from passion.” Charles, rising from his seat, and laying his hand on the shoulder of the ambassador, told him with great kindness that he had no cause to regret the loss of his country, having found such a patron as Francis I. adding, that to a virtuous man every place is his country.

Alamanni left two sons, who shared in the good fortune due to his talents and reputation. Baptist was almoner to queen Catherine de Medicis, afterwards king’s counsellor, abbot of Belle-ville, bishop of Bazas, and afterwards of Macon; he died in 1581. Nicholas, the other son, was a knight of St. Michael, captain of the royal guards, and master of the palace. Two other persons of the name of Louis Alamanni, likewise natives of Florence, were distinguished in the republic of letters. One was a colonel in the French service, and in 1591 consul of the academy of Florence. Salvino Salvini speaks of him in “Fastes Consulaires.” The other lived about the same time, and was a member of the same academy. He wrote three Latin eclogues in the “Carmina illustrium Poetarum Italorum,” and a funeral oration in the collection of “Florentine Prose,” vol. IV. He was the grandson of Ludovico Alemanni, one of the five brothers of the celebrated poet.

, a Spanish writer, born at Medina del Campo, in Castile, about the end of the sixteenth century. After having studied the law at Salamanca, he entered into the service of Anthony Perez, secretary of state under Philip II. He was in high esteem and confidence with his master, upon which account he was imprisoned after the disgrace of this minister, and kept in confinement eleven years, when Philip III. coming to the throne, set him at liberty, according to the orders given by his father in his will. Alamos continued in a private capacity, till the duke of Olivarez, the favourite of Philip IV. called him to public employments. He was appointed advocate-general in the court of criminal causes, and in the council of war. He was afterwards chosen member of the council of the Indies, and then of the council of the king’s patrimony, and a knight of the order of St. James. He was a man of wit as well as judgment, but his writings were superior to his conversation. He died in the 88th year of his age. His Spanish translation of Tacitus, and the aphorisms which he added in the margin, gained him great reputation: the aphorisms, however, have been censured by some authors, particularly by Mr. Amelot, who says, “that instead of being more concise and sententious than the text, the words of the text are always more so than the aphorism.” This work was published at Madrid in 1614, and was to have been followed, as mentioned in the king’s privilege, with a commentary, which, however, has never yet appeared. The author composed the whole during his imprisonment. He left several other works which have never yet been printed.

, in Latin Alanus de Lynna, a famous divine of the fifteenth century, was born at Lynn, in the county of Norfolk, and educated in the university of Cambridge; where he applied himself diligently to the study of philosophy and divinity, and, having taken the degree of doctor, became an eminent preacher. Bale, who gives Alan an advantageous character, yet blames him for using allegorical and moral expositions of scripture; while Pits commends the method he took to explain the holy scriptures, which was by comparing them with themselves, and having recourse to the ancient fathers of the church. But he is more generally celebrated for the useful pains he took in making indexes to most of the books he read. Of these Bale saw a prodigious quantity in the library of the Carmelites at Norwich. Alan flourished about the year 1420, and wrote several pieces, particularly “De vario Scripturæ sensu;” “Moralia Bibliorum;” “Sermones notabiles;” “Elucidarium Scripturæ;” “Prelectiones Theologiæ;” “Elucidationes Aristotelis.” At length he became a Carmelite, in the town of his nativity, and was buried in the convent of his order.

, of Tewkesbury, another English writer, who flourished about the year 1177, and died in 1201. He wrote “De vita et exilio Thomas Cantuarensis,” of the life and banishment of Thomas a Becket, archbishop of Canterbury.

, cardinal priest of the Roman church, and styled Cardinal of England, was the son of John Allen, by Jennet Lyster, sister to Thomas Lyster, of Westby, in Yorkshire, and was born at Rossal in Lancashire, in 1532. His father, according to Camden, was a gentleman of a reputable family, and had him educated at home until his fifteenth year, 1547, when he was entered of Oriel college, Oxford, and had for his tutor Morgan Philips, or Philip Morgan, a zealous Roman Catholic, and usually called the Sophister, which was a title, in the learning of those times, highly honourable. Young Alan made a rapid progress both in logic and philosophy, and was elected a fellow of his college, and took his bachelor’s degree in 1550. In the Act celebrated July 16, he went out junior of the act, having completed his degree of M. A. with the distinguished reputation of great parts, learning, and eloquence. Of this we have a proof in his being chosen principal of St. Mary hall, in 1556, when only twenty-four years of age, and the same year he served the office of proctor. In 1558, he was made canon of York; but on the accession of queen Elizabeth, when the reformed religion was again established, although he remained for a short time at Oxford, yet, as he refused to comply with the queen’s visitors in taking the oaths, &c. his fellowship was declared void; and in 1560 he found it necessary to leave England, and retire to Louvain, then a general receptacle of the expatriated English Catholics, and where they had erected a college. Here his talents and zeal recommended him to his countrymen, who looked up to him as their supporter, while they were charmed with his personal appearance, and easy address, chastened by a dignified gravity of manners.

He now began to write in support of the cause for which he had left his country; and his first piece, published in 1565, was entitled “A defence of the doctrine of Catholics, concerning Purgatory and Prayers for the Dead,” 8vo. This was intended as an answer to the celebrated bishop Jewell’s work on the same subject; and if elegance of style, and somewhat of plausibility of matter, could have prevailed, it would have served his cause very essentially; but, unluckily, of all the subjects which Jewell had handled, there was none in which he reasoned with such irresistible force. Alan’s work was at the same time answered by Dr. William Fulke; but whatever its fate in England, it procured him the highest reputation abroad, among the chiefs of his party, who, as a mark of their confidence, put under his care a young man, afterwards sir Christopher Blount, and who was concerned in the earl of Essex’s insurrection.

The care of this pupil, and his constant application to study, having injured his health, his physicians recommended him to try his native air; and with this advice, although it subjected him to personal danger, he complied, and arrived in Lancashire sometime in 1565. He had scarcely reached this place, before he began to exert his powers of persuasion in the making of converts; and in order to promote this object, wrote and circulated little treatises wherever they were likely to be successful. This open hostility to the church alarmed the magistrates, and they were in search of him, when he retired to the neighbourhood of Oxford, and wrote a kind of apology for his party, under the title of “Brief Reasons concerning the Catholic Faith.” Some, however, think that this was written at the duke of Norfolk’s house, in Norfolk, where it is certain he was for some time concealed. It appears likewise, that he returned to the neighbourhood of Oxford, and distributed his pamphlet with much boldness; and was so fearless in his zeal, that he refused a convenient opportunity of a ship going to the Netherlands. He now ventured to establish a correspondence with his old friends in the university, who were considerably numerous, and succeeded in bringing over one who had formerly been a Papist, but was now of the establishment. This so exasperated the relations of this person, that they forced Alan to fly to London, whence in 1568 he made his escape into Flanders. It has been supposed that some friends in power, who knew him formerly, connived at his easy departure. It is even said that sir Christopher Hatton bore a regard for him, in consequence of having received part of his education in St. Mary’s hall, while Alan was principal; and that Alan repaid this kindness with such honourable mention of sir Christopher abroad, as occasioned some very invidious reflections against the latter at home.

Be this as it may, Alan, having arrived safely in the Netherlands, went to Mecklin, in the duchy of Brabant, where he read a divinity lecture in one of the monasteries with great applause. Thence he went to Doway, where he became Doctor in Divinity, and laboured very assiduously in founding a seminary for the support of English scholars; and, knowing how obnoxious such institutions were in England, wrote a book in defence of them. While thus employed, a canonry of Cambray was conferred on him, as a reward for his zeal. Erythraeus (Jean Vincent Le Roux) in his Pinacotheca, gives us some reason to think that a pretended miracle contributed to this promotion, by inspiring his patrons with an idea of the sacredness of his person. The miracle is, than when in England, a person who knew him well was employed to apprehend him, but had such a mist before his eyes when he came for that purpose, as to pass him without knowing him. Such miracles, however, are capable of a very easy explanation.

Alan therefore, having overstepped the bounds of religious controversy, was now determined to measures of more open hostility. The celebrated Parsons, the Jesuit, who was his great friend and counsellor, is supposed to have suggested to him the project of invading England. For many years there had been differences, discontents, and even injuries committed between the English and Spaniards; and now Alan, and some fugitive English noblemen, persuaded Philip II. to undertake the conquest of England. To facilitate this, the pope, Sixtus V. renewed the excommunication thundered against queen Elizabeth by his predecessor Pius V. While this was in agitation, sir William Stanley, commander of the English and Irish garrison at Daventer, betrayed it to the Spaniards, and went into their service with 1200 men; and Rowland York, who had been intrusted with a strong fort in the same country, performed the same act of treachery. Alan, no longer the conscientious controversialist, wrote a defence of this base proceeding, and sent several priests to Stanley, in order to instruct those he had drawn over to the king of Spain’s service. Alan’s defence, which appeared the year after these transactions, 1588, was first printed in English in the form of a letter, and afterwards in Latin, under the title of “Epistola de Daventrise ditione,” Cracov. His only argument, if it deserve the name, was, that sir William Stanley was no traitor, because he had only delivered to the king of Spain a city which was his own before; and he exhorts all Englishmen, in the service of the states, to follow his example.

No part of the failure of this vast enterprize, however, was attributed to Alan, to whom the king of Spain now gave the archbishopric of Mecklin, and would have had reside there, as a place where he might more effectually promote the popish and Spanish interests in England; but the pope had too high an opinion of his merit to suffer him to leave Rome, where, therefore, he continued to labour in the service of his countrymen, and in promoting the Catholic faith. Some have asserted, that he and sir Francis Inglefield assisted Parsons, the Jesuit, in composing-his treasonable work concerning the succession, which he published under the name of Doleman, in 1593, and which was reckoned of such dangerous consequence, that it was made capital by law for any person to have it in his custody. Others, however, maintain that he had no hand in it, and that he even objected to it, because of its tendency to promote those dissentions which had for so many years distracted his native country; and this last opinion is probable, if what we have been told be true, that towards the close of his life he had changed his sentiments, as to government, and professed his sorrow for the pains he had taken in promoting the invasion of England. It is even asserted, by a very eminent popish writer (Watson), that when he perceived that the Jesuits intended nothing but desolating and destroying his native land, he wept bitterly, not knowing how to remedy it, much less how to curb their insolence. Such conduct, it is added, drew upon him the ill-will of that powerful society, who chose now to represent him as a man of slender abilities, and of little political consequence. On his death-bed, he was very desirous of speaking to the English students then at Rome, which the Jesuits prevented, lest he should have persuaded them to a loyal respect for their prince, and a tender regard for their country. He is generally said to have died of a retention of urine; but, as the Jesuits had shown so much dislike, they have been accused of poisoning him. Of this, however, there is no proof. He died Oct. 6, 1594, in the sixty-third year of his age; and was buried with great pomp in the chapel of the English college at Rome, where a monument was erected to his memory, with an inscription setting forth his titles and merits. What these merits were, the reader has been told. We have seen cardinal Alan in three characters: that of a zealous propagandist; of apolitical traitor to his country; and lastly, repenting the violence of his endeavours to ruin his country on pretence of bringing her back to popery. In the first of these characters he seems to have acted from the impulse of a mind firmly persuaded that every deviation from popery was dangerous heresy; and the only weapons he employed were those of controversy. As a writer, the popish party justly considered him as the first champion of his age; and both his learning and eloquence were certainly of a superior stamp. But in his worst character, as a traitor, there is every reason to think him influenced by the Jesuits, who at that time, and ever while a society, had little scruple as to the means by which they effected their purposes. Yet even their persuasions were not sufficient to inspire him with permanent hostility towards the political existence of his country. Some writers, not sufficiently attending to his history, have called him a Jesuit; but in all controversies between the Jesuits and the secular priests, the latter always gloried in cardinal Alan, as a man to whom no Jesuit could be compared, in any respect.

Of his works, besides those already mentioned, there are extant, 1. “A defence of the lawful power and authority of the Priesthood to remit Sins,” with two other tracts on Confession and Indulgences, Louvain, 1567, 8vo. ?. “De Sacramentis in genere, de sacramento Eucharistice, et de Missae Sacrificio, libri tres,” Antwerp, 1576, 4to, and Doway, 1605. 3. “A true, sincere, and modest defence of English Catholics,” without place, 1583. This was an answer to the “Execution of Justice in England,” written by lord Burleigh, the original of which, Strype says, is yet preserved. It is esteemed the best of Alan’s works. 4. “An apology and true declaration of the institution and endeavours of the two English colleges, the one in Home, the other now resident in Rheims, against certain sinister insinuations given up against the same,” Mons, 1581. Besides these, he wrote some other small treatises, without his name, of which we have nowhere seen a correct account. That in the Athenae is perhaps the best. Foppen, on the authority of Possevin in his “Apparatus Sac.” says, that he translated the English Bible printed at Rheims, in conjunction with Gregory Martin and Richard Bristow, two English divines; and that he wrote a letter to the bishop of Liege, “de miserabili statu et calamitate r'egni Anglise, fervente schismate,” which is printed in the “Gesta Episcoporum Leodiensium,” vol. III. p. 588. Le Long, who also mentions his translation of the Bible, adds, that he was employed by pope Gregory XIV. in reforming the Vulgate.

, or Alainde L'Isle or de Lille, is the name under which two persons, who were contemporaries, have been confounded by most biographers. The subject of the present article, usually termed Alanus senior, or major, was born at Lille in Flanders, about the beginning of the twelfth century; and his parents having demoted him from his birth to the service of religion, he received a suitable education. When the fame of St. Bernard began to spread abroad, Alanus was sent, in 1128, to study at Clairvaux, under that celebrated ecclesiastic, and very soon acquired a distinction above his companions. St. Bernard afterwards placed him at the head of the abbey of Rivour, in the diocese of Troyes in Champagne; and in 1151, procured him the bishopric of Auxerre, over which he presided until 1167, when he resigned it, and returned to Clairvaux, where he remained until his death in October 1181. His works, still in existence, are, 1. “Vita sancti Bernard!,” printed in the second volume of St. Bernard’s works, 1690, fol. 2. “Testamentum suum,” or his Testament, made in 1181, printed in Nicholas Camusat’s collection. 3. “Explanationes in Prophetias Merlini Angli,” in seven books, Francfort, 1608, 8vo. Alanus composed this treatise under the reign of Louis-the-Young, about 1171, on account of the noise which these pretended prophecies made. The subject is curiously illustrated by quotations from the English, Norman, and French historians, and even from the Latin poets. In the chapter-house of Auxerre is a manuscript life of Alanus, compiled in 1182 by one of the canons.

, of a noble family at Brussels, was born about the beginning of the sixteenth century. His father William Alard de Centier, a zealous convert to popery, obliged him to enter the order of Dominican friars, where he was much admired for his talents as a preacher. While thus employed, a Hamburgh merchant, who was pleased with his preaching, procured him privately the works of Luther, which Alard read with conviction, and the same merchant having assisted him in escaping from his convent, he studied divinity at Jena and Wittemberg. But the death of this faithful friend having deprived him of resources, he ventured to return to Brussels and solicit assistance from his father. Before, however, he could obtain a private interview with him, he was discovered in one of the streets of Brussels by his mother, a violent bigot, who, after some reproaches, denounced him to the Inquisition; and when no persuasions could induce him to return into the bosom of the church which he had left, his mother was so irritated, as to call forth the rigour of the law, and even offered to furnish the wood to burn him. Sentence of death being pronounced, he was conducted to prison, but on the night previous to the appointed execution, he is said to have heard a voice saying, “Francis, arise and depart:” how far this and other particulars of his escape are true, we know not; but it is certain he cleared the prison, and after some hardships and difficulties, arrived in safety at Oldenburgh, where he became almoner to the prince. Here he remained until hearing that freedom of religion was granted at Antwerp, his affection for his native country induced him to return, which he did twice, notwithstanding the persecutions of the duke of Alba a.nd the dangers to which he was exposed; and when his father came to see him at Antwerp, in hopes of bringing him back to popery, he argued with so much power, as to make a sincere convert of this bigotted parent. At length, when it was not longer safe for him to remain in the Netherlands, Christian IV. king of Denmark, gave him the curacy of Wilster in Hoistein, at which asylum he died July 10, 1578. His works, which are In Flemish or German, consist of, 1. “The Confession of Antwerp.” 2. “Exhortation of the Ministers of Antwerp.” 3. “Agenda, or Discipline of Antwerp.” 4. “Catechism.” 5. “Treatise on original Sin,” &c.

A Lasco, or Lasco, or Laski (John), usually styled the Polish reformer, a man of high rank, talents, and pious zeal, is said by Fox, the martyrologist, who was his contemporary, to have been uncle to Sigismond, king of Poland. He certainly was of a noble family in Poland, which took its name from Lasco, Latzki, or Latzeo, and subsisted under one of those titles long after his time. He was born, according to Saxius, in 1499, but we have no particulars respecting his family, unless that his brother Jerome was an able politician, and employed by the emperor Ferdinand, as his ambassador to the Turkish government. He had also an uncle, of the same name, who was archbishop of Gnesua, to whom Erasmus dedicated his edition of the works of St. Ambrose, and whom Le Clerc mistakes for our John Alasco. Erasmus in one of his epistles (ep. 862) mentions two others of the same illustrious family, Hieroslaus, and Stanislaus Alasco (usually written à Lasco); and in ep. 1167, he speaks of a John à Lasco (Joannes Lascanus), a young man, who died in Germany.

It appears by another letter from Erasmus to Pole, afterwards the celebrated cardinal, that Alasco left him to go to the university of Padua. “You will love him,” says Erasmus, “because he has all those qualities which make you amiable: noble extraction, high posts of honour, and still greater expectations, a wonderful genius, uncommon erudition, and all this without any pride. I have hitherto been happy in his company, and now lose it with great regret.” This letter is dated Basil, Oct. 4, 1525. His stay at Padua was probably short, as he went afterwards to Rome, and thence into Switzerland, where he became acquainted with Zuinglius, who, struck with his talents and amiable character, prevailed on him to examine more seriously the controversies of the times respecting religion. The result of this was his embracing Protestantism according to the tenets of the Geneva reformers, and with respect to the sacrament, he zealously adopted the opinion of Zuinglius. In 1526, he returned to Poland, where he was made provost of Gnesna and Lencziez, and was nominated bishop of Vesprim in Hungary. His family and connections would have added to these, but preferment in the popish church was no longer consistent with his principles; and after struggling with much opposition, he quitted the kingdom, with the knowledge and consent of the king, by whom, Lavater the historian says, he was much respected and frequently consulted.

When Germany became an unsafe residence for the friends of the reformatiou, and the contest respecting the interim was eagerly pursued, Alasco, whose fame had reached England, was invited thither by archbishop Cranmer. This illustrious founder of the English church had for some time afforded a quiet asylum to such learned foreigners as bad been expatriated on account of their religion; and had at one time residing at Lambeth palace, those celebrated reformers Bucer, Martyr, Fagius, Ochin, and others of inferior note. Alasco arrived accordingly about the year 1548, and was introduced not only to the archbishop, but by his means to sir John Cheke, sir William Cecil, and to the duke of Somerset, the protector. In a conference with the latter, he was encouraged to request that be and his congregation might have leave to come over to London, and be protected in the exercise of their religion; and he urged that such a favour would be a matter of policy as well as charity, as by this step many useful manufactures might be introduced into England. He requested also that they might be incorporated by the king’s jetters patent; and some old dissolved church, or monastery, given them as a place of worship. Having proposed these measures, and obtained the assistance of the archbishop and other friends of rank and power, to assist in forwarding them, he returned again to Embden, where be corresponded with the archbishop and Cecil, As soon as they informed him that his request would be complied with, he again came to England, and brought with him a considerable number of German Protestants, who found an asylum for their persons, and toleration for their principles, under the mild reign of Edward VI. Three hundred and eighty of these refugees were naturalized, and erected into a species of ecclesiastical corporation, which was governed by its own laws, and enjoyed its own form of worship, although not exactly agreeing with that of the church of England. A place of worship in London, part of the once splendid priory of the Augustine friars, in the ward of Broad-street, which is still standing, was granted to them July 24, 1549, with the revenues belonging to it, for the subsistence of their ministers, who were either expressly nominated, or at least approved of by the king. His majesty also fixed the precise number of them, namely, four minisiers and a superintendant. This last office was conferred on Alasco, who, in the letters patent, is called a person of singular probity, and great learning; and it was an office which comprehended many important duties. It appears that as among the refugees from the Continent there were sometimes concealed papists, or dangerous enthusiasts, a power was given to Alasco to examine into their characters, and none were tolerated in the exercise of their religion but such as were protected by him. His office likewise extended not only over this particular congregation of Germans, but over all the other foreign churches in London, of which we find there was a French, a Spanish, and an Italian church or congregation; and over their schools and seminaries, all which were subject to his inspection, and declared to be within his jurisdiction. In 1552, we find him using his influence to procure for a member of the French church the king’s licence to set up a printing-house for printing the liturgy, &c. in French, for the use of the French islands (Jersey and Guernsey) under the English government.

The reign of Edward VI. was short; and on the accession of his bigotted and remorseless sister, the reformation was overthrown; and those who chose to adhere to it soon saw that they must be consistent at the expence of their lives. At the commencement, however, of the Marian tyranny, whether from a respect for Alasco’s illustrious family, or some regard for the rites of hospitality to those foreigners who had been invited into the country under the royal pledge of safety, Alasco and his congregation had the fair warning of a ' proclamation which ordered all foreigners to depart the realm, particularly heretics. Accordingly, about one hundred and seventy-five persons, consisting of Pules, Germans, French, Scotch, Italians, and Spaniards, belonging to the various congregations. under his superintendance, embarked in two ships, Sept. 17, 1553, with Alasco and his colleagues, and set sail for the coast of Denmark. Their reception here has been very differently represented. It has been said that, although known to be Protestants, yet because they professed the opinions of Zuinglius respecting the sacrament, they were not suffered to disembark, or to remain at anchor more than two days; during which their wives and children were prohibited from landing. Such is the account given by Melchior Adam, and by those who have followed him without examining other writers. According, however, to Hospinian, who may be the more easily credited as he was unfriendly to the Lutherans, it appears that the landing was not opposed, and that the Lutherans even admitted of a conference with Alasco and one of his colleagues, Micronius; but in the end, as neither party would give way, Alasco and his company were obliged to leave the kingdom in the depth of winter, and were refused admittance, with equal inhumanity, at Lubeck, Wismar, and Hamburgh. After 1 thus suffering almost incredible hardships at sea, during the whole of a very severe winter, they arrived in March, 1554, at Embden; and being received with kindness and hospitality, most of them settled there. Anne, countess dowager of Oldenburgh, again extended her friendship to Alasco, became the patroness of his flock, and procured them every comfort their situation required.

After an absence of nearly twenty years, Alasco returned to his native country, where he was protected from the hostility of the ecclesiastics, by the king, who employed him in various important affairs; and when addressed by the popish clergy to remove him, answered that “he had indeed heard, that the bishops had pronounced him a heretic, but the senate of the kingdom had determined no such matter; that John Alasco was ready to prove himself untainted with heretical pravity, and sound in the Catholic faith.” This answer, however, so unfavourable to their remonstrances, did not prevent their more secret efforts to injure him; but we do not find that these were effectual, and he died in peace at Franckfort, Jan. 13, 1560, after a short illness. His piety, extensive learning, liberality, and benevolence, have been celebrated by all his contemporaries, and the bigoted part of the Lutherans were his only enemies; and even of these some could not bring any other accusation against him than that he differed from their opinion respecting the corporal presence in the sacrament; a subject which unfortunately split the early reformers into parties, when they should have united against the common enemy. We have already quoted Erasmus’s opinion of him when a very young man; and it may be added (from ep. iii. lib. 28.) that he pronounced him “young, but grave beyond his years; and that himself was huppy in his conversation and society, and even became better by it; having before him, in Alasco, a striking example of sobriety, moderation, modesty, and integrity.” In another letter he calls him, “a man of so amiable a disposition, that he should have thought himself sufficiently happy in his single friendship.” Nor was Melanchthon less warm in his praise. On the accession of queen Elizabeth, although he did not return to England, he corresponded with her on affairs of the church; and according to Zanchius, had much influence both with her, and the leading ministers of her court. It may here be noticed that the congregation he had settled in Austin Friars were tolerated again under her reign, and that bishop Grindall was appointed superintendant of this foreign church, the last of whom we have any account as holding that office. The church is to this day vested in a congregation of Dutch Calvinistic protestants, and the library belonging to it contains a vast collection of the manuscript letters and memorials of the reformers, and particularly of Alasco, whose portrait was there before the fire of London.

Alasco was twice married: his first wife died in 1552, and the second survived him; he appears to have had children by both. It was probably a descendant of his, Albertus Alasco, who was most magnificently entertained by the university of Oxford in 1583, by special command of queen Elizabeth. “Such an entertainment it was,” says Wood, “that the like before or since was never made for one of his degree, costing the university, with the colleges, about c350. And, indeed, considering the worthiness of the person for whom it was chiefly made, could not be less. He was one tarn Marti quam Mercuric: a very good soldier, and a very good scholar, an admirable linguist, philosopher, and mathematician.”

, a celebrated Spanish bishop, who lived in the sixteenth century, was a native of Vitoria, a city of Alava in the province of Biscay. He studied the civil and canon law at Salamanca, and made such considerable progress, that having been admitted one of the judges in several courts of judicature, he was at lant made president of the council of Granada. He afterwards entered into holy orders, and was advanced to the bishopric of Astorga. In that rank he assisted at the fifth Council of Trent, where his principal endeavours were to restrain pluralities. On his return he was made bishop of Avila, and afterwards of Cordova. He died in 1562. The only work he has left, the subject of which is general councils, is said to be well written “De Conciliis universalibus, ac de his quce ad reiigionis et reipublicie Christ, reformationem instituenda videutur,” Granada, 1582, fol. The family of D‘Alava produced at least two other writers of some eminence, Diego d’Alava de Beaumont, the sou of the master of the ordnance to the king of Spain, an able engineer, who wrote “El Perfecto Capitan, &c.” or the Perfect Captain instructed in the military science, and the art of fortification, Madrid, 1590, fol.; and Francis Ruis de Vergara y Alava, who wrote the history of the college of St. Bartholomew, in the university of Salamanca; and by order of Philip IV. superintended an edition, 1655, fol. of the Statutes of the order of the knights of St. James.

, a celebrated physician of Sicily, was born in 1590 at Ragalbuto, in the valley of Demona, and when young acquired great reputation for his proficiency in classical learning, and in the study of philosophy. He then made choice of the profession of medicine, and received his doctor’s degree at Messina in 1610. In 1616 he settled at Palermo, where he practised with uncommon success, his advice being eagerly sought at home and abroad, by persons of all ranks who corresponded with him in cases where his visits could not be procured. His fame rose highest, however, in 1624, when he practised with so much skill, humanity, and success, during the rage of the plague in Palermo, and other parts of Sicily. While in this prosperous career, he was in vain solicited to accept a professor’s chair in the university of Bologna, and the office of first physician to the king of Naples. Nothing could seduce him from his connexions in Palermo, where he had the principal hand in founding the medical academy. He is celebrated also for his piety and munificence towards religious institutions. He died August 29, 1662. His principal works are in Latin. 1. “Consultatio pro ulceris Syriaci nunc vagantis curatione,” Palermo, 1632, 4lo. 2. “De succedaneis Medicamentis,” ibid. 1637, 4to. 3. And in Italian, “Discorso intorno alia preservatione del morbo contagioso, e mortale, che regna al presente in Palermo, tkc.” ibid. 1625, 4to. 4. “Consigli Medico-politici,” also relating to the plague, ibid. 1652, 4to. He left, likewise, some works in manuscript, on the treatment of malignant fevers, and a commentary on the epidemics of Hippocrates.

, is said to have been the first person who suffered martyrdom for Christianity in Britain; he is therefore usually styled the protomartyr of this island. He was born at Verulam, and flourished towards the end of the third century. In his youth he took a journey to Rome, in company with Amphibalus, a monk of Caerleon, and served seven years as a soldier under the emperor Dioclesian. At his return home he settled in Verulam; and, through the example and instruction of Amphibalus, renounced the errors of Paganism, in which he had been educated, and became a convert to the Christian religion. It is generally agreed that Alban suffered martyrdom during the great persecution under the reign of Diocletian; but authors differ as to the year when it happened: Bede and others fix it in the year 286, some refer it to 296, but Usher reckons it amongst the events of 303. His death is said to have been accompanied with several miracles, to which, however, it is impossible to give credit. Collier, only, of all our historians, contends for their credibility. Between 400 and 500 years after St. Alban’s death, Offa, king of the Mercians, built a very large and stately monastery to his memory; and the town of St. Alban’s in, Hertfordshire takes its name from our protomartyr.

In 1767, when the question of the suppression of the Jesuits was agitated, the cardinal took an active part at the court of Rome in their favour, but without discovering the principles of a very enlightened mind. He dreaded in this suppression the commencement of the downfall of the church, and considered any concession to those monarchs who were for the measure, as a dangerous symptom of servility on the part of the church. In 1775, he was appointed bishop of Ostia and Velletri, and consequently dean of the sacred college; and in 1779, he succeeded to his uncle Alexander in almost all the charges which that prelate had long possessed. He was appointed plenipotentiary of the house of Austria, protector of the kingdom of Poland, of the order of Malta, of the republic of Ragusa, and what was most congenial to his temper, of the college of La Sapienza in Rome. He was also presented with some rich abbeys and priories, both in the Roman and in the Neapolitan state.

The circumstances of his being almost set apart from every affair of government, and of possessing a large income, were a source of refined gratifications to himself, and of signal benefit to all the literary characters in Rome who had gained his esteem. He renewed towards the close of the century, that example which about the middle of it had been set by his illustrious uncle. Besides his patronage of men of established fame, of such men as Visconti, Fea, Testa, and Piranesi, whenever among the children of his servants and dependants he discovered a promising, genius, he took upon himself the care of his education. He increased the valuable library of his uncle from twenty-five to thirty thousand volumes; and in the year 1793, it was computed that the villa Albani contained about two hundred thousand works of art, and specimens of antiquities.

, of the same family with the preceding, born in 1504, at Bergamo, was the son of count Francis Albani, and intended by his father for the army, but preferred the study of the civil and canon law, in which, as well as in polite literature, he attained great eminence. At first, however, he bore arms in the Venetian army, and afterwards went into the church. Pope Pius V. was no sooner raised to that dignity, than he made Albani a cardinal, in 1570. It is even said that after the death of Gregory XIII. the conclave would have elected him pope, but he was then a widower and had children, a circumstance which interfered with their intentions. He died April 25, 1591. His principal works are: 1. “De Immunitate ecclesiarum,” 1553. 2. “De potestate Papæ et concilii,” Lyons, 1558; Venice, 1561, 4to. 3. “De Cardinalibus, et de douatione Constantini,” 1584, fol. Moreri gives an account of a lawyer of Bergamo, who wrote on these subjects, and is evidently the same person.

, a celebrated painter, born at Bologna, March 17, 1578. His father was a silk merchant, and intended to bring up his son to that business; but Albano having a strong inclination to painting, when his father died, devoted himself entirely to that art, though then but twelve years of age. He first studied under Denys Calvart; Guido Rheni being at the same tune under this master, with whom Albano contracted very great friendship. Calvart drew but one profile for Albano, and afterwards left him entirely to the care of Guido; under whom he made great improvement. He followed Guido to the school of the Caraccis, but a little after their friendship for each other began to cool; which was owing perhaps to the pride of Albano, who could not bear to see Guido surpass him, or to the jealousy of Guido at finding Albano make so swift a progress. They certainly endeavoured to eclipse one another; for when Guido had set up a beautiful altar-piece, Albano would oppose to it some fine picture of his: and yet they continued to speak of each other with the highest esteem. Albano, after having greatly improved himself under the Caraccis, went to Rome, where he continued many years, and married in that city; but his wife dying in childbed, at the earnest request of his relations, he returned to Bologna, where he entered again into the state of matrimony. His second wife (Doralice) was well descended, but had very little fortune; which he perfectly disregarded, so strongly was he captivated with her beauty and good sense. Besides the satisfaction of possessing an accomplished wife, he reaped likewise the advantage of having a most beautiful model; so that he had now no occasion for any other woman to sit to him for Venus, the Graces, Nymphs, and other deities, whom he took a particular delight in representing. His wife answered this purpose admirably well; for, besides her bloom of youth, and the beauty of her person, he discovered in her so much modesty, so many graces and perfections, so well adapted to painting, that it was impossible for him to find a more finished woman. She afterwards brought him several boys, all extremely beautiful and finely proportioned; and she and her children were the originals of his most agreeable and graceful compositions. It was from them too that the famous sculptors Flamand and Algardi modelled their little cupids.

Albano was well versed in some branches of polite liteMature; but, not understanding Latin, he endeavoured to supply this defect by carefully perusing the Italian translations of such books as could be serviceable to him in his profession. He excelled in all parts of painting, but was particularly admired for his small pieces; though he himself was much dissatisfied that his large pieces, many of which he painted for altars, were not equally applauded. He delighted much in drawing the fair sex, whom he has represented with wonderful beauty; but has been reckoned not so happy in his imitation of men. He sometimes represented divine stories, but his compositions on love subjects were most eagerly sought after. “He did not,” says Malvasia, “feign Cupid heavy and sleeping, as Guido did, but represented him seated majestically on a throne; now directing the sportive exercises of the little Loves shooting at a heart fixed on a trunk of a tree; now presiding over their sprightly dances, round the marble monument of Flora crowned with a chaplet of blooming flowers; and now surveying the conquest of the little winged boys over the rural satyrs and fauns. If he represented a dead Adonis, he always introduced a band of loves, some of whom, viewing the wound, drew back in the utmost horror; while others, exasperated, broke to pieces their bows and arrows, as being no longer of use to them since Adonis was no more; and others, again, who, running behind the fierce wild boar, brandished their darts with an air of vengeance.” Albano was of a happy temper and disposition; his paintings, says the same author, breathing nothing but content and joy; happy in a force of mind that conquered every uneasiness, his poetical pencil carried him through the most agreeable gardens to Paphos and Cytherea: those delightful scenes brought him over the lofty Parnassus to the delicious abodes of Apollo and the Muses.

Our countryman, sir Robert Strange, gives this character of Albano’s paintings: “The pictures of Albano are exceedingly agreeable. His subjects are in general of the poetical kind. We may be almost sure of finding, in any picture of this master, beautiful figures of women; and children, who seem as if they had been nourished by the Graces. This artist, bred in the school of the Carracci, could not fail being an agreeable painter; and if he was not always successful in expressing the stronger passions of the soul, he knew how to touch and flatter the senses, by offering to his spectators the most pleasing and delightful images; where reigns with decency, an agreeable, and if I may be allowed the expression, even a voluptuous pleasure. What contributes to render his works inestimable, is a pencil whose freshness of colour and delicacy of touch is admirable: but he may be reprehended with overfinishing many of his pictures.” This eminent artist engraved three of his pictures: “The Three Maries at the Sepulchre; A Holy Family, with Angels; and another Holy Family.” Albani’s pictures of the “Four Elements,” formerly in the palace of the king of Sardinia, at Turin, and now in Paris, are of extraordinary beauty, and well preserved. The design is excellent, the draperies perfectly elegant, the colouring lovely, and the whole very correct. The composition is perhaps a little too dissipated, but that is a circumstance frequently observed in his works. His pictures were formerly in most of the palaces of Europe, but the greatest assemblage, we believe, is now at Paris. At Burghley house, are some fine tapestries from his designs; and there were probably some of his pictures in king Charles the First’s collection, as that prince once invited him to England.

Albano died Oct. 4, 1660, and left a brother, John Baptist Albano, who painted much in the style of his brother, but excelled principally in landscape.

, a lawyer and antiquary, was born at Nismes, and not at Vivarais, as Castel asserts in his history of Languedoc. His family was noble, but more famous for the talents of Poldo, and his father James. He originally studied with a view to practice at the bar, but Nismes becoming, in 1552, the seat of the presidial court, he was appointed to the office of counsellor, which he held during life with much reputation, and employed his leisure hours in the cultivation of jurisprudence and polite literature. His first work was a French translation, of St. Julian, archbishop of Toledo, on death, and a future state. This was followed by a translation, from the Latin of Æneas Sylvius (Pius II.) of a history of the Taborites of Bohemia; but his most curious work is his “History of Nismes,” fol. 1557, illustrated with many curious views and monuments engraven in wood, and very singular specimens of the art at that time. D'Albenas was among the first who embraced the reformed religion, and. contributed not a little to the extension of it. Before his death, in 1563, the greater part of the inhabitants of Nismes, and its neighbourhood, professed Calvinism.

, an eminent Spanish statesman, and cardinal, was born May 15, 1664. His birth and early employments afforded no presage of his future ambition and fame. He was the son of a gardener near Parma, and when a boy, officiated as bell-ringer, and attended upon the parish church of his village. The rector, finding him a shrewd youth, taught him Latin. Alberoni afterwards took orders, and had a small living, on which he resided. While here, M. Campistron, a Frenchman^ secretary to the duke of Vendome, who commanded Louis XIV's armies in Italy, was robbed, and stripped of his clothes and money, by some ruffians near Alberon^s village. Alberoni, hearing of his misfortune, took him into his house, furnished him with clothes, and gave him as much money as he could spare, for his travelling expences. Campistron, no less impressed with the strength of his understanding than with the warmth of his benevolence, took him to the head quarters, and presented him to his general, as a man to whom he haxi very great obligations.

M. de Vendome first employed him in discovering where the people in his neighbourhood had concealed their grain; an undertaking which rendered Alberoni’s departure for Spain, with Vendome, as prudent as it turned out to be advantageous. By degrees he obtained the marshal’s confidence, and ventured to propose the daughter of his sovereign, the duke of Parma, to him, as a fit match for the king of Spain. Alberoni’s proposal was attended to, and the princess was demanded in marriage by that monarch, then Philip V. The duke of Parma consented with great readiness to a match that was to procure for his daughter the sovereignty of so great a kingdom as that of Spain, When every thing was settled, and immediately before the princess was to set out for her new dominions, the ministers of Spain had heard that she was a young woman of a haughty imperious temper, and extremely intriguing and ambitious. They therefore prevailed upon the king to write to the duke, requesting another of his daughters in marriage, to whose quiet disposition they could not possibly have any objections,. The king did as he was desired, and sent his letter by a special messenger. Alberoni, who was then at Parma, hearing of this, and afraid that all his projects of ambition would come to nothing, unless the princess whom he recommended, and who of course would think herself highly obliged to him for her exalted situation, became queen of Spain, caused the messenger to be stopped at one day’s journey from Parma, and gave him his choice, either to delay his coming to Parma for a day, or to be assassinated. He of course chose the first, and the princess set out upon her journey to Spain, and became queen.

Alberoni was now prime minister of Spain, a cardipal, and archbishop of Valentia; and exercised his ministry with the most complete despotism. One of his projects was, to dispossess the duke of Orleans of the regency of France, and to bestow it upon his own sovereign, as the oldest representative of the house of Bourbon: to place the pretender on the throne of England, and to add tq Spain the kingdoms of Naples and Sicily. This project, however, was discovered by the regent; and one of the conditions he made with the king of Spain was, the banishjnent of Alberoni from his councils and his kingdom. With this he was obliged to comply, and the cardinal received orders to leave Madrid in twenty-four hours, and the kingdom of Spain in fifteen days. Alberoni, who took with him great wealth, had not proceeded far, when it was discovered that he was carrying out of the kingdom the celebrated will of Charles II. of Spain, which gave that kingdom to its then sovereign. Persons were immediately detached from Madrid, to wrest this serious and important document from him, which it was supposed he intended ta take to the emperor of Germany, to ingratiate himself with him. With some violence they effected their purpose, and the cardinal proceeded on his journey to the frontiers of France, where he had the additional mortification of being received by an officer, sent by the regent to conduct him through that kingdom, as a state prisoner. Unembarrassed, however, by this circumstance, Alberoni wrote to the regent, to offer him his services against Spain, but his highr ness disdained to return any answer.

The cardinal’s disgrace happened in 1720, and he retired to Parma for some time, till he was summoned by the pope to attend a consistory, in which his conduct was to be examined by some of the members of the sacred college, respecting a correspondence he was supposed to have kept up with the Grand Signior; and he was sentenced to be confined one year in the Jesuits college at Rome. After this, he returned to Parma, near which city he founded, at a very great expence, an establishment for the instruction of young men destined for the priesthood. In the disastrous campaign of 1746, the buildings of this academy were destroyed by the three armies that were in the neighbourhood: and as the cardinal was not supposed to have been over delicate in procuring the means by which his establishment was to have been supported, his countrymen, did not appear to express much dissatisfaction at the demolition of it. He soon after this went to Rome, and was made legate of Romana by pope Clement XII. He died at Rome in 1752, at the age of 87 years, having preserved entire to the last, the powers of his mind and of his body. In the account given of his old age, by the editor of the Dictionnaire Historique, he is said to have been very chatty in conversation, and talked in so lively and so agreeable a manner, that it made even the verv curious facts he had to tell more interesting to those who heard them. His stories were interlarded with French, Spanish, or Italian, as the circumstances required. He was continually applying some maxim of Tacitus, in Latin, to corroborate his own observations, or to support those of others. His general topics of conversation were, the campaigns in which he attended M. de Vendome, his ministry in Spain, or the common political events of the day. He was rather impatient of contradiction, and expected that in argument or in narration the company should defer to him.

From the same authority, we shall conclude this article with two anecdotes, which, although different in their kind, are highly characteristic of the humorous pride and turbulent spirit of this statesman. When the marshal de Maillebois commanded the French troops at Parma, in 1746, Alberoni waited upon him concerning some business, but was refused admittance to him by his secretary, who told him the marshal was engaged in some affairs of importance, and could not see him. “Mon ami,” replied the cardinal, very indignantly, and opening the door of the marshal’s apartment at the same time, “sachez que M. de Vendome me recevoit sur la chaise percee.”

When he was legate of Romagna, and at the age of seventy, he endeavoured to bring the little republic of San Marino, which was near his government, under the dominion of the pope. He had intrigued so successfully with some of the principal inhabitants, that the day was fixed on which these republicans were to swear allegiance to the sovereign under whose protection they had put themselves, On the day appointed, Alberoni rode up to the mountain with his suite, and was received at the door of the principal church by the priests and the chief inhabitants of the place, and conducted to his seat under a canopy, to hear high mass and Te Deum sung (a ceremony usual in all Catholic countries upon similar occasions). Unluckily, however, for him, the mass began, as probably is usual in that republic, with the word Libertas (liberty). This word had such an effect upon the minds of the hearers, who began then, for the first time perhaps, to recollect that they were about to lose the thing itself, that they fell upon the cardinal and his attendants, drove them out of the church, and made them descend the very steep mountain of San Marino with great rapidity; and the popes ever after left the inhabitants of San Marino to their old form of government. This singular event took place in the year 1740, and was communicated to Mr. Seward by general Paoli. A bon mot of Benedict XIV. on the occasion was current in every mouth.“Alberoni is like a glutton, who, after having eaten a large salmon, cannot help casting a wistful eye at a minnow.” The “Testament Politique” of cardinal Alberoni, collected from his memoirs and letters, was published at Lausanne in 1753, but is a compilation of no authority, and was written by Maubert de Gouvest. His life, to the year 1719, was published by John Rousset, translated from the Spanish into French, and in the same year was translated into English, and published in London.

, a Lutheran divine, born, according to some, in Weteraw, or, according to others, at a small village near Francfort on the Main, studied divinity at Wittemberg, and became one of the most zealous adherents of Luther, who had a great friendship for him. He was for some time preacher to Joachim II. elector of Brandenburgh, but on a dispute respecting the revenues of the clergy, he lost that situation, and travelled intw various places, maintaining the doctrines of the reformation. In 1548 he was a preacher at Magcleburgh; but the Interim, proposed by Charles V. and fatal to so many of the Protestant clergy, oblige'd him to leave that place, and reside in a private station at Hamburgh. He was afterwards appointed &uperintendant-general of New Brandenburgh, in Mecklenburgh, where he died May J, 1553. He collected from the book, written by Albizzi (See Albizzi), of the conformities of St. Francis with Jesus Christ, the most remarkable absurdities and follies, and published them under the title of the “Alcoran of the Cordeliers.” He printed this collection in German, in the year 1531, without name of place or printer; and again in Latin at Wittemberg, in 1542 4, and called the Alcoran, because the Franciscans of his time paid as much veneration to the conformities as the Turks do to their alcoran. Luther honoured the compilation of his disciple with a preface. Conrad Baudius augmented it with a second book, translated it into French, and published it in 1556, one vol. 12mo; afterwards at Geneva, in 1560, in 2 vols. 12 mo. The last edition of this satirical work is that of Amsterdam in 1734, in 3 vols. 12mo, with copper-plates. There is also of this Albert, “Judicium de Spongia Erasmi, Roterodami;” and several other pieces in Latin and German, particularly a collection of forty-nine fables, called “The book of Wisdom and Virtue,” Francfort, 1579, 8 vo, in German verse. His satirical turn pervades all his writings.

, an abbe of the cloister of St. Mary at Stade, in the thirteenth century, and supposed to be an Italian by those writers who have mistaken him for Albert of Pisa. The monks of Stade living in great disorder, their abbe went to Rome, and obtained a bull against them; but this not producing any good effect, he joined the order of the Franciscans. He wrote in Latin, a “Chronicle,” from the creation to the year 1256, to which Andre Hoier added a supplement, bringing it down to the year 1316. It was published at Helmstadt, in 1587, 4to, by Reiner Reineck, with notes.

, a mathematician and poet, of the thirteenth century, was a gentleman of Provence, and born in the environs of Gap, from which circumstance he was surnamed Gapencois. He resided a long time at Sisteron, where he died. Others writers say, that he was of Tarascon, of the family of Malespine; bnt perhaps he only lived in the latter of these towns. He was equally devoted to polite literature and to the fair sex, and composed several poems in honour of his platonic mistress, the marchioness of Malespine, who was the most accomplished lady of Provence in that age. He wrote also some treatises on mathematical subjects. It is said that he died of grief, and that he delivered his poems to a friend, in order to be presented to his favourite marchioness; but this friend sold them tp Faber d‘Uzes, a lyric poet, who published them as his own. When the fraud was discovered, d’Uzes was seized, and underwent the punishment of whipping for his plagiarism, agreeably to the law established by the emperors against that crime, but which, unfortunately for authors, has been repealed in all countries.

, professor of Divinity in the university of Leyden, was born 1698, at Asse in Holland. After the example of Eisner, Raphelius, and the celebrated Lambert Bos, who had been his tutors at the university of Franeker, and of some other divines who have been called sacred philologians, he collected from prophane authors all the parallel passages in favour of the Greek phrases in the New Testament, with a view to defend the style of the evangelists and apostles against those critics who maintain that it is barbarous and full of Hebraisms. The result of his labours he published in 1725, under the title of “Observationes Philologicæ in sacros Novi Feederis libros,” 8vo, Leyden; and encouraged by the reputation he derived from this work, he next published “Periculum criticum in quo loca quædam cum V. ac N. T. tum Hesychii et aliorum, illustrantur, vindicantur, emendantur,” Leyden, 1727, 8vo. In this he displayed an uncommon acquaintance with the Greek lexicographers and grammarians, and some years after conceived a design of a new edition of Hesychius. While making collections for this undertaking, Fabricius sent him an unpublished glossary of the words of the New Testament, which he thought worthy of publication by itself, with a comment and some critical pieces. It appeared accordingly in 1735, under the title “Glossarium Græcum in sacros N. T. libros. Accedunt miscellanæ critica in glossas nomicas, Suidam, Hesychium, et index auctorum ex Photii lexico inedito,” Leyden, 8vo. Ten years after, in 1746, the first volume of his edition of Hesychius made its appearance, and fully, gratified the expectations of the learned world. He had arrived at the letter K in the second volume, when he was attacked by the cholic of Poitou, and although restored ia some measure by the waters of Aix-la-Chapelle, he was obliged to desist from his labours for about three years. He then resumed them, but the manuscript was left unfinished at his death, which was occasioned by the erysipelas, Aug. 13, 1762. The Hesychius was afterwards completed by Rhunkenius, Leyden, 1766. This is the best edition, and is thought by some critics to be one of the best edited books the learned world can boast.

, adominican and provincial of his order, was born at Bologna in 1479, and died in 1552. He wrote in Italian, 1. “Historic di Bologna, deca e libro primo deca secunda sino all' anno 1253,” Bologna, 1541, 4to. The second and third books were not published until long after his death, by F. Lucio Caccianemici, who added two supplements, 1590 and 1591, 4to. 2. “Cronica delle principali Famiglie Bolognesi, &c.” Vincenza, 1592, 4to. 3. “Descrizione di tutta l'Italia,” printed at Bologna in his life-time, fol. 1550, and reprinted, Venice, 1551 and 1553, 1561, 1581, and 1588. This work, so often published, is replete with curious facts, but the author has shewn less judgment in adopting the fables of Annius of Viterbo. 4. In Latin, “De Viris illustribus ordinis praedicatorum, libri sex in unum congesti,” Bologna, 1517, fol. 5. “Dialriba de increments Domini Venetæ,” and “De claris viris reipublicse Venetæ,” which are printed in Contarini’s VenetianRepublic, ed. 2, Leiden, 1628.

Among the moral works of Alberti, written in Latin, are, 1. his dialogue, entitled, “Momus, de Principe,” of which there were two editions at Rome in 1520. 2. “Trivia, sive de causis senatoriis, &c.” Basil, 1538, 4to. Cosimo Bartoli, who translated into Italian most of the works of Albertij has made the fifth and sixth books of the Momus from his treatise “De Jure,” or On the administration of justice. He composed an hundred “Fables,” or Apologues, and a poem, entitled “Hecatomphile,” on the art of love, which was translated by Bartoli into Italian, 1568, and into French in 1534 and 1584. There are extant many other writings by Alberti on philosophy, mathematics, perspective, and antiquities. He also wrote some Italian poems, in which he wished to introduce the Latin rythm, but in this he has not been successful. His writings, however, on the arts, are in highest estimation. He wrote a treatise on sculpture, and another on painting “De Pictura, prestantissima et nunquam satis laudata arte, &c.” Basil, 1540; printed likewise at Leyden by the Elzevirs, in 1649. The work from which he derives most reputation is his treatise on architecture, “De re aidificatoria,” in ten books, which was not published until after his death, in 1485, by his brother Bernard. It was translated into Italian by Peter Lauro, Venice, 1549, and in 1550 by Bartoli, with wood-cuts. A beautiful edition was also published in London, 1726, 3 vols. fol. by James Leoni, in Italian and English, with fine copper-plates. The last edition, that of Bologna, 1782, fol. contains the treatise before mentioned. Alberti died probably in 1485, or as Tiraboschi thinks, in 1472; and was buried in his family-vault in the church of St. Croix. He was indefatigable in study and business; in his temper amiable and conciliating, and extremely liberal to the merits of other artists. Politian, in the dedication of his work on architecture to Lorenzo de Medici, bestows the highest encomiums on him, and attributes to him the discovery of a great variety of curious mechanical inventions; and Vasari gives him the invention of the camera obscura; but it is more certain that we owe to him the optical machine for exhibiting drawings so as to imitate nature.

, the pupil of Jerome Fabricius at Padua, was born at Nuremberg, in 1540, and became professor of medicine at Wittemberg. He may be joined with Vesalius, Eustachius, and others who founded the new school of anatomy, and himself made several important discoveries in the structure of the ear, the eye, &c. His “Historia plerarumque humani corporis partium membratim scripta,” Wittemberg, 1583, 8vo, and his “Tres Orationes,” Norimberg, 1585, 8vo, are still in considerable estimation, on account of the many excellent observations they contain on questions of physiology and the materia medica. He died at Dresden in 1600.

, professor of divinity at Leipsic, was born in 1635, at Lehna in Silesia, and died at Leipsic in 1697. He wrote a great many controversial treatises against Puffendorf, Thomasius, the Cartesians, Cocceians, and the adversaries of the Augsburgh communion, especially Bossuet and count Leopold de Collonitsch, bishop of Wienerisch-Nenstadt. Alberti attacked also the orthodoxy of the pious Spener, the Fenelon of the Lutheran church, but who has been censured for his leaning too ranch to the pietists and mystics. Among his writings, which have been most favourably received and frequently reprinted, we may notice his “Compendium Juris naturae,” against Puffendorff, and his “Interesse prsecipuarum religionum Christian.” He also wrote two curious dissertations, “De fide hsereticis servanda,” Leipsic, 1662, 4to. Adelung, who has given a list of his works, says that his German poems are not bad, if we consider the imperfections of that language, and the false taste which prevailed in his time.

In 1274, after he had preached the crusades in Germany and Bohemia, by order of the pope, he assisted at a general council held at Lyons, and returned thence to his favourite residence at Cologn, where he died in 1280, leaving a greater number of works than any philosopher before his time had ever written. Peter Jammi, a dominican, collected as many as he could procure, and published them in 1651, Lyons, 21 vols. fol. We have nowhere a complete catalogue of his works. The largest is in the first volume of the “Scriptores ordinis Priedicatorum,” by Quetif and Echard, and extends to twelve folio pages. Many pieces which have been erroneously attributed to him, have no doubt swelled this catalogue, but when these are deducted, enough remains to prove the vast fertility or his pen. In the greater part of his works he is merely a commentator on Aristotle, and a compiler from the Arabian writers, yet he every where introduces original discussions and observations, some of which may yet be thought judicious. He treats on philosophy in all its branches, and although he does not erect a system of his own, a very complete body of the Aristotelian doctrines maybe found in his writings, which of late have been studied and analysed by Brucker, in his “History of Philosophy;” by Buhle in his “Lehrbuch der Gesch. der Philosophic,” vol. V.; and especially by Tiedman, who gives a very luminous and complete analysis of Albert’s system, in his “History of Speculative Philosophy,” vol. V. Albert was a very bad Greek scholar, and read Aristotle, &c. only in the Latin translations, but he was better acquainted with the Arabian writers and rabbis. In divinity, Peter Lombard was his guide and model. His wish was to reconcile the Nominalists with the Realists, but he had not the good fortune to please either. His treatises on speculative science are written in the abstract and subtle manner of the age, but those on natural subjects contain some gems, which would perhaps, even in the present age, repay the trouble of searching for them. It is remarked by Brucker, that the second age of the scholastic philosophy, in which Aristotelian metaphysics, obscured by passing through the Arabian channel, were applied with wonderful subtlety to the elucidation of Christian doctrine, began with Albert and ended with Durand.

, a native of Bolene in the comtat Venaissin, was born in 1590, and entered the order of the Jesuits at the age of sixteen. After having taught the languages for seven years, he studied divinity, which he afterwards taught, with philosophy, for twelve years, and was successively rector of the colleges of Avignon, Aries, Grenoble, and Lyons. He died at Aries, Octobers, 1659. He wrote, 1. “Eloges historiques des Cardinaux Francais et etrangers, mis en parallele,” Paris, 1644, 4to, a superficial work, of which father Le Long mentions an edition in 1653, with the additional lives of the cardinals de Berulle, Richelieu, and Rochefoucault. 2. “L'Anti-Theophile paroissial,” Lyons, 1649, 12mo. Bonaventure Bassee, a capuchin, had published at Antwerp, in 1635, his “Theophilus Parochialis,” and Benoit Puys, the curate of St. Nizier at Lyons, gave a translation of it in 1649, in which he professed to have undertaken this labour as an answer to those who declaimed against performing and attending mass in parishes; and when Albi’s Anti-Theophile appeared, answered him in a work entitled “Reponse Chretienne.” On this Albi wrote, 3, “Apologie pour l'Anti-Theophile paroissial,” Lyons, 1649, under the feigned name of Paul de Cabiac. The following year these two adversaries became reconciled. 4. A translation from the Latin of father Alexander of Rhodes, of the “History of Tunquin, and the progress of the Gospel there from 1627 to 1646,” Lyons, 1651, 4to, a very curious work, but heavy in point of style. 5. The Lives of various pious persons, and some religious pieces, of which Niceron has given a catalogue in vol. XXXIII.

, a Latin poet, who lived under Augustus and Tiberius, about thirty-five years before the Christian tera. He wrote elegies, epigrams, and a poem on Germanicus’s voyage to the north. There are, however, only extant, an elegy addressed to Livia on the death of her son Drusus; another on the death of Maecenas, but so inferior in elegance to the former, that some critics have thought it did not come from the same pen; and a third, entitled “The last words of Maecenas,” which was usually found joined to the elegy on his death, until Scaliger discovered they were distinct pieces. Le Clerc, under the assumed name of Theodore Goralle, published an edition of these fragments of Albinovanus, with the notes of Scaliger, Heinsius, &c. Amsterdam, 1703, 8vo, and has adopted Scaliger’s opinion respecting the last mentioned poem, that it consisted of the actual last words of Maecenas versified. There is an other edition of these fragments, with critical notes and a philological index, by J. C. Bremer, Helmstadt, 8vo. The only fragment that remains of the voyage of Germanicus has been preserved by Seneca. It represents the dangers which threatened the prince and his soldiers on a sea Bo little known to the Romans. Seneca prefers it to all other poems on the same subject, nor is Martial less warm in his praises of Albinovanus. Ovid, who was very intimate with him, congratulates himself, that in all his disIgrace (by banishment, Ex Ponto. lib. iv. ep. x.) he preserved the friendship of Albinovanus. We must not, however, confound him, as Dacier has done, with another Albinovanus, mentioned by Horace in the Art of Poetry, as a plagiarist.

, an eminent physician, whose proper name was Weiss, was born at Dessau, in the province of Anhalt, in 1653, and was the son of a burgomaster of that town. He studied first at Bremen, and afterwards at Leyden. In 1676, after taking his doctor’s degree in medicine, he travelled in Flanders, France, and Lorraine, and returned, in 1681, to the possession of a professor’s chair at Francfort on the Oder. In his mode of teaching he discovered those talents and that penetration, of which he exhibited some proofs while a student, and soon rose to wealth and distinction. He was appointed physician to the successive electors of Brandenburgh, who bestowed many honours upon him, and among other marks of their favour, gave him a prebend of Magdeburgh, exempting him, at the same time, from the duties of the place; but this he resigned, as the possession of so rich a preferment, under such circumstances, might give offence to his brethren. For a long time the obligations which these princes conferred prevented Albinus from accepting the many offers made to him by the universities of Europe; but at length, in 1702, he went to Leyden, where he was professor until his death in 1721. Carrere, in his “Bibl. de Medicine,” gives a list of twenty-two medical works by Albinus, among which are, 1. “De corpusculis in sanguine contends.” 2. “De Tarantula mira.” 3. “De Sacro Freyenwaldensium fonte,” &c. The illustrious Boerhaave pronounced his eloge, which was afterwards printed, and contains an account of his life, to which this article is indebted.

, also called Bartholomew of Pisa, was born in the fourteenth century at Rivano in Tuscany, and was of the order of the Franciscans, or Friars minorites; and derived much fame in the eyes of his brethren by a work in Latin, on the “Conformity of St. Francis with Jesus Christ,” which he presented to the chapter of his order in 1399. (See Albert, Erasmus.) The impiety of this work may be partly guessed from the title; but as Tiraboschi has thought proper to blame the Protestants who either answered it seriously, or turned it into ridicule, and according to him raised a clamour against the friars, who could not be supposed responsible for the act of an individual, it may be necessary to remind the readers of that learned historian, that the friars did in fact take upon them a very high degree of responsibility. They not only bestowed the highest praise on Albizzi; but after receiving his book in a full chapter, the representatives of the whole order, they presented him with a complete dress which St. Francis wore in his life-time. This foolish book, which not only raises St. Francis above all other saints, but impiously compares him with the Saviour, was first printed at Venice, fol. without date, or printer’s name. The second edition, which Dr. Clarke calls the first, was printed at Milan, 1510, a folio of 256 leaves in the black letter, and sells on the continent at from ₤5. to ₤20. The third was also printed at Milan, 1513, in the same form, and type, with a new preface by Mapelli, a Franciscan. All these are uncommonly scarce, and hardly ever to be found complete. Jeremy Bucchi, another Franciscan, published a new edition at Bologna in 1590, in which he omitted many passages, and added the lives of the illustrious men of the order of St. Francis; but as this did not sell, the first two leaves were cancelled, and it was again published in 1620, as a new work. It contains the approbation of the chapter-general, dated Aug. 2, 1399. This work, with more alterations and omissions, was again published at Cologn in 1632, under the title “Antiquitates Franciscanae, sive Speculum vitae B. Francisci et sociorum,” &c. The last we shall notice is that of father Valentine Maree, ' or Marcus, a reco^let, or reformed Franciscan, entitled “Traite de conformites du disciple avec le maitre, c'est a dire, de S. Francois avec J. C. en tout le mysteres de sa naissance, vie, passion, mort, &c.” Liege, 1658, 4to. Although in this many extravagances are retrenched, there is yet enough to demonstrate its folly. Some other works, sermons, &c. have been attributed to Albizzi, which are little known.

, marquis de Fronsac, seigneur de St. Andre, marechal of France, and one of the greatest captains of the sixteenth century, better known by the name of marechal de St. Andre, descended from an industrious and ancient family in Lyonnois. He gained the esteem of the dauphin, who, when he came to the crown by the name of Henry II. loaded him with riches and honours, made him marechal of France^ 1547, and afterwards first gentleman of his bed-chamber. He had already displayed his courage at the siege of Boulogne, and the battle of Cerisolles. He was then, it is said, chosen to carry the collar of his order to Henry VIII. king of England, who decorated him with that of the garter; but we do not find his name among the knights of that order, and it is more likely that he was the bearer of the insignia of the garter to Henry II. of France, from our Edward VI. In 1552, he had the command of the army of Champagne, and contributed much to the taking of Marienberg in 1554. He destroyed Chateau-Cambresis, and acquired great reputation at the retreat of Quesnoy; was at the battle of Renti; was taken prisoner at that of St. Quintin 1557, and bore an active part in the peace of Cambresis. He afterwards joined the friends of the duke ofGuise, and was killed by Babigny de Mezieres, with a pistol, at the battle of Dreux, 1562. He was handsome, noble, brave, active, insinuating, and much engaged in the important transactions of his time. Brantome asserts, that he had a presentiment of his death, before the battle of Dreux, He had only one daughter by his marriage with Margaret de Lustrac, who died very young in the monastery of LongChamp, at the time when her marriage was agreed upon with Henry of Guise.

, a descendant of the preceding, was born at Lyons in 1753, and died at Paris, 1789. He passed the greater part of his life in travelling and writing, and was a member of various academies. His works are: 1. “Dialogue 'entre Alexandre et Titus,” 8vo; in which he pleads the cause of humanity against those who are called heroes and conquerors. 2. “Observations d‘un citoyen sur le nouveau plan d’impositions,” 1774, 8vo. 3. “Œuvres diverses, lues le jour de sa reception a l'academie de Lyon,” 1774, 8vo. 4. “Eloge de Quesnoy,” 1775, 8vo; since inserted in the “Necrologe des Hommes celebres.” His attachment to the economists induced him to pay this respect to one of the chief of those writers. 5. “Eloge de Chamousset,” 1776, 8vo. 6. “La Paresse,” a poem; pretended to be translated from the Greek of Nicander, 1777, 8vo. 7. “CEuvres diverses,” 1778, 12mo; consisting of fables, verses, a memoir addressed to the economical society of Berne, and a letter to a suffragan bishop. 8. “Discours,” &c. on the question whether the Augustan age ought to be preferred to that of Louis XIV. as to learning and science, 1784, 8vo. This he determines in favour of the age of Louis; but a severe criticism having appeared in the Journal de Paris, he published an answer, dated Neufchatel, but printed at Paris. 9. “Discours politiques, historiques, et critiques, sur quelques Gouvernments de l'Europe,” 1779, &c. 3 vols. 8vo. The governments are Holland, England, Germany, Italy, Spain; and his remarks are chiefly valuable where he treats of commerce, agriculture, and the other subjects which the French cecjpnomists studied. In matters of government, legislation, manners, &c. he is jejune, superficial, and confused; sometimes through prejudice, and sometimes through wilful ignoranoe. This is particularly striking in his accounts of the constitutions of England and Holland. His account of Spain is perhaps the best. 10. “Discours prononcé a la seance de la societé d'agriculture de Lyon,” 1785, 8vo. 11. “Eloge de Count de Gebelin,” 1785, 8vo. This learned Protestant being denied Christian burial, according to the laws then established in France, Count d'Albon caused him to be buried in his garden, at Franconville, in the valley of Montmorency, and erected a handsome monument to his memory. These gardens, which were laid out in the English fashion, are described in a set of nineteen plates published in 1780; and they are also described by Dulaure in his “Curiosites des environs de Paris.” His numerous writings, his attachment to Quesnoy, and his liberality to count de Gebelin, procured him a considerable share of celebrity during his life, although his character was tinged with some personal oddities, and peculiarities of opinion, which frequently excited the pleasantry of his contemporaries. It is given as an instance of his vanity, that when he had erected some buildings for the accommodation of the frequenters of a fair, he inscribed on the front: “Gentium commodo, Camillus III.”

, an eminent Spanish statesman and cardinal, of the fourteenth century, descended from the royal families of Leon and Arragon, was born at Cuen^a, and educated at Toulouse. Alphon­$us XI. appointed him, in succession, almoner of his court, and archdeacon of Calatrava; and lastly, although he was then very young, promoted him to the archbishopric of Toledo. He accompanied the king of Castille in his expedition against the Moors of Andalusia, in which his rank of archbishop did not prevent him from carrying arms; and he first displayed his bravery in saving the king’s life m the hottest onset of the battle of Tarifa. Alphonsus, in return, knighted him, and in 1343 gave him the command at the siege of Algesiras; but on the death of this prince, he lost his influence with his successor, Peter the cruel, whom he reproved for his irregularities, and who would have sacrificed him to the resentment of his mistress Maria de Padilla, if he had not made his escape to Avignon. Here the pope Clement VI. admitted him of his council, and made him a cardinal; on which he resigned his archbishopric, saying, that he should be as much to blame in keeping a wife with whom he could not live, as Peter king of Castille, in forsaking his wife for a mistress. Innocent VI. the successor of Clement, sent him to Italy in 1353, both as pope’s legate and as general, to reconquer the ecclesiastical states which had revolted from the popes during the residence of the latter at Avignon. This commission Albornos executed in the most satisfactory manner, either by force or intrigue; but in the midst of his career, he was recalled in 1357, and another commander sent on the expedition. He, however, having been unfortunate, the pope saw his error, and again appointed Albornos, who completed the work by securing the temporal power of the popes over those parts of Italy which have been, down to the present times, known by the name of the Ecclesiastical States. Having thus achieved his conquest, Albornos, as a minister of state, rendered himself for many years very popular. To Bologna he gave a new constitution, and founded in that city the magnificent Spanish college; and for the other parts of the ecclesiastical dominions, he enacted laws which remained in force for four centuries after. At length he announced to pope Urban V. that he might now enter and reign at Rome without fear, and was receiving him in pomp at Viterbo, when the pope, forgetting for a moment the services Albornos had rendered to the holy see, demanded an account of his expenditure during his legation. Albornos immediately desired him to look into the court-yard of the palace, where was a carriage full of keys, telling him that with the money intrusted to him, he had made the pope master of all the cities and castles of which he now saw the keys. The pope on this embraced and thanked him. He then accompanied Urban to Rome, but returned afterwards to Viterbo, where he died August 24, 1367, regretted by the people, and by the pope; who, finding himself embarrassed with new cares, more than ever wanted his advice. Albornos’s body was removed to Toledo, at his own request, and interred with great pomp. He wrote a book on the constitutions of the Roman church, which was printed at Jesi, in 1475, and is very rare. His will also was printed, with this injunction, characteristic of the man and the age he lived in, that the monks should say 60,000 masses for his soul. His political life was written by Sepulveda, under the title “Historia de hello administrate in Italia per annos 15, et confecto abÆg. Albornotio,” Bologna, 1623, fol.

, a celebrated Arabian surgeon; called also Albucasa, Albuchasius, Buchasis, Bulcaris-Ga-Laf, Alsaharavius, and Azaravius, but whose proper name was Aboul-Casem-Khalaf-Ben-Abbas, was a native of Alzahrah, a city of Spain. He is supposed to have lived about the year 1085; but Dr. Freind thinks he is not so ancient, as in treating of wounds, he describes the arrows of the Turks, a nation which scarcely made any figure until the middle at least of the twelfth century. From what he says of surgery being in a manner extinct in his time, the same historian supposes that he lived long after Avicenna; as in the time of the latter, surgery was in good repute. Albucasis, however, revived it, and is the only one among the ancients who has described the instruments in each operation, and explained the use of them; and the figures of these instruments are in both the Arabic manuscripts now in the Bodleian library (Marsh, N 54, and Huntington, N 156.) The use of the cautery was very common with him, and he appears to have ventured upon incisions of the most hazardous kind. In Dr. Freind’s history is a very elaborate analysis of his works and practice. His works, collected under the title of “Al-Tacrif,” or the method of practice, have been translated and often printed in Latin, Venice, 1500, and 1520, folio; Augsburgh, 1519; Strasburgh, 1532; and Basil, 1541.

, or Abou-Machar, a noted Arabian astrologer and philosopher, was born at Balkh in the Khorasan, about the year 805 or 806. For a long time he was addicted to the Mahometan traditions, and a determined enemy to philosophy; but in his forty-seventh year he began to study the sciences, and acquired the reputation of an astronomer and astrologer; and, although he is now principally known by his writings on astrology, he cannot be refused a place among the most distinguished easterns, who have made astronomical observations. The table called Zydj Abou-Machar was calculated from his observations; but the work from which he derives his principal reputation, is his treatise on astrology, entitled “Thousands of years;” in which, among other singular positions, he maintains that the world was created when the seven planets were in conjunction in the first degree of Aries, and will end when they shall assemble in the last degree or Pisces. He died in 885. His astrological work was published at Venice, 1506, 8vo; with the title “De magnis conjunctionibus, annorum revolutionibus, ac eorum perfectionibus;” but his “Introductio ad Astronomiam” was printed before this in 4to,. Augsburgh, 1489; and reprinted at Venice, 1490, 1506, and 1515, 4to.

, surnamed the Great, and one of the most illustrious characters of the Portuguese nation, was born at Lisbon in 1452, of a family who traced their origin to the kings of Portugal, and in an age remarkable for the heroism, the discoveries, and the conquests of Portugal. The Portuguese navigators had already subdued the greater part of the west coast of Africa, and were bent on extending their conquests to India. D' Albuquerque was accordingly appointed viceroy of the new settlements in Asia, and the commander of a squadron destined for that quarter, of six ships, which set sail 1503; and the same year three more were sent under his brother, Francis Albuquerque. The latter arrived in India some time before the other, with two ships only, the third having perished by the way. Arriving at the islands of Anchedive, he found some Portuguese officers, from whom he learned the distressed situation of their ally Trimumpar, king of Cochin, and sailed to Vipian, where the king then was. The arrival of the Portuguese so alarmed the garrison who then had possession of Cochin, that they precipitately left it. Here one of the ships that had sailed from Portugal with Alphonso, joined him. Francis restored Trimumpar to his capital, and subdued some islands near it. Having rendered the king such essential service, he desired leave to build a fort as a mutual defence against their enemies: this was granted, and the fort immediately begun. Four days after it began, Alphonso joined him, and with the additional number of hands he brought with him it was soon completed.

A consultation was then held among the Portuguese officers, when it was resolved to etttack some towns belonging to the prince of Repelsin, about twenty miles distant from Cochin. The Portuguese set out in boats, and surprised the towns, but were soon after attacked by a large army, and obliged to retreat. They returned to Cochin, and the same night made an attack on some other villages, when Alphonso being advanced with a fresh party, was attacked by some of the enemy who lay in ambush, and in this dangerous situation signalized himself by his courage, having fought with great intrepidity till break of day, when his brother Francis came to his assistance. The Portuguese then put the enemy to flight, pursued, and slew a great number of them. The fame of the Portuguese being spread everywhere, Alphonso Albuquerque sailed to Coulon to load three ships, which he completed without opposition, made an alliance with the people, and returned to Cochin. On his return, he found the Zamorin ready to enter into a treaty of peace with him, which was concluded. The two brothers soon after sailed to Cananor, and thence proceeded for Portugal. Alphonso arrived safe at Lisbon; but it is most probable Francis perished at sea, as he was never more heard of.

In 1508, Alphonso was appointed to succeed to the government of India, and dispatched with five ships; he sailed in company with Cugna, another Portuguese officer. Having plundered and taken some towns on the coast of Arabia, they sailed to Zocatora, and made themselves masters of the fort there. After which Cugna returned to Portugal, and Albuquerque, who now acted alone, immediately formed the design of attacking Ormuz island, situated at the mouth of the Persian Gulph, and subject to a king of its own, who had extended his dominions over several cities in Arabia. With a small army of 470 men, he proceeded along the Arabian coast, took many towns, and proceeded to the island itself. He found several ships fitted for war in the harbour; these it was determined to burn. However, he first offered peace to the king, who entered into a treaty, with a view to gain time until a reinforcement arrived. The expected force came, and an engagement ensued, in which the Portuguese were victorious. Albuquerque then pressed the city, and the king, finding no resource, solicited peace, on condition of becoming tributary to the king of Portugal, which was agreed to. Albuquerque went on shore, had an interview with the king; and, knowing the perfidy of the Arabians, began to build a fortress. While this was carrying on, some deputies arrived from the king of Persia to demand tribute. of the king of Ormuz. The latter consulted Albuquerque., who with great spirit told the deputies that his master paid no tribute, but arms. Albuquerque was, however, forced to desist by the perfidy of his officers, and to repair on board his fleet. He then renewed the war; but receiving a letter from the governor (AJmeed) blaming his conduct, he proceeded for India; when, after some hesitation, Almeed resigned the government to him, and sailed to Europe.

, a celebrated Roman orator in the time of Augustus, was a native of Novarre, and advanced to the office of sedile, but he left it on account of an insult offered to him by some persons who had lost their suit. He then went to Rome, where he associated himself v.-ith Munacius Plancus, the orator, but rivalship soon parted them, and he formed a separate auditory, and at length ventured to plead causes. In this office, he met with a disgrace which obliged him to renounce it. In the warmth of pleading he one day made use of an expression which he meant only as a nourish: “Swear,” said he to his adversary, “by the ashes and by the memory of your fathers, and you shall gain your cause.” After he had amplified this thought, the advocate on the opposite side coolly replied, “We accept the condition;” and the judges admitting the oath, Albutius lost his cause, and his temper, at least, if not his credit. We hear no more of him, until he returned to Novarre, old and afflicted with an abscess, when he called the people together, and explained to them in a long speech the reasons that hindered him from desiring to live, and so starved himself to death. Seneca the father gives him the singular character of one who could neither bear nor offer an injury. A passage in Quintilian seems to intimate that he composed a “Treatise on Rhetorick.”

, an ancient lyric poet, was born at Mytilene, the capital of Lesbos, according to Eusebius, in the 44th olympiad, or in the year 604 B. C.; and was consequently the countryman and contemporary of Sappho, with whom he is said to have been violently enamoured. A verse in which he insinuated his passion, with her answer, is preserved in Aristotle, Rhet. lib. 1. cap. 9. He was born with a restless and turbulent disposition, and seemed at first inclined to adopt the profession of arms, which he preferred to every other pursuit. His house was filled with swords, helmets, shields, and cuirasses; but on his first essay in the field he shamefully fled, and the Athenians, after their victory, branded him with disgrace, by suspending his arms in the temple of Minerva at Sigseum. He made great pretensions to the love of liberty, but was suspected of harbouring a secret wish for its destruction. With his brothers, he first joined Pittacus, to expel Melanchrus, tyrant of Mytilene, and then took part with the malcontents to subvert the government of Pittacus, on whom he lavished the grossest epithets of personal abuse. At length he attacked Pittacus in a pitched battle, and his party being defeated, he became the prisoner of Pittacus, who generously gave him his life and liberty. After the failure of his political enterprizes he travelled into Egypt, but when he died is uncertain.

, a Spanish poet of the seventeenth century, who was born at Lisbon in 1599, and carried on the business of a merchant. Devoting his leisure hours to literature, he wrote a work entitled “Viridarium anagrammaticum,” and five “Novels,” which procured him, it is said, much reputation, not from their merit, but from their originality. In each of these novels, the author has contrived to get rid of one or other of the vowels: a is not to be found in the first, nor e in the second, &c. But this idle whim was not original, the same having been practised by Tryphiodorus, whom Addison so pleasantly ridicules as one of the lipogrammatists, or letterdroppers of antiquity. Moreri gives us the title of another work by this author, printed at Lisbon, 1664. “Psalteriurn quadruplex anagrammaticum, angelicum, immaculatum, Marianum, Deiparse dicatum, sexaginta anagrammata Latina complectens.” Alcala died Nov. 21, 1682.

, Alçazar, or Alcasar, (Louis D'), a Spanish Jesuit, was born at Seville in 1554, and entered among the Jesuits in 1569, against the will of his family, who were in possession of a large estate. After he had been a teacher of philosophy, he taught divinity at Cordova and at Seville, for abov e twenty years. M uch of his life was spent in endeavouring to explain the book of the Revelations, and his first volume on the subject, “Vestigatio arcani sensus in Apocalypsi,” is said to have been the result of twenty years’ study and investigation. This work was printed at Antwerp, fol. 1604 and 1619, and at Lyons, 1616, fol.; and is accounted one of the best commentaries which had been produced by any writer of the Romish church. It is said that Grotius was considerably indebted to it; but neither Grotius, nor any other writer has followed him in supposing that the prophecies of the Apocalypse have been accomplished to the twentieth chapter. Pursuing this investigation, however, his next work was a commentary on such parts of the Old Testament as have any connexion with the Apocalypse; this was published in 1631, Lyons, fol. under the title, “In eas veteris Testament! partes, quas respicit Apocalypsis, nempe Cantica Canticorum, Psahnos complures, multa Danielis aliorumque librorum capita, libri V.” There is a supplement to the first, on weights and measures, and to the second, on bad physicians. He died at Seville, June 16, 1613.

, a celebrated and learned lawyer, was the son of a rich merchant of Milan, according to Pancirolus, and born in that city in 1492. After having studied the liberal sciences under Janus Parrhasius at Milan, he attended the law-lectures of Jason at Pavia, and those of Charles Ruinus at Bologna. Then taking a degree in law in his twenty-second year, he followed his profession at the bar, in the city of Milan, till he was called to the law-chair by the university of Avignon. He discharged his office with so much capacity, that Francis I. thought he would be a very proper person to promote the knowledge of the law in the university of Bourges, and accordingly prevailed on him to remove thither in 1529; and the next year he doubled his salary, which before was six hundred crowns. Alciati acquired here great fame and reputation; he interspei’sed much polite learning in his explication of the law, and abolished that barbarous language, which had hitherto prevailed in the lectures and writings of the lawyers. Francis Sforza, duke of Milan, thought himself obliged to bring back to his native country a man who could do it so much honour; and this he compassed at last, by giving him a large salary and the dignity of a senator. Alciati accordingly went to teach the law at Pavia, but soon after removed to the university of Bologna, where he continued four years, and then returned to Pavia; from whence he went to Ferrara, being solicited thither by duke Hercules d'Este, who was desirous to render his university famous. It resumed its reputation under a professor so much followed; but at the end of four years Alciati left it, and returned to Pavia. Paul III. gave him an honourable reception as he passed by Ferrara, and offered him ecclesiastical preferment; but Alciati was contented with that of prothonotary, and would not give up his profession of the law. He seems to rejoice that he had refused Paul’s offers, in a letter to Paulus Jovius, whom the pope had a long time amused with fallacious promises: “I am very glad,” says he, “that I did not suffer myself to be deceived by this pope’s offers, who, under the promise of a great recompense, wanted to draw me to Rome.” The emperor created Alciati a count-palatin and a senator; and Philip, afterwards king of Spain, presented him with a golden chain as he passed by Pavia.

Alciati died at Pavia, on the 12th of January, 1550, being then in his 58th year. After the death of his mother, who died in a very advanced age, he intended to have employed his wealth in the foundation of a college; but, having received an affront from some insolent scholars, he dropped that design, and chose for his heir Francis Alciati, his nephew, a promising youth, whom he had brought up at his house. Mr.Teissier says, that Andrew Alciati passed his life in celibacy; but this is a mistake, as may be seen from a passage of a letter he wrote to his friend Francis Calvus, after he had withdrawn from Milan to Avignon. He was a man of unquestionable abilities and learning, but tainted with avarice, which often obscured the lustre of his reputation. He was very young when his talents began to attract the admiration of his countrymen. His “Paradoxes of Civil Law,” or an explanation of the Greek terms which occur in the Digest, was written in his fifteenth year, and published in his twenty-second. His works have been collected and published at Lyons, 1560, 5 vols. folio; at Basil, 1571, 6 vols. folio; and there also 1582, 4 vols. folio; Strasburgh, 1616, 4 vols. folio; Francfort, 1617, 4 vols. folio. So many editions of a work of this magnitude afford a striking proof of the reputation of Alciati. Some of the contents of these volumes have been printed separately, as his “notes on Tacitus,” and a “treatise on Weights and Measures;” but besides these he wrote, 1. “Responsa nunquam antehac edita,” Lyons, 1561; Basil, 1582, folio; published by his heir Francis Alciati. 2. “De Formula Romani Imperii,” Basil, 1559, 8vo. 3. “Epigrammata selecta ex anthologia Latine versa,” Basil, 1521, 8vo. 4. “Rerum patriae, seu Historise Mediolanensis libri quatuor,” 1625, 8vo, reprinted in Graevius’ Thesaurus. 5. “De Plautinorurn carminum ratione,” and “De Plautinis vocabulis Lexicon,” in an edition of Plautus, Basil, 1568, 8vo. 6. “Judicium de legum interpretibus parandis,” printed with Conrad Page’s treatise “Methodica juris traditio,” 1566, 8vo. 7. “Encomium Historiae,” 1530, 4to. 8. “Palma,” inserted in the “Amphitheatrum sapientiae Socraticae Dornavii.” 9. “Judiciarii processus compendium,” 1566, 8vo. 10. “Contra vitam monastic-am,” 1695, 8vo. II. “Notae in Epistolas familiares Ciceronis,” printed with Thierry’s edition of these epistles, Paris, 1557, folio. 12. “Twentyseven letters in ‘Gudii Epistolas,’” 1697, 4to. Perhaps the work for which he is now most generally known is his “Emblems,” highly praised by the elder Scaliger. Of these there have been various editions and translations. The best is that of Padua, 1661, 4to. The piece above noticed, “Contra vitam monasticam,” was addressed to Bernard Mattius, and shews that Alciati entertained the same notions with his friend Erasmus concerning the religious orders of the church. Mattius, to whom this treatise, or rather letter, is addressed, was a learned, modest, and ingenious man, who suddenly left his friends and his aged mother to embrace the monastic life; but whether Alciati’s persuasions were effectual is not known.

, a native of Milan, was one of those Italians who forsook their country in the sixteenth century, to join with the Protestant church; but afterwards explained away the mystery of the Trinity in such a manner as to form a new party, no less odious to the Protestants than to the Catholics. Alciati had borne arms. He began his innovations at Geneva, in concert with a physician named Blandrata, and Gribaud, a lawyer, with whom Valentine Gentilis associated himself. The precautions, however, that were taken against them, and the severity of the proceedings instituted against Gentilis, made the others glad to remove to Poland, where they professed their heresies with more safety and success, and where they were soon joined by Gentilis. It was indeed at Alciati’s request that the bailiff of Gex had released him out of prison. From Poland these associates went to Moravia; but Alciati retired to Dantzick, and died there in the sentiments of Socinus, although some report he died a Mahometan, which Bayle takes pains to refute. Of his Socinianism, however, there can bfe no doubt. He published “Letters to Gregorio Pauli,” 156-t, in defence of that heresy. Calvin and Beza speak of him as a raving madman.

, a native of Rome, and a Jesuit of great reputation for learning. Urban VIII. who highly esteemed him, thought him worthy of the rank of cardinal, but he died before that honour was conferred upon him, in 1651, leaving some curious materials for a history of the council of Trent, to which he gave the title of “Historic concilii Tridentini a veritatis hostibus evulgatae elenchus.” His object, which was countenanced by the pope, was to refute or answer father Paul Sarpi’s history of that celebrated council; and his collections were made use of, after his death, in a new history of the same by cardinal Pallavicino.

The first public affair of any material consequence in which he embarked, was soon after the peace, for fifty years was concluded between the Athenians and Lacedemonians. Some discontents still prevailed: the people of Athens had complied with the terms of the peace, but the Lacedemonians having taken and demolished the town of Panactus, made them very uneasy; these discontents were heightened by Alcibiades, now beginning to rival Nicias, who, with his party, at that time ruled in Athens. Alcibiades declaimed, that the Spartans were taking measures for humbling Argos, that they might afterwards attack the Athenians; he artfully put them in mind of Nicias having declined making a descent on Spacteria, and drew conclusions from thence very much against him. When the ambassadors from Sparta arrived, and were introduced into the senate, by Nicias, on their retiring, Alcibiades, as the old friend of their nation, invited them to his house, assured them of his friendship, and persuaded them to declare that they were not vested with full powers (although they had in the senate declared they were), to avoid making unreasonable concessions. When, therefore, they first appeared in the forum, Alcibiades addressed himself to the people, saying, “You, see, my countrymen, what credit ought to be given to these Lacedemonians, who deny to you to-day what they affirmed yesterday.” The people then refused to hear them.

Two years after, some dissentions taking place at Argos, Alcibiades sailed with a fleet of twenty ships into their territories, to assist his friends, and put an end to their disputes. To effect this, he caused three hundred of the inhabitants, who were suspected of favouring the Lacedemonians, to be seized and carried away. After this, he sailed to the island of Melos, which, although small and of inconsiderable force, had always acted with inflexible obstinacy against the Athenians. Alcibiades laid siege to it; but finding the siege attended with difficulties, he turned it into a blockade, and leaving a considerable body of forces there, returned to Athens; the place afterwards surrendered at discretion.

The fleet sailed; but they had not been long in Sicily before orders from Athens arrived, directing Alcibiades to return and take his trial; the whole city being in a confusion on the affair of defacing the Hermae. This was probably a scheme of the enemies of Alcibiades, to ruin the mighty interest, which his birth, fortune, and accomplishments had gained him in Athens: to effect their purpose, they also reported that he had entered into a conspiracy to betray the city to the Lacedemonians, and that he had persuaded the Argives to undertake something to their prejudice. It was therefore determined to put him to death on his return; but it being apprehended, that the attempt to arrest him in sight of the army might produce commotions, those who were sent to bring him home, were ordered to treat him with great decency, and not to discover by any means the severe resolution taken against him. They executed their commission very exactly, so that neither he nor his army, who were likewise accused, had any suspicion: but, in the course of the voyage, gathering from the seamen something of what was intended, and being informed that a person, out of fear of death, had acknowledged himself guilty, and impeached them, they wisely determined not to trust an enraged and superstitious multitude, but to provide for their own safety by withdrawing as soon as they had an opportunity: this offered quickly after; they escaped from their convoy, and retired to such parts of Greece as, out of hatred to Athens, were most likely to give them shelter.

, a philosopher of Crotona, the son of Perithus, was one of the disciples of Pythagoras, and flourished probably about 500 B. C. He acquired a high degree of reputatjon in the Italian school by his knowledge of nature, and his skill in medicine. He is said to have been the first person who attempted the dissection of a dead body; and in the course of his operations, he made some discoveries in the structure of the eye. The sura of his philosophical tenets, as far as they can be collected from scattered fragments, is this Natural objects, which appear multiform to men, are in reality two-fold intelligent natures, which are immutable; and material forms, which are infinitely variable. The sun, moon, and stars are eternal, and are inhabited by portions of that divine fire, which is the first principle in nature. The moon is in the form of a boat, and when the bottom of the boat is turned towards the earth, it is invisible. The brain is the chief seat of the soul. Health consists in preserving a due mean between the extremes of heat and cold, dryness and moisture.

, an ancient musician, and one of the early cultivators of lyric poetry, was a native of Sardis, and flourished about 670 B. C. Heraclides of Pontus assures us that he was a slave in his youth at Sparta, but that by his good qualities and genius, he acquired his freedom, and a considerable reputation in lyric poetry. He was consequently an excellent performer on the cithara, and, if he was not a flute player, he at least sung verses to that instrument; Clemens AleKandnnus makes him author of music for choral dances; and, according to Archytas Harmoniacus, quoted by Athenseus, Alcman was one of th first and most eminent composers of songs on love and gallantry. If we may credit Suidas, he was the first who excluded hexameters from verses that were to be sung to the Jyre, which afterwards obtained the title of lyric poems. And Ælian tells us, that he was one of the great musician! who were called to Lacedcemon, by the exigencies of the state, and that he sung his airs to the sound of the flute. All the evolutions in the Spartan army were made to the sound of that instrument; and as patriotic songs accompanied by it were found to be excellent incentives to public virtue, Alcman seems to have been invited to Sparta, in order to furnish the troops with such compositions. Alcman was not more remarkable for a musical genius, than for a voracious appetite, and Ælian numbers him among the greatest gluttons of antiquity. This probably brought on the morbus pediculosus, of which he died. His tomb was still to be seen at Lacedæmon, in the time of Pausanias. But nothing, except a few fragments, are now remaining of the many poems attributed to him by antiquity. These have been published by Stephens, among other lyric fragments, at the end of his edition of Pindar, 1560; and have been often reprinted.—There is said to have been another Alcman of Messina, also a lyric poet.

, an English physician of considerable celebrity as a practitioner, was the second son of David Alcock of Runcorn in Cheshire, by his wife Mary Breck, and was born in that place, Sept. 1707. He was initiated in reading and grammar by his parents, and afterwards placed at a neighbouring school, which he soon left upon some disgust. After however passing some time in idle rustic amusements, he was roused to a sense of duty, and resolved to return to school, and to qualify himself for the study of medicine, if his father would give up to him a small estate, about 50l. a year, with which he engaged to maintain himself. His father complying, he put himself under the care of his brother-in-law, Mr. Cowley, master of a public grammar-school in Lancashire, and after applying with enthusiasm to the Greek and Latin languages, mathematics, &c. he removed to Edinburgh, and went through the usual course of lectures in that medical school. Here the fame of Boerhaave was so often echoed by the professors, who had been his pupils, that Mr. Alcock felt an irresistible desire to complete his medical studies under him, and accordingly went to Leyden, where he benefited by the instructions, not only of that eminent teacher, but by those of his very learned contemporaries, Gaubius, Albinus, and Gravesand. He concluded his,studies there by taking the degree of M. D. in 1737; and the following year returned to England with a view to settle in some part of his native country.

, one of the fevr learned Englishmen of the eighth century, was born in the north of England, and educated at York, under the direction of archbishop Egbert, as we learn from his own letters, in which he frequently calls that great prelate his beloved master, and the clergy of York the companions of his youthful studies. As he survived the venerable Bede about seventy years, it is hardly possible that he could have received any part of his education under him, as some writers have asserted; nor does he ever call that great man his master, though he speaks of him with the highest veneration. It is not well known to what preferments he had attained in the church before he left England, although some say he was deacon of the church of York, and abhot of Canterbury. The occasion of his leaving his native country was, his being sent on an embassy by Offa, king of Mercia, to the emperor Charlemagne, who contracted so great an esteem and friendship for him, that he earnestly solicited, and at length prevailed upon him, to settle in his court, and become his preceptor in the sciences. Alcuinus accordingly instructed that great prince in rhetoric, logic, mathematics, and divinity; which rendered him one of his greatest favourites. He was treated with so much kindness and familiarity by the emperor, that the courtiers called him, by way of eminence, “the emperor’s delight.”

Charlemagne employed Alcuinus to write against the opinions of Felix, bishop of Urgel, who had revived something like the Nestorian heresy, by separating the humanity from the divinity of the Son of God; and Alcuinus shewed himself a master of his subject, and wrote in a very candid and moderate spirit. He also defended the orthodox faith against Felix, in the council of Fraucfort, in 794. This likewise he performed to the entire satisfaction of the emperor and council, and even to the conviction of Felix and his followers, who abandoned their errors. The emperor consulted chiefly with Alcuinus on all things relating to religion and learning, and, principally by his advice, founded an academy in the imperial palace, over which Alcuinus presided; and other academies were established in the chief towns of Italy and France, at his instigation. In France he may be reckoned a principal instrument in founding the universities of Paris, Tours, Fulden, Soisson, and many others.

After Alcuinus had spent many years in the most intimate familiarity with Charlemagne, he at length, with great difficulty, obtained leave to retire to his abbey of St. Martin’s, at Tours. Here he kept up a constant correspondence with the emperor, and the contents of their letters show their mutual love of religion and learning, and their anxiety to promote them in the most munificent manner. In one of these letters, which Dr. Henry has translated, there is a passage which throws some light on the learning of the times “The employments of your Alcuinus in his retreat are suited to his humble sphere; but they are neither inglorious nor unprofitable, I spend my time in the halls of St. Martin, in teaching some of the noble youths under my care the intricacies of grammar, and inspiring them with a taste for the learning of the ancients; in describing to others the order and revolutions of those shining orbs which adorn the azure vault of heaven; and in explaining to others the mysteries of divine wisdom, which are contained in the holy scriptures: suiting my instructions to the views and capacities of my scholars, that I may train up many to be ornaments to the church of God, and to the court of your imperial majesty. In doing this, I find a great want of several things, particularly of those excellent books in all arts and sciences, which I enjoyed in my native country, through the expence and care of my great master Egbert. May it therefore please your majesty, animated with the most ardent love of learning, to permit me to send some of our young gentlemen into England, to procure for us those books which we want, and transplant the flowers of Britain into France, that their fragrance may no longer be confined to York, but may perfume the palaces of Tours.” Mr. Warton, who in his History of Poetry gives some account f the learned labours of Alcuinus, endeavours to undervalue his acquirements. This, in an enlightened age like the present, is easy, but is scarcely candid or considerate. Alcuinus was one of the few who went beyond the learning of his age, and it is surely impossible to contemplate his superiority without veneration. Mr. Warton has likewise asserted, what is a mistake, that Alcuinus advised Bede to write his Ecclesiastical History. He probably copied this from Leland, without examining the dates. Alcuinus must have been a mere child, if born at all, when Bede wrote his history. But there was another Alcuinus, an abbot of Canterbury, who was strictly contemporary with Bede, and may have been his adviser.

, a learned Italian, was born at Venice, of poor parents of the lowest class, about the end of the fifteenth century. Alcyonius, or Alcyonio, was not his family name, but he is supposed to have adopted it, according to the custom of his age, to give himself an air of antiquity or classical origin. Whatever the meanness of his birth, he had the merit of applying in his youth to the learned languages with such success, as to become a very accomplished scholar. He was corrector of the press a considerable time for Aldus Manutius, and is entitled to a share in the praises given to the editions of that learned printer. He translated into Latin several treatises of Aristotle; but Sepulveda wrote against these versions, and pointed out so many errors in them, that Alcyonius had no other remedy than buying up as many copies as he could get of Sepulveda’s work, and burning them. The treatise which Alcyonius published concerning Banishment contained so many fine passages, with others quite the reverse, that it was thought he had interwoven with somewhat of his own, several fragments of Cicero’s treatise De Gloria; and that afterwards, in order to save himself from being detected in this theft, he burnt the manuscript of Cicero, the only one extant. Paulus Manutius, in his commentary upon these words of Cicero, “Libruni tibi celeriter mittam de gloria,” has the following passage relating to this affair: “He means (says he) his two books on Glory, which were handed down to the age of our fathers; for Bernard Justinian, in the index of his books, mentions Cicero de Gloria. This treatise, however, when Bernard had left his whole library to a nunnery, could not be found, though sought after with great care, and nobody doubted but Peter Alcyonius, who, being physician to the nunnery, was intrusted with the library, had basely stolen it. And truly, in his treatise of Banishment, some things are found interspersed here and there, which seem not to savour of Alcyonius, but of some higher author.” Paul Jovius repeated this accusation, and it was adopted as a fact by other writers. Alcyonius, however, has been amply vindicated by some late biographers, particularly Tiraboschi, who has proved that the charge was not only destitute of truth, but of probability.

In 1517, he aspired to the professor’s chair, which his master Marcus Musurus held, but was rejected on account of his youth. In 1521, however, he went from Venice to Florence, where he obtained, by the interest of the cardinal Julius de Medicis, the Greek professorship of that university, and, besides his’ salary, had ten ducats a month from the cardinal de Medicis, to translate Galen “De partibus animalium.” As soon as he understood that this cardinal was created pope, he asked leave of the Florentines to depart; and though he was refused, he went nevertheless to Rome, in great hopes of raising himself there. He lost all his fortune during the troubles the Columnas raised in Rome; and some time after, when the emperor’s troops took the city, in 1527, he received a wound when flying for shelter to the castle of St. Angelo: but got thither, notwithstanding he was pursued by the soldiers, and joined Clement VII. He was afterwards guilty of base ingratitude towards this pope; for, as soon as the siege was raised, he deserted him, and went over to cardinal Pompeius Colutnna, at whose house he fell sick, and died a few months after, in his fortieth year. Alcyonius might have made greater advances in learning, had he not been too much influenced by vanity and self-conceit, which hindered him from taking the advice of his friends. He was likewise too much addicted to detraction and abuse, which raised him many enemies. Menckenius reprinted his treatise “De Exilio,” in 1707, 12mo, Leipsic, with those of Valerianus and Tollius on the misfortunes of men of letters, and other pieces on the same subject, under the title of “Analecta de calamitate Literatorum.” The treatise “De Exilio” was first printed at the Aldine press, 1522, 4to. The only other original works which he left are, his orations on the taking of Rome, and on the knights who died at the siege of Rhodes; which we cannot find to have been published, but which had merit enough to prove him capable of writing the treatise on exile.

, an Italian physician and botanist of Cesena, in the seventeenth century, was physician to cardinal Odoard Farnese, who appointed him superintendant of his botanic garden. He is mentioned, in the last edition of this dictionary, as the author of “Descriptio plantarum horti Farnesiani,” Rome, 1625, fol. But it is necessary to mention that Albini’s name, for whatever reason, was borrowed on this occasion, and that the work, as appears by the preface, was written by Peter Castelli, a physician at Rome.

, an English divine, was bishop of Shireburn in the time of the Saxon heptarchy, and in the eighth century. William of Malmesbury says that he was the son of Kenred, or Kenter, brother of Ina king of the West-Saxons. He was born at Caer Bladon, now Malmesbury, in Wiltshire. He had part of his education abroad in France and Italy, and part at home under Maildulphus, an Irish Scot, who had built a little monastery where Malmesbury now stands. Upon the death of Maildulphus, Aldhelm, by the help of Eleutherius bishop of Winchester, built a stately monastery there, and was himself the first abbot. When Hedda, bishop of the WestSaxons, died, the kingdom was divided into two dioceses; viz. Winchester and Shireburn, and king Ina promoted Aldhelm to the latter, comprehending Dorsetshire, Wiltshire, Devonshire, and Cornwall: he was consecrated at Rome by pope Sergius I. and Godwin tells us that he had the courage to reprove his holiness for having a bastard. Aldhelm, by the directions of a diocesan synod, wrote a book against the mistake of the Britons concerning the celebration of Easter, which brought over many of them to the catholic usage in that point. He likewise wrote a piece, partly in prose and partly in nexameter verse, in praise of virginity, dedicated to Ethelburga abbess of Barking, and published amongst Bede’s Opuscula, besides several other treatises, which are mentioned by Bale and William of Malmesbury, the latter of whom gives him the following character as a writer: “The language of the Greeks,” says he, “is close and concise, that of the Romans splendid, and that of the English pompous and swelling as for Aldhelm, he is moderate in his style; seldom makes use of foreign terms, and never without necessity; his catholic meaning is clothed with eloquence, and his most vehement assertions adorned with the colours of rhetoric: if you read him with attention, you would take him for a Grecian by his acuteness, a Roman by his elegance, and an Englishman by the pomp of his language.” He is said to have been the first Englishman who ever wrote in Latin; and, as he himself tells us in one of his treatises on metre, the first who introduced poetry into England “These things,” says he, “have I written concerning the kinds and measures of verse, collected with much labour, but whether useful I know not; though I am conscious to myself I have a right to boast as Virgil did:

Such is the account that has been commonly given of this extraordinary man. We shall now advert to some circumstances upon which modern research has thrown a new light. All the accounts represent Aldhelm as having been a very considerable man for the time in which he lived. It is evident, says Dr, Henry, from his works, which are still extant, that he had read the most celebrated authors of Greece and Rome, and that he was no contemptible critic in the languages in which these authors wrote. In the different seminaries in which he was educated, he acquired such a stock of knowledge, and became so eminent for his literature, not only in England but in foreign countries, that he was resorted to by many persons from Scotland, Ireland, and France. Artville, a prince of Scotland, sent his works to Aldhelm to be examined by him, and entreated him to give them their last polish, by rubbing off their Scotch rust. Besides the instructions which Aldhelm received from Maildulphus, in France and Italy, he had part of his education, and as it would seem the most considerable part, at Canterbury, under Theodore, archbishop of that city, and Adrian, the most learned professor of the sciences, who had ever been in England. The ardour with which he prosecuted his studies at that place, is well represented in a letter written by him to Hedda, bishop of Winchester; which letter also gives a good account of the different branches of knowledge in the cultivation of which he was then engaged. These were, the Roman jurisprudence, the rules of verses ard the musical modulation of words and syllables, the doctrine of the seven divisions of poetry, arithmetic, astronomomy, and astrology. It is observable, that Aldhelm speaks in very pompous terms of arithmetic, as a high and difficult attainment: though it is now so generally taught, as not to be reckoned a part of a learned education. In opposition to what has been commonly understood, that Aldhelm was the first of the Saxons who taught his countrymen the art of Latin versification, Mr. Warton, in his History of Poetry, informs us, that Conringius, a very intelligent antiquary in this sort of literature, mentions an anonymous Latin poet, who wrote the life of Charlemagne in verse, and adds that he was the first of the Saxons that attempted to write Latin verse. But it ought to have been recollected, that Aldhelm died above thirty years before Charlemagne was born. Aldhelm’s Latin compositions, whether in prose or verse, as novelties, were deemed extraordinary performances, and excited the attention and adruiration of scholars in other countries. His skill in music has obtained for hhn a considerable place in sir John Hawkins’s History of Music.

was a native of Florence, and for some time a professor of law at Pisa. Oa his return to his own country, he involved himself in the prevailing political contests; and having taken a part in opposition to the house of Medici, he was banished, and deprived of all his property. Paul III. however, received him at Rome, and appointed him advocate of the treasury and apostolic chamber. He died in 1558, aged 58, leaving several works on jurisprudence, which are enumerated by Mazzuchelli. He was the father of Hypolitus Aldobrandini, who reached the papal chair, and assumed the name of Clement VIII.

, a native of Florence, who flourished in the fourteenth century, and died Sept. 30, 1327, was a physician of great eminence in his time, and practised principally at Sienna, whither the jealousy of his colleagues at Bologna, where he first studied, had obliged him to retire. He wrote notes on Avicenna and Galen, and on some parts of Hippocrates. The abbe Lami gives an article to his memory in his “Notices literaires,” published in 1748; and he is celebrated also in Lucques’s edition of the Eloges of illustrious Tuscans, vol. I.

, abbot of Tavistock, was promoted to the bishopric of Worcester in 1046. He was so much in favour with king Edward the Confessor, and had so much power over his mind, that he obliged him to be reconciled with the worst of his enemies, particularly with Swane, son of the earl Godwin, who had revolted against him, and came with an army to invade the kingdom. Aldred also restored the union and friendship between king Edward and Griffith king of Wales. He took afterwards a journey to Rome; and being returned into England in the year 1054, he was sent ambassador to the emperor Henry It staid a whole year in Germany, and was very honourably entertained by Herman archbishop of Cologn, from whom he learned many things relative to ecclesiastical discipline, which on his return he established in his own diocese. In 10.58, he went to Jerusalem, which no archbishop or bishop of England had ever done before him. Two years after, he returned to England; and Kinsius, archbishop York, dying the 22d of December, 1060, Aldred was elected in his stead on Christmas day following, and thought fit to keep his bishopric of Worcester with the archbishopric of Canterbury, as some of his predecessors had done. Aldred went soon after to Rome, in order to receive the pallium from the pope; he was attenc.ed by Toston, earl of Northumberland, Giso, bishop of Wells and Walter, bishop of Hereford. The pope received Joston very honourably, and made him sit by him in the synod which he held against the Simonists. He wanted to Giso and Walter their request, because they were tolerably well learned, and not accused of simony. But Aldred being by his answers found ignorant, and guilty of simony, the pope deprived him very indignantly of all his honours; so that he was obliged to return without the pallium. On his way home, he and his fellow-travellers were attacked by some robbers, who took from them all that they had. This obliged them to return to Rome; and the pope, either out of compassion, or by the threatenings of the earl of Northumberland, gave Aldred the pallium; but he was obliged to resign his bishopric of Worcester. However, as the archbishop of York had been almost entirely ruined by the many invasions of foreigners, king Edward gave the new archbishop leave to keep twelve villages or manors which belonged to the bishopric of Worcester. Edward the Confessor dying in 1066, Aldred crowned Harold his successor. He also crowned William the Conqueror, after he had made him take the following oath, viz That he would protect the holy church of God and its eaders: that he would establish and observe righteous that he would entirely prohibit and suppress all rapines and unjust judgments. He was so much in favour with the conqueror, that this prince looked upon him as a father; and, though imperious in regard to everybody else, he yet submitted to obey this archbishop; John Brompton gives us an instance of the king’s submission, which at the same time shews the prelate’s haughtiness. It happened one day, as the archbishop was at York, that the deputy-governor or lord-lieutenant going out of the city with a great number of people, met the archbishop’s servants, who came to town with several carts and horses loaded with provisions. The governor asked to whom they belonged; and they having answered they were Aldred’s servants, the governor ordered that all these provisions should be carried to the king’s store-house. The archbishop sent immediately some of his clergy to the governor, commanding him to deliver the provisions, and to make satisfaction to St. Peter, and to him the saint’s vicar, for the injury he had done them; adding, that if he refused to comply, the archbishop would make use of his apostolic authority against him (intimating that he would excommunicate him.) The governor, offended at this proud message, insulted the persons whom the archbishop had sent, and returned an answer as haughty as the message. Aldred fhen went to London to make his complaint to the king; but even here he acted with his wonted insolence; for meeting the king in the church of St. Peter at Westminster, he spoke to him in these words “Hearken, Q William when thou wast but a foreigner, and God, tQ punish the sins of this nation, permitted thee to become master of it, after having shed a great deal of blood, I consecrated thee, and put the crown upon thy head with blessings; but now, because thou hast deserved it, I pronounce a curse over thee, instead of a blessing, since thou art become the persecutor of God’s church, and of his ministers, and hast broken the promises and oaths which thou madestto me before St. Peter’s altar.” The king, terrified at this discourse, fell upon his knees, and humbly begged the prelate to tell him, by what crime he had deserved so severe a sentence. The noblemen, who were present, were enraged against the archbishop, and loudly cried out, he deserved death, or at least banishment, for having offered such an insult to his sovereign; and they pressed him with threatenings to raise the king from the ground. But the prelate, unmoved at all 'this, answered calmly, “Good men, let him lie there, for he is not at Aldred’s but at St. Peter’s feet; let him feel St. Peter’s power, since he dared to injure his vicegerent.” Having thus reproved the nobles by his episcopal authority, he vouchsafed to take the king by the hand, and to tell him the ground of his complaint. The king humbly excused himself, by saying he had been ignorant of the whole matter; and oegged of the noblemen to entreat the prelate, that he might take off the curse he had pronounced, and change it into a blessing. Aldred was at last prevailed upon to favour the king thus far; but not without the promise of several presents and favours, and only after the king had granted him to take such a revenge on the governor as he thought fit. Since that time (adds the historian) none of the noblemen ever dared to offer the least injury. The Danes having made an invasion in the north of England in 1068, under the command of Harold and Canute the sons of king Swane, Aldred was so much afflicted at it, that he died of grief on the llth of September in that same year, having besought God that he might not see the desolation of his church and country.

, an eminent scholar and divine, was son of Henry Aldrich of Westminster, gentleman, and born there in 1647. He was educated at Westminster under the celebrated Busby, and admitted of Christ Church, Oxford, in 1662. Having been elected student, he took the degree of M. A. in April 1669; and, entering soon after into orders, he became an eminent tutor in his college. Feb. 1681, he was installed canon of Christ Church; and in May accumulated the degrees of B. and D. D. In the controversy with the papists under James II. he bore a considerable part; and Burnet ranks him among those eminent clergj T men who “examined all the points of popery with a solidity of judgment, a clearness of arguing, a depth of learning, and a vivacity of writing, far beyond any thing which had before that time appeared in our language.” In short, he had rendered himself so conspicuous, that, at the Revolution, when Massey, the popish dean of Christ Church, fled beyond sea, the deanry was conferred upon him, and he was installed in it June 17, 1689. In this station he behaved in a most exemplary manner, zealously promoting learning, religion, and virtue in the college where he presided. In imitation of his predecessor bishop Fell, he published generally every year some Greek classic, or portion of one, as a gift to the students of his house. He wrote also a system of logic, entitled “Artis Logicae compendium;” and many other things. The publication of Clarendon’s History was committed to him and bishop Sprat; and they were charged by Oldmixon with having altered and interpolated that work; but the charge was sufficiently refuted by Atterbury. In the same year that he became dean of Christ Church he was appointed one of the ecclesiastical commissioners who were to prepare matters for introducing an alteration in some parts of the church service, and a comprehension of the dissenters. But he, in conjunction with Dr. Mew, bishop of Winchester, Dr. Sprat, bishop of Rochester, and Dr. Jane, regius professor of divinity in the university of Oxford, either did not appear at the meetings of the committee, or soon withdrew from them. They excepted to the manner of preparing matters by a special commission, as limiting the convocation, and imposing upon it, and they were against all alterations whatever. Besides attainments in polite literature, classical learning, and an elegant turn for Latin poetry, of which some specimens are in the Musae Anghcanae, he possessed also great skill in architecture and music; so great, that, as the connoisseurs say, his excellence in either would alone have made him famous to posterity. The three siues of the quadrangle of Christ Church, Oxford, called Peck water-square, were designed by him; as was also the elegant chapel of Trinity college, and the church of All-Saints in the High-street; to the erection of which Dr. Ratcliff, at his solicitation, was a liberal contributor. He cultivated also music, that branch of it particularly which related both to his profession and his office. To this end he made a noble collection of church music, and formed also a design of writing a history of the science; having collected materials, which are still extant in the library of his own college. His abilities indeed as a musician have caused him to be ranked among the greatest masters of the science: he composed many services for the church, which are well known; as are also his anthems, to the number of near 20. In the “Pleasant Musical Companion,” printed 1726, are two catches of his; the one, “Hark the bonny Christ Church Bells,” the other entitled “A Smoking Catch;” for he himself was, it seems, a great smoaker. Besides the preferments already mentioned, he was rector of Wem in Shropshire. He was elected prolocutor of the convocation in February 1702, on the death of Dr. Woodward, dean of Sarum. He died at Christ Church, December 14, 1710. The tracts he published in the popish controversy were two, “Upon the Adoration of our Saviour in the Eucharist,” in answer to O. Walker’s discourses on the same subject, printed in 1687, and 1688, 4to. We have not been able to get an account of the Greek authors he published, except these following: 1. Xenophontis Memorabilium, lib. 4, 1690, 8vo. 2. Xenophontis Sermo de Agesilao, 1691, 8vo. 3. Aristese Historia 72 Interpretum, 1692, 8vo. 4. Xenophon, de re equestri, 1693, 8vo. 5.Epictetus etTheophrastus, 1707, 8vo. 6. Platonis, Xenopliontis, Plutarchi, Luciani, Symposia, 1711, 8vo. This last was published in Greek only, the rest in Greek and Latin, and all printed at Oxford. His logic is already mentioned. He printed also Elements of Architecture, which was elegantly translated and published in 1789, 8vo. with architectural plates, by the rev. Philip Smyth, LL. B. fellow of New College, and now rector of Worthing, Shropshire. He had a hand in Gregory’s Greek Testament, printed at Oxford in 1703, folio; and some of his notes are printed in Havercamp’s edition of Josephus.

When he was senior proctor, he was employed by the university to write three letters to the king, and the following curious entry in the proctor’s book for 1527, proves this fac-L “Magistro Aldryg pro tribus literis missis ad Dominum regem, IDs.” He was a correspondent of Erasmus, who termed him, when young, “blandae eloquentiae juvenis,” and appears to have associated with him during his residence at Cambridge. Fuller is of opinion that he belongs to the light rather than the dark side of the reformation; but Strype seems to doubt whether he was well affected to this great change. He was certainly, however, not a persecutor; and the mildness or timidity of his disposition may account for his retaining his offices during reigns of opposite principles. It yet remains to be noticed that in 1523, he was one of the Cambridge university-preachers, who were sent out by the university to preach in different parts of the nation, as the judges now go their circuits; there being at. that time very few men of ability in any county.

In the above year Aleander was invited by Louis XI L king of France, to a professor’s chair in the university of Paris, notwithstanding the statutes which excluded foreign­$rs from that honour; but, after residing there some years, he was alarmed by the appearance of the plague, and went into the country of France, and gave lectures on the Greek language at Orleans, Blois, and other places. At length be took up his residence at Liege, was preferred to a canonry of the cathedral, and to the chancellorship of the diocese, and here also he gave his lectures on the Greek tongue, for two years, with distinguished success. In 1517, the prince bishop sent him to Rome, where he soon recommended himself to Leo X. who requested the princebishop that Aleander might he permitted to quit his service, and enter into that of the Roman church. The bishop, who was then anxious to be made a cardinal, and hoped that Aleander might promote that favourite object, readily consented: and Aleander was first appointed secretary to Julio de Medici, an office at that time of the highest trust; and in 1519, was made librarian of the Vatican. In 1521, he was sent as nuncio to the imperial diet at Worms, where he harangued against the doctrines of Luther for three hours, and with great success, as Luther was not present to answer him; but afterwards, when Luther was permitted to speak, Aleander refused to dispute with him; and yet, with the tyranny and cowardice of a genuine persecutor, obtained an order that his books should be burnt, and his person proscribed, and himself drew up the edict against him. On this occasion, his conduct drew upon him the just censure, not only of the decided reformers, but of his friend Erasmus, who condemned the violence of his zeal with great asperity. He did not, however, become the less acceptable to the church of Rome. After pope Leo’s death, Clement VII. gave him the archbishopric of Brindisi and Oria, and he was appointed apostolic nuncio to Francis I. whom he attended at the battle of Pavia in 1525, where he was made prisoner along with the king by the Spaniards. After his release, he was employed in several embassies, and in 1538, he was promoted to the rank of cardinal by Paul III. and was intended to be president at the council of Trent; but his death, which took place Feb. 1, 1542, prevented this important appointment. His death is said to have been accelerated by a too frequent use of medicine. His library, a very considerable one, he bequeathed to the monastery of S. Maria del Orto in Venice; and it was afterwards transferred to the canons of S. Georgio, and from them to the library of S. Marco at Venice.

, a Flemish Jesuit, born at Brussels the 22d of January 1592, was trained in polite literature in his own country. He went afterwards to Spain, and entered into the service of the duke of Ossuna, whom he attended to Sicily, when the duke went there as viceroy. Alegambe, being inclined to a religious life, took the habit of a Jesuit at Palermo, the 7th of September 1613, where he went through his probation, and read his course of philosophy. He pursued the study of divinity at Rome, whence he was sent to Austria, to teach philosophy in the university of Gratz. Havhig discharged th duties of this function to the satisfaction of his superiors, he was chosen professor of school-divinity, and promoted in form to the doctorship in 1629. About this time the prince of Eggemberg, who was in high favour with the emperor Ferdinand II. having resolved that his son should travel, and being desirous he should be attended by some learned and prudent Jesuit, Alegambe was judged a proper person; and he accordingly travelled with him five years, visiting Germany, France, Spain, Portugal, and Italy. In 1638, the young prince with whom he travelled, being appointed by the emperor Ferdinand III. ambassador of obedience to the pope, invited Alegambe to go with him, who accordingly accompanied him to Rome, in quality of his confessor. After he had discharged this office, the general of the Jesuits retained him as secretary of the Latin dispatches for Germany. Alegambe, having spent four years in the discharge of this laborious office, was obliged to resign it, the continual application to writing having considerably weakened his sight. He was now appointed president of spiritual affairs in the professed house, and had the office also of hearing confessions in the church, in which capacity he acquitted himself with reputation. He died of the dropsy, at Rome, the 6th of September 1652. He is now principally known by hi 1. “Bibliotheca scriptorum societatis Jesu,” Antwerpise, 1643, fol. 2. “Vita P. Joannis Cardin. Lusitani, ex societate Jesu,” Romae, 1649, 12mo. 3. “Heroes et victims charitatis societatis Jesu,” Romse, 1658, 4to; continued by Nadasi from 1647 to 1657. These “victims” were such as lost their lives in attending persons who died of the plague. 4. “Mortes illustres et gesta eorum de societate Jesu, qui in odium fidei ab hsreticis vel aliis occisi sunt,” Romse, 1657, fol.

, an antiquary of great learning, was born of Greek parents, Jan. 12, 1583, and educated in the Greek college founded by pope Gregory XIII. where he made a vast progress in learning, and was no less esteemed for the integrity of his morals. He afterwards entered into holy orders. He probably at first intended to settle in Greece, and applied to a.' Greek bishop, who ordained him a sub-deacon; but he afterwards changed his mind, and received the other sacred orders from the hands of the bishops of the Romish church. Erythneus, in his “Pinacotheca,” although a zealous Roman Catholic, insinuates, that in this change Alemanni was influenced by the prospect of interest. His fortune, however, being still inconsiderable, he employed himself in teaching the Greek language to several persons of distinguished rank, and gained the friendship of Scipio Cobellutius, who was at that time secretary of the briefs to pope Paul V. This paved the way for his obtaining the post of secretary to cardinal Borghese, which, however, he did not fill to the entire satisfaction of his employer, from his being more intimately conversant in Greek than Latin, and mixing Greek words in his letters. He was afterwards made keeper of the Vatican library, for which he was considered as amply qualified. He died July 24, 1626. His death is said to have been occasioned by too close an attendance on the erection of the great altar of the church of St. Peter at Rome. It was necessary for him to watch that no person should carry away any part of the earth dug up, which had been sprinkled with the blood of the martyrs, and in his care he contracted some distemper, arising from the vapours, which soon ended his days. He published “Procopii Historic Arcana, Gr. et Lat. Nic. Alernanno interprete, cum ejus et Maltreti notis,” Paris, 1663, fol. and a “Description of St. John de Lateran,” 1665.

At his leaving the college, he found himself alone and unconnected in the world; and sought an asylum in the house of his nurse. He comforted himself with the hope, that his fortune, though not ample, would better the condition and subsistence of that family, which was the only one that he could consider as his own: here, therefore, he took up his residence, resolving to apply himself entirely to the study of geometry. And here he lived, during the space of forty years, with the greatest simplicity, discovering the augmentation of his means only by increasing displays of his beneficence, concealing his growing reputation and celebrity from these honest people, and making their plain and uncouth manners the subject of good-natured pleasantry and philosophical observation. His good nurse perceived his ardent activity; heard him mentioned as the writer of many books; but never took it into her head that he was a great man, and rather beheld him with a kind of compassion. “You will never,” said she to him one day, “be any thing but a philosopher—and what is a philosopher?—a fool, who toils and plagues himself during his life, that people may talk of him when he is no more.”

In the year 1741, he was admitted member of the academy of sciences; for which distinguished literary promotion, at such an early age, he had prepared the way by correcting the errors of a celebrated work on geometry, which was deemed classical in France. He afterwards set himself to examine, with deep attention and assiduity, what must be the motion of a body which passes from one fluid into another more dense, in a direction not perpendicular to the surface separating the two fluids. Every one knows the phenomenon which happens in this case, and which amuses children under the denomination of ducks and drakes; but M. d'Alembert was the first who explained it in a satisfactory and philosophical manner.

So early as the year 1744, M. d'Alembert had applied this principle to the theory of the equilibrium, and the mq tjon of fluids; and all the problems before solved by geometricians became, in some measure, its corollaries. The discovery of this new principle was followed by that of a new calculus, the first trials of which were published in a “Discourse on the general Theory of the Winds;” to which the prize medal was adjudged by the academy of Berlin in the year 1746, and which was a new and brilliant addition to the fame of M. d'Alembert. This new calculus of partial differences he applied, the year following, to the problem of vibrating chords, whose solution, as well as the theory of the escalations of the air and the propagation qf sound, had been given but incompletely by the geometricians who preceded kirn. In the year 1749, he furnished a method of apply ing his principle to the motion of any body of a given figure; and he solved the problem of the precession of the equinoxes, determined its quantity, and explained the phenomenon of the nutation of the terrestrial axis discovered by Dr. Bradley.

The tranquillity of M. d‘Alembert was abated when his fame grew more extensive, and when it was known beyond the circle of his friends, that a turn for literature and philosophy accompanied his mathematical genius. Our author’s eulogist ascribes to envy, detraction, and to other motives nearly as ungenerous, all the disapprobation, opposition, and censure that M d’Alembert met with on account of the publication of the famous Encyclopedical Dictionary of Arts and Sciences, in conjunction with Diderot. But when the reader is told that this eulogist is Condorcet, and when he recollects the vast extent of mischief, moral and political, spread over France, and indeed the whole continent, by the impious and disorganizing principles of d'Alembert and his associates in this work, ne will learn to moderate his admiration of “that fine and enlightened turn for literature and philosophy” which Condorcet displayed before the academy in his Eulogy, pronounced but a very few years before its destructive effects were to be made apparent. We shall not, however, refuse the just tribute of applause to the displays of genius, judgment, and literary taste, with which M. d'Alembert has enriched the work now mentioned. Among others, the preliminary discourse he has affixed to it, concerning the rise, progress, connexions, and affinities of all the branches of human knowledge, is certainly a capital production. Yet we are disposed to question whether the master-builders of this new and stupendous temple of science, for the worship of nature, had really in view the advancement of human knowledge, and the improvement of the arts and sciences. la the inner court of this temple there was a confederacy formed against all those who looked higher than nature, for the principal object of their veneration and confidence, a fact too palpable, nay too boldly avowed, to stand in need of any proof. And if it be thus palpable, what shall we say, not to the philosophy, but the common sense, of these great men, who could for a moment conceive that objects so incompatible were to be promoted by the same means, and that national impiety and national improvement in the arts of science and social life, were to be incorporated in the same system But it would be unnecessary to expatiate, in this sketch, on the evils of a publication, the effects of which have been so widely felt and so generally acknowledged.

M. d‘Alembert died on the 29th of October, 1783. Condorcet and other French writers of his own school attribute to him many amiable lines of candour, modesty, disinterestedness, and beneficence, in his moral character; and we are not disposed to question that his personal virtues might have been many; but his character cannot be justly appreciated without recollecting that he was the mostsubtle agent in that hostility against Christianity which was carried on by Voltaire, Diderot, and others who assisted in the Encyclopaedia. Nor is the extent of their aversion to revealed religion to be discovered so clearly in their writings prepared for the press, for there they affected to disguise it under the mask of an argumentative philosophy, as in their secret correspondence, much of which appears in Beaumarchais’s edition of Voltaire’s works. The abbe Barruel, in his Memoirs of Jacobinism, has produced many proofs from these letters and other documents, that the impiety of Voltaire, d’Alembert, Diderot, &c. was not a personal concern, not an error into which they had separately fallen, and which they separately avowed, but a design consulted upon, and carried on in common among them; that they encouraged each other by frequent letters, deliberated about the means, and combined in the execution; and that whatever they had done before, it evidently appears from their correspondence, they placed all their hopes in the Encyclopaedia.

, a native of Norfolk, was elected fellow of C. C. C. Cambridge in 1536, proceeded M. A. the year following, became their steward in 1539, and not long after obtained leave of the society to go and study abroad for a limited time; which he afterwards procured to be extended for two years more. By assiduous application he became, as Strype informs us, not only a great proficient in the Greek and Latin tongues, but an “eminent Protestant divine, and a learned minister of the gospel.” His works, indeed, which are written with much plainness and simplicity, but at the same time with great strength of reasoning and argument, sufficiently shew that he ought to be ranked in the list of the most considerable reformers. This extraordinary merit, while it obliged him to continue an exile during the reign of queen Mary, recommended him powerfully to the favour of her sister Elizabeth; who no sooner came to the crown than she appointed him one of her chaplains, gave him a commission to act under her as an ambassador, and nominated him to the vacant see of Rochester; but after a long absence, he either died on his return, or soon after, and never became possessed of the bishopric. It is said he was buried in the church of St. Thomas Apostle, in London, Aug. 30, 1559.

, a Jesuit, born, in Brescia, in the republic of Venice. He travelled into the eastern countries, and arrived at Maca in 1610, where he taught mathematics. From thence he went to the empire of China, where he continued to propagate the Christian religion for 36 years. He was the first who planted the faith in the province of Xanfi, and he built several churches in the province of Fokien. He died in August 1649, leaving behind him several works in the Chinese language: 1. “The Life of Jesus Christ,” in eight volumes. 2. “The Incarnation of Jesus Christ.” 3. “Of the Sacrifice of the Mass.” 4. “The Sacrament of Penitence.” 5. “The Original of the World.” 6. “Proof of the Existence of a Deity.” 7. “Dialogues.” 8. “The Dialogue of St. Bernard betwixt the Soul and Body,” in Chinese verse. 9. “A Treatise on the Sciences of Europe.” 10. “Practical Ge metry, in four books.” 11. “The Life of P. Matthew Ricci.” 12. “The Life of Dr. Michael Yam, a Chinese convert.” 13. “The Theatre of the World, or Cosmography.”

, an Italian architect, who died in 1630, was born of parents so poor that in his youth he was obliged to carry bricks and mortar to the workmen; but having a natural turn for architecture, by hearing others talk, he learned all the rules of it, as well as those of geometry; and was even able to publish works in those sciences. He took great part in those famous controversies that arose concerning the three provinces, Ferrara, Bologna, and the Romagna, which were much exposed to inundations in the commencement of the seventeenth century, and published a plan for stopping their progress. Pope Clement VII. employed him to build the citadel of Ferrara, and at Mantua, Modena, Parma, and Venice, are several monuments after his designs. The only work we have seen of his on the subject of the inundations is entitled “Difesa per riparare alia sommersione del Polesine,” Ferrara, 1601, fol.

, a celebrated divine of the confession of Augsbourg, was born at Edinburgh, April 23, 1500. He soon made a considerable progress in schooldivinity, and entered the lists very early against Luther; this being then the great controversy in fashion, and the grand field in which all authors, young and old, were accustomed to display their abilities. Soon after he had a share in the dispute which Patrick Hamilton maintained against the ecclesiastics, in favour of the new faith he had imbibed at Marpurgh: he endeavoured to bring him back to the catholic religion; but this he could not effect, and even began himself to doubt about his own religion, being much affected by the discourse of this gentleman, and more still by the constancy he shewed at the stake, where David Beaton, archbishop of St. Andrew’s, caused him to be burnt. The doubts of Ales would perhaps have been carried no further, if he had been left unmolested to enjoy his canonry in the metropolitan church of St. Andrew’s; but he was persecuted with so much violence by the provost of St. Andrew’s, whose intrigues he preached against that he was obliged to retire into Germany, where he became at length a perfect convert to the Protestant religion, and persevered therein till his death. In the different parties which were formed, he sometimes joined with those that were least orthodox; for, in 1560, he maintained the doctrine of George Major, concerning the necessity of good works. The change of religion, which happened in England after the marriage of Henry VI IL with Anna Boleyn, induced Ales to go to London, in U35, where he was highly esteemed by Cranmer, archbishop of Canterbury, Latimer, and Thomas Cromwel, who were at that time in favour with the king. Upon the fall of these favourites, he was obliged to return to Germany, where the elector of Brandenburg appointed him professor of divinity at Francfort upon the Oder, in 1540. Two years afterwards he had a dispute there, upon the question “Whether the magistrate can and ought to punish fornication” and he maintained the affirmative with Melancthon. He was greatly offended at their not deciding this dispute, and perhaps his discontent was the reason of his quitting Francfort precipitately; and it is certain that the court of Brandenburgh complained of him, and wrote to the university of Wittemberg to have him punished. He retired, however, to Leipsic; and while he was there, he refused a professor’s chair, which Albert duke of Prussia intended to erect at Koningsberg, and which was erected the year following. Soon after, he was chosen professor of divinity at Leipsic, and enjoyed it till his death, which happened on the 17th of March 1565. The following are the titles of his principal works: 1. “De necessitate et merito Bonorum Operum, disputatio proposita, in celebri academia Lipsica ad 29 Nov. 1560.” 2. “Commentarii in evangelium Joannis, et in utramque epistolam ad Timotheum.” 3. “Expositio in Psalmos Davidis.” 4. “De Justificatione, contra Osiandrum.” 5. “De Sancta Trinitate, cum confutatione erroris Valentini.” 6. “Responsio ad triginta et duos articulos theologorum Lovaniensium.”

While at Leipsic, he was employed to translate the first liturgy of Edward VI. into Latin, for Bucer’s use, who did not understand English. He appears to have been highly esteemed for probity and learning. Henry VIII. familiarly called him “his scholar,” and Cranmersaid he was “virum in theologia perductum.” Melancthon and Ales were inseparable companions, and Beza pronounced him one of the greatest ornaments of his country. He wrote with most spirit on the doctrine of the Trinity, against Valentine Gentilis; and on the divinity of Jesus Christ against Servetus.

At fifteen years of age, Alexander was delivered to the tuition of Aristotle. He discovered very early a mighty spirit, and symptoms of that vast and immoderate ambition which was afterwards to make him the scourge of mankind and the pest of the world. One day, when it was told him that Philip had gained a battle, instead of rejoicing, he looked much chagrined, and said, that “if his father went on at this rate, there would be nothing left for him to do.” Upon Philip’s shewing some wonder, that Alexander did not engage in the Olympic games, “Give me,” said the youth, “kings for my antagonists, and I will present myself at once.” The taming and managing of the famous Bucephalus is always mentioned among the exploits of his early age. This remarkable horse was brought from Thessaly, and purchased at a very great price; but upon trial he was found so wild and vicious, that neither Philip nor any of his courtiers could mount or manage him; and he was upon the point of being sent back as useless, when Alexander, expressing his grief that so noble a creature should be rejected, merely because nobody had the dexterity to manage him, was at length permitted to try what he could do. Alexander, we are told, had perceived, that the frolicksome spirit and wildness of Bucephalus proceeded solely from the fright which the animal had taken at his own shadow: turning his head, therefore, directly to the sun, and gently approaching him with address and skill, he threw himself upon him; and though Philip at first was extremely distressed and alarmed for his son, yet when he saw him safe, and perfectly master of his steed, he received him with tears of joy, saying, “O, my son thou must seek elsewhere a kingdom, for Macedonia cannot contain thee.” One more instance of this very high spirit may suffice. When Philip had repudiated Olympias for infidelity to his bed, the young prince felt a most lively resentment on the occasion; yet, being invited by his father to the nuptials with his new uife, he did not refuse to go. In the midst of the entertainment, Attalus, a favourite of Philip, had the imprudence to say, that the Macedonians must implore the gods to grant the king a lawful successor. “What, you scoundrel do you then take me for a bastard r” says Alexander; and threw a cup that instant at his head. Philip, intoxicated with wine, and believing his son to be the author of the quarrel, rushed violently towards him with his sword; but, slipping with his foot, fell prostrate upon the floor; upon which Alexander said insultingly, “See, Macedonians, wnat a general you have for the conquest of Asia, who cannot take a single step without falling;” for Philip had just before been named for this expedition in a common assembly of the Greeks, and was preparing for it, when he was murdered by Pausanius at a feast.

It was at Anchyala, a town of Cilicia, that he was shewn a monument of Sardanapalus, with this inscription “Sardanapalus built Anchyala and Tarsus in a day Passenger, eat, drink, and enjoy thyself all else is nothing.” This, probably, moved his contempt very strongly, when he compared such petty acquisitions to what he projected. From Cilicia he marched forwards to Phoenicia, which all surrendered to him, except Tyre; and it cost him a siege of seven months to reduce this city. The vexation of Alexander, atbeing unseasonably detained by this obstinacy of the Tyrians, occasioned a vast destruction and carnage; and the cruelty he exercised here is among the deepest stains on his character. After besieging and taking Gaza, he went to Jerusalem, where he was received by the high priest; and, making many presents to the Jews, sacrificed in their temple. He told Jadduas (for that was the priest’s name), that he had seen in Macedonia a god, in appearance exactly resembling him, who had exhorted him to this expedition against the Persians, and given him the firmest assurance of success. Afterwards, entering Ægypt, he went to the oracle of Jupiter Ammon, and upon his return built the city of Alexandria. It was now that he took it into his head to assume divinity, and to pretend himself the son of the said Jupiter Ammon, for which his mother Olympias would sometimes rally him, not unpleasantly, “Pray,” she would say, “cease to be called the son of Jupiter: thou wilt certainly embroil me in quarrels with Juno.” Policy, however, was at the bottom of this: it was impossible that any such belief should be really rooted in his breast, but he found by experience that this opinion inclined the barbarous nations to submit to him; and therefore he was content to pass for a god, and to admit, as he did, of divine adoration. So far, indeed, was he from believing this of himself, that he used among his friends to make a jest of it. Thus, afterwards, when he was bleeding from a wound he had received, “See here,” says he, “this is your true genuine blood, and not that ixpp, or thin fine liquor, which issues, according to Homer, from the wounds of the immortals.” Nay, even his friends sometimes made free with this opinion, which shews that he did not hold it sacred: for once, when it thundered horridly loud, and somewhat terrified the company, the philosopher Anaxarchus, who was present, said to Alexander, “And when wilt thou, son of Jupiter, do the like” “Oh,” said Alexander, “I would not frighten my friends.”

The character of this hero is so familiar, that it is almost needless to draw it. It was equally composed of very great virtues and very great vices. He had no mediocrity in any thing but his stature: in his other properties, whether good or bad, he was all extremes. His ambition rose even to madness. His father was not at all mistaken in supposing the bounds of Macedon too small for his son: for how could Macedon bound the ambition of a man, who reckoned the whole world too small a dominion He wept at hearing the philosopher Anaxarchus say, that there was an infinite number of worlds: his tears were owing to his despair of conquering them all, since he had not yet been able to conquer one. Livy, in a short digression, has attempted to inquire into the events which might have happened, if Alexander, after the conquest of Asia, had brought his arms into Italy Doubtless things might have taken a very different turn with him; and all the grand projects, which succeeded so well against an effeminate Persian monarch, might easily have miscarried if he had had to do with hardy Roman armies. And yet the vast aims of this mighty conqueror, if seen under another point of view, may appear to have been confined within a very narrow compass; since, as we are told, the utmost wish of that great heart, for which the whole earth was not enough, was, after all, to be praised by the Athenians. It is related, that the difficulties which he encountered in order to pass the Hydaspes, forced him to cry out, “O Athenians, could you believe to what dangers I expose myself for the sake of being celebrated by you?” But Bayle affirms, that this was quite consistent with the vast unbounded extent of his ambition, as he wanted to make all future time his own, and be an object of admiration to the latest posterity; yet did not expect this from the conquest of worlds, but from books. And he was right, continues that author, “for if Greece had not furnished him with good writers, he would long ago have been as much forgotten as the kings who reigned in Macedon before Amphitryon.”

Alexander has been praised upon the score of continency, and his life might not be quite regular in that respect, yet his behaviour to the Persian captives shews him to have had a great command over himself in this particular. The wife of Darius was a finished beauty; her daughters likewise were all beauties; yet this young prince, who had them in his power, not only bestowed on them all the honours due to their hisfh rank, but consulted their reputation with the utmost delicacy. They were kept as in a cloister, concealed from the world, and secured from the reach not only of every dishonourable attack, but even from imputation. He gave not the least occasion to censure, either by his visits, his looks, or his words: and for other Persian dames his prisoners, equally beautiful in face and shape, he contented himself with saying gaily, that they gave indeed much pain to his eyes. Notwithstanding these facts, he has been accused of those licentious gallantries common to princes in his age and country.

His excesses with regard to wine were more notorious, and beyond all imagination; and he committed, when intoxicated, a thousand extravagances. It was owing to wine, that he killed Clytus, who saved his life; and burnt Persepolis, one of the most beautiful cities of the east: he did this last indeed at the instigation of the courtezan Thais: a circumstance which makes it the more atrocious. It is generally believed, that he died by drinking immoderately; and even Plutarch, who affects to contradict it, owns that he did nothing but drink the whole day he was taken ill. His character has been so often the theme of history, nd the subject of discussion, tfyat it would be superfluous to analyze the various opinions entertained. The reader, however, to whom the subject is interesting, may be referred, with confidence, to a work, entitled “A critical Inquiry into the Life of Alexander the Great, by the ancient historians from the French of the baron de St. Croix; with notes and observations, by sir Richard Clayton, bart.” Lond. 1793, 4to.

, bishop of Alexandria, succeeded St. Achillas in the year 313. Arius, who had pretensions to this see, resented the preference given to Alexander by attacking his opinions, which were strictly orthodox, and substituting his own, which were at that time new: The bishop at first opposed him only by mild exhortations and persuasions; but, being unable to prevail, he cited him before an assembly or synod of the clergy at Alexandria, and on his refusing to recant his errors, excommunicated him and his followers. This sentence was confirmed by above an hundred bishops in the council of Alexandria, in the year 320; and Alexander signified the same by a circular letter to pope Sylvester, and all the catholic bishops; and his conduct was approved by Osius., who had been employed by the emperor Constantine to inquire into the matter. Alexander afterwards assisted at the council of Nice, to which he was accompanied by St. Athanasius, then only a deacon, and died Feb. 26, 326, appointing Athanasius for his successor. Of his numerous epistles, written against the Arian heresy, two only remain; one, the circular letter already mentioned, in Socrates, lib. I.e. 6; and in Gelasius Cyzicus’ history of the council of Nice, lib. 2. c. 3. The other, addressed to Alexander of Byzantium, is in Theodoret, lib. I. c. 4. In the Bibl. Vindob. Cod. Theol. is a very short letter of his to the presbyters and deacons of Alexandria; this is also in Cotelerius: and he wrote an epistle against the Arians, of which are two fragments in S. Maximus Opus. Theol. et Polem. vol. II. 152, 155.

, a Neapolitan lawyer of great learning, who flourished towards the end of the fifteenth and beginning of the sixteenth century, was descended of the ancient and noble family of the Alexandri of Naples. He was born according to some, in 1461. He followed the profession of the law, first at Naples, and afterwards at Rome; but devoted all the time he could spare to the study of polite literature; and at length entirely left the bar, from scruples of conscience respecting the practice of tke law, that he might lead a more easy and agreeable life with the muses. “When I saw,” says he, “that the counsellors could not defend nor assist any one against the power or favour of the mighty, I said it was in vain we took so much pains, and fatigued ourselves with so much study in controversies of law, and with learning such a variety of cases so exactly reported, when I saw the judgments passed according to the temerity of every remiss and corrupt person who presided over the laws, and gave determinations not according to equity, but favour and affection.” The particulars of his life are to be gathered from his work entitled “Genialium Dierum:” It appears by it that he lodged at Rome in a house that was haunted; and he relates many surprising particulars about the ghost, which show him to have been credulous, although perhaps not more so than his contemporaries. He says also, that when he was very young, he went to the lectures of Philetphus, who explained at Rome the Tusculan questions of Ci'cero; he was there also when Nicholas Perot and Domitius Calderinus read their public lectures upon Martial. Some say that he acted as prothonotary of the kingdom of Naples, and that he discharged the office witn great honour; but this is not mentioned in his work. Apostolo Zeno fixes his death in 1523, and it is generally agreed that he died at Rome, aged about sixty-two. His work, the “Genialium Dirrum,” is a miscellany of learning and philology, somewhat on the model of the “Noctes Atticae” of Aulus Gellius. The first edition was printed at Rome, 1522, fol. under the title of “Alexandri de Alexandro dies Geniales.” Andrew-Tiraqueau bestowed a commentary on it, entitled “Semestria,” Lyons, 1586, fol. Notes have also been added to it by Christopher Colerus, and Dennis Gotefrid, or Godfrey, which were printed with Tiraqueau’s commentary, Francfort, 1594, fol. The edition of Paris, 1582, is held in estimation, but the best is that of Leyden, 1675, 2 vols. 8vo. There is another work of his, published before the Genialium Dierum, but afterwards incorporated with it, entitled “Alexandri J. C. Napolitani Dissertationes quatuor de rebus admirundis, &c.” Rome, 4to, without date, or printer’s name. Mr. Roscoe, who has introduced him in his life of Leo as a member of the academy of Naples, says that his works prove him to have been a man of extensive reading, great industry, and of a considerable share of critical ability, and perhaps as little tinctured with superstition as most of the writers of the age in which he lived.

, bishop of Cappadocia, and afterwards of Jerusalem, in the early part of the third century, was the scholar of Pantaenus and Clement of Alexandria, to whom he acknowledges his obligations. About the year 204, when bishop of Cappadocia, he suffered imprisonment for the profession of the Christian faith, and remained in prison for some years, under the reign of Severus. His faithfulness and constancy in suffering induced the church at Jerusalem, after his release from prison, to appoint him colleague to their bishop Narcissus, who was now an hundred and sixteen years old. The account which Jerom and Eusebius give of his election, and of his arrival, being supernaturally revealed to Narcissus and the clergy, will not now probably obtain belief; but it is certain that he was gladly welcomed thither, and afterwards succeeded Narcissus in the see, over which he presided for the long space of forty years, with zeal, approbation, and success, in his ministry. When Decius revived the persecution of the Christians, Alexander was again cast into prison, where, from ill usage or old age, he died about the year 25 1. None of his writings remain, except some fragments of letters in Eusebius, who also informs us that Alexander founded a library in Jerusalem into which he collected all the Christian epistles and documents that could be procured; and as this was extant in the time of Eusebius, the latter acknowledges his obligations to it in the compilation of his history.

Lardner, who has given a long account of this bishop from various sources, observes that his piety and humility are conspicuous in the fragments left, and his meekness is celebrated by Origen. If he was not learned, he was at least a patron of learning. Above all, we are indebted to him for his glorious testimony to the truth, of the Christian religion, and his remarkable example of steadiness in the faith, of which he made, at least, two confessions, before heathen magistrates.

, a young writer of very promising talents, was born in Ireland in 1736, whither his father, a dissenting teacher at Stratford upon Avon, had removed; and from whence, on his death, the widow and family returned to England. After having gone through a grammatical education, John was sent to the dissenting academy at Daventry, where he prosecuted his studies with commendable diligence, and was afterwards put under the tuition of Dr. Benson, who had sometimes young students under his care, after they had finished their university or academical education, for the purpose of instructing them in a more critical acquaintance with the sacred writings. He afterwards entered into the ministry, which he exercised in and near Birmingham, but principally at a small village called Longdon, about twelve miles from that place. On Saturday, Dec. 28, 1765, he returned to rest, in perfect health, between eleven and twelve o'clock, intending to officiate at Longdon next day but at six in the morning he was found dead in his bed; an event which was sincerely deplored by his friends, both as a private and a public loss.

He had a brother, Dr. Benjamin Alexander, a phyjwcian in London, who died young, in 1768, and was the translator of Morgagni “De sedibus et causis morborum,” 3 vols. 4to, Lond. 1765).

, bishop of Lincoln in the reigns of Henry I. and Stephen, was a Norman by birth, and nephew of the famous Roger, bishop of Salisbury, who first made him archdeacon of Salisbury, and afterwards, by his interest with the king, raised him to the mitre. Alexander was consecrated at Canterbury July 22, 1123. Having received his education under his uncle the bishop of Salisbury, and been accustomed to a splendid way of living, he affected show and state more than was suitable to his character, or consistent with his fortunes; but, tbis failing excepted, he was a man of worth and honour, and every way qualified for his station. The year after his consecration, his cathedral church at Lincoln having been accidentally burnt down, he rebuilt it, and secured it against the like accident for the future by 'a stone roof. He also increased the number of prebends in his church, and augmented its revenues with several manors and estates. In imitation of the barons and some of the bishops, particularly his uncle the bishop of Salisbury, he built three castles; one at Banbury, another at Sleaford, and a third at Newark. He likewise founded two monasteries; one at Haverholm, for regular canons and nuns together, the other at Tame, for White-friars. He went twice to Rome in the years 1142 and 1144. The first time, he came back in quality of the pope’s legate, for the calling a synod, in which he published several wholesome and necessary canons. In August 1147 he took a third journey to the pope, who was then in France; where he fell sick through the excessive heat of the weather, and returning with great difficulty to England, he died in the 24th year of his prelacy.

, grand duke of Russia, and a saint of the Russian church, is so often mentioned on account of the order of knighthood instituted to his honour by Peter the Great, and yet is so little known out of Russia, that an article may well be allowed him here. He was born in 1218, and seems to have been a man of strong character, of personal courage, and bodily strength. The almost incessant wars in which his father Yaroslauf was engaged with Tshingis khan and the neighbouring horcles of Mongoies, inspired him early in life with a passion for conquest. Probably too an unhappy conceit entertained by the princes of those times and those countries, might have contributed somewhat to prepare Alexander for the part of the hero he. afterwards performed. This was the custom of conferring on young princes particular provinces as apanages or viceroyalties. Yaroslauf had in 1227 changed his residence at Novgorod for that of Pereyaslaf, leaving in the former place his two eldest sons, Feodor and Alexander, as his representative, under the guidance of two experienced boyars. However small the share that a boy of ten years old, as Alexander then was, could take in the government; yet it must have been of advantage to him to be thus initiated in a situation preparatory to the exercise of that power he was one day to enjoy in his own right. Five years afterwards Feodor died; and now Alexander was alone viceroy of Novgorod he was not an apanaged prince till 1239, when his father took possession of Vladimir. He now married a princess of the province of Polotzk, and the first care of his government was to secure the country against the attacks of the Tshudes (among whom are particularly to be understood the Esthonians), who were partly turbulent subjects, and partly piratical neighbours of the principality of Novgorod. To this end he built a line of forts along the river Shelonia, which falls into the Ilmenlake. But a more imminent danger soon furnished him with an opportunity of performing far greater service to his nation. Incited by the oppressions exercised by the Tartars on southern Russia, the northern borderers formed a league to subdue Novgorod; and thought it necessary to begin their enterprise the sooner, as, from the accounts they had received by one of their chiefs, who had gained a personal knowledge of Alexander at Novgorod, the young prince would shortly be too powerful for them. The warlike king of Denmark, Valdemar II. at that time possessed a considerable portion of Esthonia, together with Reval, which he had lately built . He had long been in alliance with the Teutonic knights of Livonia, which he renewed in 1233; ift which treaty they agreed upon a combined expedition against the Russians. This was accordingly undertaken in 1239. A very considerable fleet came to land on the banks of the Neva, while the Swedes were coming down from Ladoga to attack them by land. An embassy was sent to Alexander, commanding him immediately to submit, or to stake his fortunes on a decisive battle. He made choice of the latter. Too near the enemy, and too distant from his father, he had no hope of any foreign succour, and his army was extremely weak. In the presence of his people he solemnly implored the assistance of heaven, was certified of it by the formal benediction of the archbishop; and thus raised the efficacy of the only support he had, the courage of his soldiers. Having their strength increased by the persuasion that the hosts of heaven were on theic­'side, they went to battle, and began the attack. This was at six in the morning. The two armies were closely engaged during the whole day, and the slaughter continued till night put an end to the contest. The field was covered with the bodies of the slain. Three ship-loads of them were sunk in the sea, and the rest were thrown together in pits. On the side of the Novgorodians only 20 men were killed, say the chronicles; perhaps by an error of the writers, perhaps in the meaning that only the principal citizens of Novgorod are reckoned. But most likely this statement is one of those poeac extravagancies which are not to be mistaken in perusing the Russian accounts of this battle. In the ancient history of all nations a certain lively colouring is used in describing the decisive transactions of early times; a natural consequence of the intimate concern the chronologer takes in the successes of his conntry, and the enthusiasm with which he wishes to represent it as a nation of heroes. Thus the old historians mention six mighty warriors, who, by some signal act in this battle, have handed down their names to the latest posterity. It is impossible not to imagine we are perusing a fragment of romance, when we read, that Gavriela Alexiri pursued a king’s son on horseback into a ship, fell into the sea, came back unhurt, and slew a general and two bishops. Sbislauf was armed only with an axe, Jacob Polotshanin with nothing but a sword, and both killed a multitude of the ene r my. Sava rushed into the enemy’s camp, destroyed the tent of the general, &c. Alexander, our heroic saint, is also indebted to this poetical colouring (perhaps to a vulgar ballad) for his canonization and his fame. He sprung like a lion upon the leader of the hostile troops, and cleft his face in two with a stroke of his sword. This personage, according to the Russian annalists, was no less a man than the king of the northern regions himself. And this act it was that procured our Alexander the surname of Nevskoi, i.e. the conqueror on the banks of the Neva. Peter the Great took a politic advantage of the enthusiasm of the nation, for this Alexander, in order to procure a religious interest for his new city of Petersburg. On the spat where, according to the common opinion, the holy hero had earned the glorious name of Nevskoi, he caused the foundations of a monastery to be laid in 1712, to which he afterwards, in 1723, caused the bones of the great duke to be brought. Peter gave orders that the relics of the saints of Volodimer should be brought to Petersburg (a distance of 700 miles) attended by great solemnities. Between 300 and 400 priests accompanied the procession. On their arrival, the emperor himself, with all his court, went out to meet them; and the coffin, inclosed in a case of copper strongly gilt, was deposited in the monastery with great ceremony. This monastery of St. Alexander Nevskoi is about five versts from the castle at Petersburg, in an agreeable situation on the bank of the Neva. It has gradually been enlarged by the several sovereigns since the emperor Peter; and the present empress has built a magnificent church within its walls, and a sumptuous mausoleum for herself and her descendants. The shrine of the saint is of massy silver, of great value, but both the workmanship and the inscription in a bad taste. The order of knighthood of St. Alexander Nevskoi was properly instituted by Peter the Great in 1722; but he died before he had appointed the knights. This was done by Catherine I. in June 1725. The number of the knights are at present about 135, among whom are one or more crowned heads.

, a Benedictine of the congregation of St. Maur, who was born at Paris in 1654, and died at an advanced age at St. Denys in 1728, is known by two useful works 1. “La Medicine et la Chirurgie des pauvres,” Paris, in 12mo, 1738. This book contains remedies, cheap, and easily prepared, for both inward and outward ailments. 2. “Dictionnaire Botaniqne et Pharmaceutique,” in 8vo, several times reprinted; in which are found the principal properties of such minerals, vegetables, and animals as are used in medicine. A great number of remedies are pointed out, but not always with sufficient care in the selection. Dr. Alexander had a very extensive knowledge in simples. Equally pious and charitable, he employed it to the relief of his brethren, and especially the poor.

, a learned ecclesiastical writer of the 17th century, born at Roan in Normandy, Jan. 19, 1639. After finishing his studies at Roan, he entered into the order of Dominican friars, and was professed there in 1655. Soon after he went to Paris, to go through a course of philosophy and divinity in the great convent, where he so distinguished himself, that he was appointed to teach philosophy there, which he did for twelve years. This however did not so much engage his attention as to make him neglect preaching, which is the chief business of the order he professed. His sermons were elegant and solid: but as he had not that ease and fluency of speech requisite in a preacher, he soon forsook the pulpit; and his superiors being of opinion that he should apply himself wholly to the study of the scriptures and ecclesiastical history, he followed their advice, and was created a doctor of the Sorbonne in 1675. Mr. Colbert shewed him many marks of his esteem; and being determined to omit nothing to complete the education of his son, afterwards archbishop of Roan, he formed an assembly of the most learned persons, whose conferences upon, ecclesiastical history might be of advantage to him. Father Alexander was invited to this assembly, where he exerted himself with so much genius and ability, that he gained the particular friendship of young Colbert, who shewed him the utmost regard as long as he lived. These conferences gave rise to Alexander’s design of writing an ecclesiastical history; for, being desired to reduce what was material in these conferences to writing, he did it with so much accuracy, that the learned men who composed this assembly advised him to undertake a complete body of church-history. This he executed with great assiduity, collecting and digesting the materials himself, and writing even the tables with his own hand. His first work is that wherein he endeavours to prove, against Ai. de Launoi, that St. Thomas Aquinas is the real author of the Sum, ascribed to him: it was printed in Paris 1675, in 8vo. The year following he published the first volume of a large work in Latin, upon the principal points of ecclesiastical history: this contains 26 volumes in 8vo. The first volume treats of the history of the first ages of the church, and relates the persecutions which it suffered, the succession of popes, the heresies which arose, the councils which condemned them, the writers in favour of Christianity, and the kings and emperors who reigned during the first century: to this are subjoined dissertations upon such points as have been the occasion of dispute in history, chronology, criticism, or doctrine. The history of the second century, with some dissertations, was published in two volumes in the year 1677. The third century came out in 1678; in this he treats largely of public penance, and examines into the origin and progress of the famous dispute between pope Stephen and St. Cyprian, concerning the rebaptizing of those who had been baptized by heretics; and he has added three dissertations, wherein he has collected what relates to the life, manners, errors, and Defenders of St. Cyprian. The history of the fourth century is so very extensive, that Alexander has found matter for three volumes and forty-five dissertations; they were printed at Paris in 1679. In the three following years he published his history of the fifth, sixth, seventh, eighth, ninth, and tenth centuries; and that of the eleventh and twelfth centuries in 1683; in these volumes are several Dissertations against Mr. Daille; and in some of them he treats of the disputes between the princes and popes in. such a manner, that a decree from Rome was issued out Against his writings in 1684. However, he published the same year the history of the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries, in which he continued to defend the rights of kings against the pretensions of that court. He at last completed his work in 1686, by publishing four volumes, which contained the history of the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries. Jn 1689 he published a work, in the same method, upon the Old Testament, in six volumes 8vo. In 1678 he published three dissertations: the first concerning the superiority of bishops over presbyters, against Blondel; the second concerning the celibacy of the clergy, and reconciling the history of Paphnutius with the canon of the council of Nice; and the third concerning the Vulgate. The same year he printed a dissertation concerning sacramental confession, against Mr. Daille“, in 8vo. In 1682 he wrote an apology for his dissertation upon the Vulgate, against Claudius Frassen. He published likewise about this time, or some time before, three dissertations in defence of St. Thomas Aquinas; the first against Henschenius and Papebroch, to shew that the office of the holy sacrament was written by him; the second was in form of a dialogue between a Dominican and a Franciscan, to con fute the common opinion that Alexander of Hales was St. Thomas Aquinas’s master: and that the latter borrowed his” Secunda Secundse“from the former: the third is a panegyric upon Aquinas. In 1693 he published his” Theologia dogmatica,“in five books, or” Positive and Moral Divinity, according to the order of the catechism of the council of Trent.“This Latin work, consisting of ten octavo volumes, was printed at Paris and at Venice in 1698; in 1701 he added another volume; and they were all printed together at Paris, in two volumes folio, in 1703, with a collection of Latin letters, which had been printed separately. In 1703 he published tf A commentary upon the four Gospels,” in folio; and in 1710, he published another at Roan, upon St. Paul’s and the seven canonical epistles. He wrote also a commentary upon the prophets Jsaiah, Jeremiah, and Baruch, which was never printed. The following works are also enumerated by his biographers. 1. “Statuta facultatis artium Thomistiæe collegio Parisiensi fratrum prsedicatorum instituta,” Paris, 1683, 12mo. 2. “Institutio concionatorum tripartita, seu praecepta et regula ad praedicatores informandos, cum ideis seu rudimentis concionum per totum annum.” 3. “Abre‘ge’ de la foy et de la morale de l‘eglise, tiree de l’ecriture sainte,” Paris, 1676, 12rno. 4. “Eclaircissement des prétendues difficultés proposeés a mons. l'archevêque de Rouen, sur plusieurs points importans de la morale de Jesus Christ,” 1697, 12mo. 5. “A Letter to a Doctor of Sorbonne, upon the dispute concerning Probability, and the Errors of a Thesis in Divinity maintained by the Jesuits in their college at Lyons, the 26th of August,” printed at Mons, 1697, 12mo. 6. “A second letter upon the same subject,” 1697, 12mo. 7. “An apology for the Dominican Missionaries in China, or an Answer to a book of father Tellier the Jesuit, entitled a Defence of the new Christians; and to an Explanation published by father Gobien, of the same society, concerning the honours which the Chinese pay to Confucius and to the dead,” printed at Cologn, 1699, 12mo. 8. “Documenta controversiarum missionariorum apostolicorum imperii Sinici de cultu praejiertim Confueii philosophi et progenitoruin defunctorum spectantia, ac apologiam Dominica norum missiones Sinicae ministrorum adversus Hr. Pp. le Tellier et le Gobien societatis Jesu confirmantia.” 9. “A Treatise on the conformity between the Chinese ceremonies and the Greek and Roman idolatry, in order to confirm the apology of the Dominican Missionaries in China,” 1700, 12 mo. Translated into Italian, and printed at Cologn, 8vo. He wrote likewise seven letters to the Jesuits Le Comte and Dez, upon the same subject. In 1706 he was made a provincial for the province ofParis. Towards the latter part of his life, he was afflicted with the loss of his sight, a most inexpressible misfortune to one whose whole pleasure was in study; yet he bore it with great patience and resignation. He died at Paris, merely of a decay of nature, August 21, 1724, in the 86th year of his age. His piety, humility, and disinterestedness rendered him the object of general esteem; and he was honoured with thfe friendship of the most learned prelates of France. His opinion was always considered as of great weight upon the most important subjects which were debated in the Sorbonne. He was likewise highly valued at Rome: the learned cardinals N orris and Aguirre distinguished him upon several occasions.

, of Paris, a writer of romance in the twelfth century, was a native of Bernay in Normandy, and one of the authors of the romance of “Alexander,” written in verses of twelve feet, which have been since called Alexandrines, from the name of the hero, and not of the poet, who was not the inventor of them. This romance was begun by Lambert li Cors (the little) of Chateaudun; and various other poets, besides our Alexander, assisted in completing it. Manuscripts of all their performances are in the imperial library at Paris, under the three titles of: 1. “Le roman d'Alexandre,” by Lambert li Cors, and Alexander of Paris 2. “Le Testament d'Alexandre,” by Pierre de St. Cloud: 3. “Li Roumans de tote Chevalerie ou Ja Geste d'Alisandre,” by Thomas de Kent. This last is written in the French language introduced into England by William the Conqueror, a mixture of the Norman and Anglo-Saxon. 4. “La Vengeance d'Alexandre,” by Jehan le Venelais, or li Nivelois. 5. “Vœu de Paon,” partly by Jehan Brise-Barre. The other writers who contributed to this collection are, Guy de Cambray, Simon de Boulogne, surnamed le Cterc, or the learned, Jacques de Longuyon, and Jehan de Motelec. The first part of the romance of Alexander appeared about the year 1210, under the reign of Philip Augustus, and not that of Louis VII. as has been asserted. It contains many flattering allusions to the events of the reigns of both those princes, and is very well written for the time; many of the verses are harmonious, and the descriptive part animated, but this character belongs chiefly to the first part: the continuators were very unequal to the task. In the 16th century, an abridgement of the romance appeared at Paris, printed by Bonfons, but without date, under the title “Histoire du tres-noble et tres-vailiant roi Alexandre-le-Grant, jadis roi et seigneur de tout le monde, avec les grandes prouesses qu'il a faites en son temps.”

, surnamed Polyhistor, on account of his great learning, and Cornelius, because he had been the slave of Cornelius Lentulus, was eminent as a philosopher, geographer, and historian. According to Suidas, he was originally of Miletum, but Stephen of Byzantium thinks he was a native of Coup, a town in Phrygia. He was taken prisoner in one of the battles of Mithridates, and purchased by Cornelius Lentulus, who employed him to educate his children, but afterwards gave him his liberty. He lived in the time of Sylla, about the year 85 B. C. He lost his life by an accidental fire; and his wife Helen, shocked at the catastrophe, committed suicide. Few men, according to Eusebius, were at that time possessed of so much learning and genius as Alexander Polyhistor. He wrote forty-two works on different subjects, particularly on the history of the nations of the East, of which a few fragments are extant. Stephen of Byzantium quotes his works on the history of Bithynia, Caria, Syria, and other places. Athenaeus mentions his description of the island of Crete, and Plutarch his history of the musicians of Phrygia. Diogenes Laertius ascribes to him a work on the succession of philosophers, and another, commentaries of Pythagoras. But all these have perished, and his memory lives only in the pages of Suidas, Eusebius, Athenæus, and Pliny.

, a learned physician and philosopher, of the 6th century, was born at Tralles, in Asia Minor. His father, also a physician, had five sons distinguished for their talents: the two most celebrated were Anthemius, an architect, and Alexander. The latter, after travelling for improvement into France, Spain, and Italy, took up his residence at Rome, where he acquired great reputation. He and Aretatæus may be considered as the best Greek physicians after Hippocrates. Alexander describes diseases with great exactness, and his style is elegant; but he partook of the credulity of his times, and trusted too much to amulets and nostrums. He added something, however, to the more judicious practice of the art, having been the first who prescribed opening the jugular, and the first who administered steel in substance. He is much fuller, and more exact than his predecessors in Therapeutics, and collected those remedies principally which he had found to be most effectual. Dr. Freind has given an elaborate analysis of his practice. There are various editions of his works; one in Greek, Paris, 1548, fol. corrected by Goupil, from a manuscript furnished by Duchatel, bishop of Macon and grand almoner of France. There is also an old and bad Latin translation, which Fabricius thinks must have been taken from some Arabic original, published under the title of “Alexandri iatros practica, cum expositione glossae interlinearis Jacobi de Partibus, et Simonis Januensis,” Leyden, 1504, 4to. This was retrenched by Albanus Taurinus, but without the Greek being consulted, and published at Basil, fol. 1533. Another translation, by Gouthier d'Andernac, was improved from the Greek, and has often been reprinted. Among the works of Mercurialis is a small treatise in verse, attributed to Alexander. Haller published a Latin edition of all his works, in 1772, 2 vols. 8vo, with Freind’s account of his practice. In 1734, an abridgement was published at London by Edward MiUvard, M. D. entitled “Trallianus Redivivus, or an account of Trallianus one of the Greek authors who flourished after Galen; showing that these authors are far from deserving the imputation of mere tforrtpilators,” 8vo. This was intended as a supplement to Dr. Freind’s History.

, a poet and statesman of Scotland, is said to have been a descendant of the ancient family of Macdonald. Alexander Macdonald, his ancestor, obtained from one of the earls of Argyle a grant of the lands of Menstrie in the comity of Clackmanan, and our author’s sirname was taken from this ancestor’s proper name. He was born about the year 1580, and from his infancy exhibited proofs of genius, which his friends were desirous of improving by the best instruction which the age afforded, Travelling was at that time an essential branch of education, and Mr. Alexander had the advantage of being appointed tutor, or rather companion, to the earl of Argyle, who was then about to visit the continent.

On his return to Scotland, he betook himself for some time to a retired life, and endeavoured to alleviate the sorrows of ill-requited love by writing those songs and sonnets which he entitled “Aurora.” Who his mistress was, we are not told; but it appears by these poems that he was smitten with her charms when he was only in his fifteenth year, and neither by study or travel could banish lier from his affections. When all hope, however, was cut off by her marriage, he had at last recourse to the same remedy, and obtained the hand of Janet the daughter and heiress of sir William Erskine.

Soon after his marriage, he attended the court of king James VI. as a private gentleman, but not without being distinguished as a man of learning and personal accomplishments, and particularly noticed as a poet by his majesty, who, with all his failings, had allowable pretensions to the discernment, as well as the liberality, of a patron of letters. James was fond of flattery, and had no reason to complain that his courtiers stinted him in that article; yet Mr. Alexander chose at this time to employ his pen on subjects that were new in the palaces of kings. Having studied the ancient moralists and philosophers, he descanted on the vanity of grandeur, the value of truth, the abuse of power, and the burthen of riches. Against a11 that has ever been objected to courts and ministers, to minions and flatterers, he advised and remonstrated with prolix freedom in those Tragedies which he calls “Monarchic,” and which, however unfit for the stage, seem to have been written for the sole purpose of teaching sovereigns how to rule, if they would render their subjects happy and loyal, and their reigns prosperous and peaceful.

With these productions king James is said to have been delighted, and honoured the. author with his conversation, calling him his philosophical poet. He began likewise to bestow some more substantial marks of his favour, as soon as Mr. Alexander followed him to the court of England. In the month of July 1613, he appointed him to be one of the gentlemen ushers of the presence to prince Charles; but neither the manners nor the honou s of the court made any alteration in the growing propensity of our author’s muse towards serious subjects. From having acquired the title of a philosophical, he endeavoured now to earn that pf a divine poet, by publishing, in 1614, his largest work, entitled “Doomsday, or the Great Day of Judgment,” printed at Edinburgh, in 4to, afterwards in the same size in London, and aoain in folio with his other works. In 1720, the first two books were edited by A. Johnstoun, encouraged by the favourable opinion of Addison who, however, did not live to see the edition published.

The same year in which this last work appeared, the king appointed him master of the requests, and conferred upon him the order of knighthood. And no~w, in the opinion of his biographer, his views began to descend from the regions of supposed perfection and contentment to those objects which are more commonly and more successfully accomplished in the sunshine of a court. Having projected the settlement of a colony in Nova Scotia, he laid out a considerable sum of money in that quarter, and joined with a company of adventurers who were willing to embark their property in the same concern. His majesty, in whose favour he still stood high, made him a grant of Nova Scotia on the 21st of September 1621, and intended to create an order of baronets for the more dignified support of so great a work; but was diverted from this part of his purpose by the disturbed state of public affairs towards the close of his reign. His successor, however, shewed every inclination to promote the scheme; and sir William, in 1625, published a pamphlet entitled “An Encouragement to Colonies,” the object of which was to state the progress already made, to recommend the scheme to the nation, and to invite adventurers. But before this, there is reason to think he had a hand in “A brief Relation of the discovery and plantation of New England: and of sundry accidents therein occurring, from the year of our Lord 1607 to this present 1622: together with the state thereof as it now standeth, the general forme of government intended, and the division of the whole territorie into counties, baronries, &c.”

But whatever opposition or censure he encountered from the public in this affair, he still remained in high credit with the king, who, in 1626, appointed him secretary of state for Scotland, and in 1630, created him a peer of that kingdom by the title of viscount Canada, lord Alexander pf Menstrie. About three years after, he was advanced to the title of earl of Stirling, at the solemnity of his majesty’s coronation in Holyrood house. His lordship appears to have discharged the office of secretary of state for Scotland with universal reputation, and endeavoured to act with moderation during a crisis of peculiar delicacy, when Laud was endeavouring to abolish presbytery in Scotland, and to establish episcopacy.

He left, by his lady, 1. William, lord Alexander, viscount Canada, his eldest son, who died in the office of his majesty’s resident in Nova Scotia, during his father’s lifetime: William, the son of this young nobleman succeeded his grandfather in the earldom, but died about a month after him 2. Henry Alexander, afterwards earl of Stirling 3. John, and two daughters, lady Margaret and lady Mary. Henry Alexander settled in England, and was succeeded in titles and estate by his grandson Henry, who died in 1739, and was the last male descendant of the first earl. A claimant appeared in 1776, but, being unable to prove his descent before the house of peers, was ordered not to assume the title .

Our author has been liberally praised by his contemporaries, and by some of his successors, by John Dunbar, Arthur Johnston, Andrew Ramsay, Daniel, Davis of Hereford, Hayman, Habington, Dray ton and Lithgow. His style is certainly neither pure nor correct, which may perhaps be attributed to his long familiarity with the Scotch language, but his versification is in general very superior to that of his contemporaries, and approaches nearer to the elegance of modern times than could have been expected from one who wrote so much. There are innumerable beauties scattered over the whole of Ims works, but particularly in his songs and sonnets: the former are a species of irregular odes, in which the sentiment, occasionally partaking of the quaintness of his age, is more frequently new, and forcibly expressed. The powers of mind displayed in his Doomsday and Para;nesis are very considerable, although we are frequently able to trace the allusions and imagery to the language of holy writ; and he appears to have been less inspired by the sublimity, than by the awful importance of his subject to rational beings. A habit of moralizing pervades all his writings; but in the Doomsday, he appears deeply impressed with his subject, and more anxious to persuade the heart than to delight the imagination.

, a Greek comic poet, was born at Thurium, a colony of Athenians in Lucania, and came to Athens when young. He was uncle to Menander, and his instructor in theatrical composition. He lived in the time of Alexander, about the year 363 B. C. and when advanced to extreme old age, to one who asked him what he was doing, he replied, “1 am dying by degrees.” The only fragments left of his writings are in Cnspinus’s collection, “Vetustissimorum Authorum Grvecorum poemata,” 1570.

, a Piedmontese, the reputed author of a book of “Secrets,” which was printed at Basil 1536, in 8vo, and translated from Italian into Latin by Wecher it has also been translated into French, and printed several times with additions. In the preface Alexis informs us, that he was born of a noble family; that he had from his most early years applied himself to study; that he had learned the Greek, the Latin, the Hebrew, the Chaldean, the Arabian, and several other languages; that having an extreme curiosity to be acquainted with the secrets of nature, he had collected as much as he could during his travels for 57 years; that he piqued himself upon not communicating his secrets to any person: but that when he was 82 years of age, having seen a poor man who had died of a sickness which might have been cured had he communicated his secret to the surgeon who took care of him, he was touched with such a remorse of conscience, that he retired from the world and ranged his secrets in such an order, as to make them fit to be published. They appeared accordingly at Venice in 1557, 4to, and have been translated and published in every European language; and an abridgement of them was long a popular book at the foreign fairs. Haller says that his real name was Hieronymo Rosello.

, an English poet, once of some fame, who lived in the reign of Charles I. He received his education at Sidney college in Cambridge; and going to London, became assistant to Thomas Farnaby the famous grammarian, athis great school in Goldsmith’s rents, in the parish of St. Giles’s, Cripplegate. In 1631, he published two poems on the famous victories of Cressi and Poictiers, obtained by the English in France, under king Edward III. and his martial son the Black Prince; they are written in stanzas of six lines. Leaving Mr. Farnaby, he went into the family of Edward Sherburne, esq. to be tutor to his son, who succeeded his father as clerk of the ordnance, and was also commissary-general of the artillery to king Charles I. at the battle of Edgehill. His next production was a poem in honour of king Henry VII. and that important battle which gained him the crown of England: it was published in IbliS, under the title of “The Historic of that wise and fortunate prince Henrie, of that name the seventh, king of England; with that famed battle fought between the said king Henry and Richard III. named Crook-back, upon Red more near Bosworth.” There are several poetical eulogiums prefixed to this piece, amongst which is one by Edward Sherburne, his pupil. Besides these three poems, there are in print some little copies of commendatory verses ascribed to him, and prefixed to the works of other writers, particularly before the earliest editions of Beaumont and Fletcher’s plays. la 1639 he published the History of Eurialus and Lucretia, which was a translation; the story is to be found among the Latin epistles of Æneas Sylvius. The year after he is said to have died, and to have been buried in the parish of St. Andrew’s, Holborn.

, a very eminent Arabian philosopher of the tenth century, was born at Farab, now Othrar, in Asia. Minor, from which he took the name by which he is generally known. His real name was Mohammed. He was of Turkish origin, but quitted his country to acquire a more perfect knowledge of the Arabic, and of the works of the Greek philosophers. He studied principally at Bagdat, under a celebrated Aristotelian professor, named Abou Bachar Mattey; and then went to Harran, where John, a Christian physician, taught logic. In a short time, he surpassed all his fellow-scholars; and after a visit to Egypt, settled at Damas, where the prince of that city, Seif-edDaulah, took him into his patronage, although it was with difficulty that he could persuade him to accept his favours. Alfarabi had no attachment but to study, and knew nothing of the manners of a court. When he presented himself, for the first time, before the prince, the latter, wishing to amuse himself at the expence of the philosopher, made known his intention to his guards in a foreign language, but was much surprised when Alfarabi told him that he knew what he said, and could, if necessary, speak to him in seventy other languages. The conversation then turning on the sciences in general, Alfarabi delivered his opinions with such learning and eloquence, that the men of letters present were completely put to silence, and began to write down what he said. He excelled likewise in music, and ingratiated himseif so with the prince, that he gave him a handsome pension, and Alfarabi remained with him until his death in the year 950. He wrote many treatises on different parts of the Aristotelian philosophy, which were read and admired, not only among the Arabians, but also among the Jews, who began about this time to adopt the Aristoteliaft mode of philosophizing. Many of his books were translated from Arabic into Hebrew, and it is by these versions principally that the Europeans have been made acquainted with his merit. His treatise “De Intelligentiis” was published in the works of Avicenna, Venice, 1495; another, “Dfc Causis,” is in Aristotle’s works, with the commentaries of Averroes; and his “Opuscula varia” were printed at Paris in 1638. One of his writings, which brought him much reputation, was a kind of encyclopaedia, in which he gives a short account and definition of all branches of science and art. The manuscript of this is in the Escurial.

, a Spanish painter of considerable eminence, was born at Cordova in 1640, educated under Castillo, and completed his studies with Velasquez at Madrid, whose style he copied, particularly in his portraits. Velasquez, who was the first painter to the king of Spain, procured Alfaro favourable opportunities to study the fine pictures in the royal collections; and Titian, Rubens, and Vandyke, became his principal models. Many of his pictures, particularly his small ones, are very much in the style of Vandyke. As he principally followed the lucrative business of portrait-painting, both in oil and miniature, he probably would have realized a considerable fortune, but a weakly state of health soon plunged him into melancholy, of which he died in his fortieth year. Mr. Cumberland attributes his death to grief, upon account of the banishment of the admiral of Castille, in whose family he was an inmate, and to his having been rejected when he went to pay his respects to the admiral on his release. Alfaro was not only a good painter, but wrote sensibly on th, art. Of his pictures, there is an “Incarnation” at Madrid, and a “Guardian Angel,” and a portrait of Don Pedro Caldefona, in the church of St. Salvador, which are verj conspicuous monuments of his skill.

, a celebrated Roman lawyer, was born in the year of Rome 713, at Cremona, from whence he came to Rome and studied under Servius Sulpicius. His distinguished talents and probity of character raised him at length to the rank of consul. He was the first who made those collections of the civil law, which are called Digests; but none of his writings are now extant. There have been several persons of the same name, whose characters have been confounded, as may be seen by a reference to our authorities.

, an eminent Italian poet of the last century, was born at Asti, in Piedmont, Jan. 17, 1749, of an ancient family, and sent for education to Turin, where he was principally under the care of the count Benoit Alfred, his father’s cousin. His progress, however, was for some time very slow, partly owing to bad health, and partly to temper; and when his tutor died, he left the academy at the age of sixteen, almost as ignorant as he entered it, and without having acquired a taste for any thingbut riding. His next passion was for travelling, in which he appeared to have no-other object than moving from one place to another. In less than two years he visited a great part of Italy, Paris, England, Holland, and returned to Piedmont, without having sought to know any thing, to study any thing, or to gratify any curiosity. His second tour was yet more extensive and more rapid: in eighteen months he travelled through Germany, Denmark, Sweden, Russia, Prussia, and returning through the Spa and Holland, went again to England. During this second visit to London, he engaged in affairs of gallantry, and discovered many oddities of behaviour, but in neither of his visits did he give himself the trouble to learn the language. After remaining in London seven months, he returned, with the utmost expedition, by Holland, France, Spain, and Portugal, and arrived at Turin, May 5, 1772. A violent attachment to a lady of quality of this place engrossed his mind for two years, but had the happy effect of first inspiring him with a taste for poetry and poetical composition. After some imperfect attempts, he wrote a sort of tragedy, called “Cleopatra,” which he procured to be acted at Turin, June 16, 1775, with a small piece “The Poets,” by way of farce, in which the author endeavoured to turn his own tragedy into ridicule. The success of these two pieces, although confined to only two representations, decided Alfieri to become an author, and proved the commencement of a new life. At this time, he knew French very imperfectly, scarcely any thing of Italian, and nothing of Latin. The French he determined to forget altogether, but to cultivate Italian and Latin, and study the best authors in both. The study, accordingly, of the Latin and the pure Tuscan languages, and of dramatic composition, upon a new plan of his own invention, occupied all his time, and gave employment to that activity and sprightliness of mind and fancy which had hitherto been dissipated on trifles. His first two tragedies were “Philip II.” and “Polinice;” and these were followed at short intervals, by “Antigone,” “Agamemnon,” &c. to the amount of fourteen, within less than seven years; and within the same space, he wrote several pieces in prose and verse, a translation of Sallust, “A Treatise on Tyranny,” “Etruria avenged,” in four cantos, and five “Odes” on the American revolution. He afterwards recommenced his travels, and added to his collection of tragedies, “Agis,” “Sophonisba,” “Brutus I.” “Brutus II.” and others. Although he had a dislike to France, he came thither to print his theatre, and with him the lady of his affections, the princess of Schomberg, the wife of the last prince of the house of Stuart, who, when set at liberty by the death of her husband, bestowed her hand on Alfieri. On his arrival in France, he found that nation ripe for a revolution, to the principles of which he was at first inclined, and expressed his opinion very freely in “Parigi Shastigliato,” an ode on the taking of the Bastille; but the horrors of revolutionary phrenzy which followed, induced him to disavow publicly the principles which he had professed, and he resolved to lose the property that he had acquired in France, rather than to appear to maintain them any longer. Accordingly he left France ia August 1792, and the following year, his property in the funds was confiscated, and his furniture, papers, and books sequestered and sold at Paris. In 1794, he published a declaration in the gazette of Tuscany, in which he avowed some of the works left behind him, and disavowed others which he thought might be found among his papers, or altered without his consent, and published as his. Among the latter was his “Etruria avenged,” and the “Treatise on Tyranny” above mentioned; but it is certain that he had caused an edition of these and some other pieces of the same stamp to be published at Kell, about the time he arrived in France, and now disavowed them merely because he had changed his opinions. From this time, ruminating on the unjust treatment he had received at Paris, he never ceased to express his contempt of the French nation in what he wrote, but he resumed his pen and his studies with more eagerness than ever. At the age of forty-eight he began the study of Greek, and continued it with his usual ardour, and the rest of his life was employed in making translations from that language, and in writing comedies, tragedies, and satires. His incessant labours at length brought on a complaint of which he died at Florence (where he had resided from the time of his leaving France), Oct. 8, 1803, and was interred in the church of St. Croix, where his widow erected a splendid monument to his memory, executed by Canova, between the tombs of Machiavel and Michael Angelo. The inscription was written by himself, and is as flattering as his life, written also by himself, and published at Paris, 1809, and in English at London, 1810, 2 vols. His posthumous works, in 13 volumes, were published in 1804, at Florence, although with London on the title: they consist of a number of translations, and some original dramas in a singular taste, and not very likely to be adopted as models. A French translation of his dramatic works was published at Paris, 1802, 4 vols. 8vo. Petitot, the translator, has added some judicious reflexions on the forms given to the Italian tragedy by Alfieri, and notwithstanding its weak parts, this collection is a mine which some new authors have frequently worked. His lofty expression, or attempt at expression, and his anxious search for forcible thoughts, sometimes render him obscure; and he appears to have encumbered his genius with more designs than it could execute. Of his personal character, various accounts have been given. In his “Life,” he is sufficiently favourable to himself; but there are few traits in his character that are not rather objects of warning than of imitation. From his youth he appears to have been the slave of passion and temper, averse to the restraints of a well-regulated mind, and consequently many of his opinions, whether good or bad, were hastily conceived, and hastily abandoned.

, Alfergani, or Fargani, was a celebrated Arabic astronomer, who nourished about the year 800. He was so called from the place of his nativity, Fergan, in Sogdiana, now called Maracanda, or Samarcand, anciently a part of Bactria. He is also called Ahmed (or Muhammed) Ben-Cothair, or Katir. He wrote the Elements of Astronomy, in 30 chapters or sections. In this work the author chiefly follows Ptolomy, using the same hypotheses, and the same terms, and frequently citing him. There are three Latin translations of Alfragan’s work. The first was made in the twelfth century, by Joannes Hispalensis; and was published at Ferrara in 1493, and at Nuremberg in 1537, with a preface by Melancthon. The second was by John Christman, from the Hebrew version of James Antoli, and appeared at Francfort in 1590. Christman added to the first chapter of the work an ample commentary, in which he compares together the calendars of the Romans, the Egyptians, the Arabians, the Persians, the Syrians, and the Hebrews, and shews the correspondence of their years.

, the youngest son of Æthelwolf king of the West Saxons, was born in the year 849, at Wannating, or Wanading, which is supposed to be Wantage in Berkshire. Æthelwolf, having a great regard for religion, and being extremely devoted to the see of Rome, sent Alfred to that city at five years of age; where pope Leo IV. adopted and anointed him, as some think, with a regal unction, though others are of opinion he was only confirmed. Soon after his return, his father, being in the decline of life, and going to visit the holy see, took his favourite son with him; where he had an opportunity of seeing and hearing many things, which made snch strong impressions on him, as remained during his whole life, Æthelwolf had five sons, and a daughter; of whom Æthelstan, the eldest, was king of Kent in his father’s life-time, and died before him. Æthelbald, the second son, raised a rebellion against his father, when he returned from Rome; who, to avoid any effusion of blood, consented to divide his dominions with him. Æthelwolf did not long survive this; but, before his death, he, by a full and distinct testamerit, endeavoured to settle all the claims of his children. By this will Æthelbalcl and Æthelbert had his kingdoms divided betwixt them; and he left his private estate, with all the money in his coffers, to his younger sons Æthelred and Alfred. Æthelwolf died in the year 858, and was succeeded by Æthelbald, who reigned but two years and a half. On his demise JLthelbert seized the crown, which he held for five years, and died in the year 866. He was succeeded by his brother Æthelred; who, while he was a private man, had solemnly promised Alfred to do him that justice which had been denied by the two former kings, by giving him what his father had bequeathed him. On his accession Alfred demanded a performance of his promise; but the king excused himself on account of the troublesome times, and assured him that at his death he would leave him all. Alfred having given proofs of his courage in the former king’s reign, Æthelred would never part with him, but employed him as his first minister and general of his armies.

Upon his death, Alfred succeeded to the crown, agreeably to the will of king Æthelwolf and the appointment of Æthelred. This happened in the year 871, and the 22d of Alfred’s age. He had scarce time to attend the funeral of his brother, when he was obliged to fight for the crown he had so lately received. He engaged the Danish army at Wilton, and at the beginning of the battle had the advantage; but, in the pursuit, the Danes, discovering his weakness, rallied, and drove him out of the field. Soon after a treaty was concluded; but the Danes paid little regard to it, roaming up and down the country, and pillaging wherever they came. They at last put an end to the kingdom of Mercia, and obliged Burrhed, the king, not only to quit his dominions, but the island. Alfred fitted out a fleet to guard the coasts; and a squadron of five Danish ships approaching the coast, one of them was taken. A considerable army of Danes, however, having contrived to land, marched as far as Grantbndge, and quartered in that neighbourhood. Next summer they advanced to Werham: here Alfred met them witn all the forces he could raise; but not finding himself strong enough to engage them, he concluded a peace, and the Danes swore never more to invade his dominions; but in a little time they broke their faith; for being on the road to Mercia, they met a body of English horse, advancing in a peaceable manner, under the faith of the treaty: of them they slew the greater part, and soon after surprised Exeter. The king immediately marched against them with what forces he could collect, and besieged them in that city. While things were in this situation, his majesty’s fleet, having engaged a numerous one of the enemy, sunk many and dispersed the rest, which, attempting to gain some of the English ports, were driven on the coasts, and all miserably perished. This so terrified the Danes, that they were again obliged to sue for peace, and give hostages. However, in 877, having obtained newaids, they came in such numbers into Wiltshire, that the Saxons, giving themselves up to despair, would not make head against them; many fled out of the kingdom, not a few submitted, and the rest retired every man to the place where he could be best concealed. In this distress, Alfred, conceiving himself no longer a king, laid aside all marks of royalty, and took shelter in the house of one who kept his cattle. He retired afterwards to the isle of Æthelingey in Somersetshire, where he built a fort for the security of himself, his family, and the few faithful servants who repaired thither to him. When he had been about a year in, this retreat, having been informed that some of his subjects had routed a great army of the Danes, killed their chiefs, and taken their magical standard he issued his letters, giving notice where he was, and inviting his nobility to come and consult with him. Before they came to a final determination, Alfred, putting on the habit of a harper, went into the enemy’s camp; where, without suspicion, he was everywhere admitted, and had the honour to play before their princes. Having thereby acquired an exact knowledge of their situation, he returned in great secrecy to his nobility, whom he ordered to their respective homes, there to draw together each man as great a force as he could; and upon a day appointed there was to be a general rendezvous at the great wood, called Selwood, in Wiltshire. This affair was transacted so secretly and expeditiously, that in a little time the king, at the head of an army, approached the Danes before they had the least intelligence of his design. Alfred, taking advantage of the surprise and terror they were in, fell upon them, and totally defeated them at Æthendune, now Eddington. Those who escaped fled to a neighbouring castle, where they were soon besieged, and obliged to surrender at discretion. Alfred granted them better terms than they could have expected: he agreed to give up the whole kingdom of the East-Angles to such as would embrace the Christian religion; on condition that they should oblige the rest of their countrymen to quit the island, and, as much as it was in their power, prevent the lauding of any more foreigners. For the performance thereof he took hostages; and when, in pursuance of the treaty, Guthruna, the Danish captain, came with thirty of his chief officers to be baptized, Alfred answered for him, at the font, and gave him the name of Athelstan; and certain laws were drawn up betwixt the king and Guthrum, for the regulation and government of the Danes settled in, England. In 884-, a fresh number of Danes landed in Kent, and laid siege to Rochester; but, the king coming to the relief of that city, they were obliged to abandon their design. Alfred’s success was now complete, chiefly owing to his fleet, an advantage of his own creating. Having secured the sea coasts, he fortified the rest of the kingdom with castles and wailed towns; and he besieged and recovered from the Danes the city of London, which he resolved to repair and keep as a frontier.

After some years respite, Alfred was again called into the field; as a body of Danes, being worsted in the west of France, appeared with a fleet of 250 sail on the coast of Kent, and having landed, fixed themselves at Appletree. Shortly after, another fleet of eighty vessels coming up the Thames, the men landed, and built a fort at Middleton. Before Alfred marched against the enemy, he obliged the Danes, settled in Northumberland and Essex, to give him hostages for their good behaviour. He then moved towards the invaders, and pitched his camp between their armies, to prevent their junction. A great body, however, moved off to Essex; and, crossing the river, came to Farnham in Surrey, where they were defeated by the king’s forces. Meanwhile the Danes settled in Northumberland, in breach of treaty, and notwithstanding the hostages given, equipped two fleets; and, after plundering the northern and southern coasts, sailed to Exeter, and besieged it. The king, as soon as he received intelligence, marched against them; but, before he reached Exeter, they had got possession of it. He kept them, however, blocked up on all sides, and reduced them at last to such extremities, that they were obliged to eat their horses, and were even ready to devour each other. Being at length rendered desperate, they made a general sally on the besiegers, but were defeated, though with great loss on the king’s side. The remainder of this body of Danes fled into Essex, to the fort they had built there, and to their ships. Before Alfred had time to recruit himself, another Danish leader, whose name was Laf, came with a great army out of Northumberland, and destroyed all before him, marching on to the city of Werheal in the west, which is supposed to be Chester, where they remained the rest of that year. The year following they invaded North Wales; and, after having plundered and destroyed every thing, they divided, one body returning to Northumberland, another into the territories of the east Angles; from whence they proceeded to Essex, and took possession of a small island called Meresig. Here they did not long remain; for having parted, some sailed up the river Thames, and others up the Lea-road; where drawing up their ships, they built a fort not far from London, which proved a great check upon the citizens, who went in a body and attacked it, but were repulsed with great loss. At harvest-time the king himself was obliged to encamp with a body of troops in the neighbourhood of the city, in order to cover the reapers from the excursions of the Danes. As he was one day riding by the side of the river Lea, after some observation, he began to think that the Danish ships might be laid quite dry; which he attempted, and so succeeded therein, that the Danes deserted their fort and ships, and marched away to the banks of the Severn, where they buikt a fort, and wintered at a place called Quatbrig . Such of the Danish ships as could be got off, the Londoners carried into their own road; the rest they burnt and destroyed. The Danes in a little time began again to invade the territories of the West Saxons both by land and sea; but they did more mischief as pirates than as robbers, for, having built long and largeships, they became masters at sea, and depopulated all the coast. Alfred built some large gallies, and sent them to cruize on the coasts of the Isle of Wight and Devonshire, the sea thereabouts being greatly infested by six piratical vessels, which were all taken or destroyed except one: and such of the Danes as landed when their ships ran ashore, were taken prisoners, and brought before the king at Winchester, who sentenced them to be hanged as piratical murderers and enemies to mankind.

Alfred enjoyed a profound peace during the three last years of his reign, which he chiefly employed in establishing and regulating his government for the security of himself and his successors, as well as for the ease and benefit of his subjects in general. Before his reign, though there were many kings who took the title, yet none could properly be called monarch of the English nation; for notwithstanding there was always, after the time of Egbert, a prince who held a kind of pre-eminence over the rest, yet he had no dominion over their subjects, as Alfred had in the latter part of his reign; for to him all parts of England, not in the possession of the Danes, submitted, which was greatly owing to the fame of his wisdom and mildness of his government. He is said to have drawn up an excellent system of laws, which are mentioned in the Mirror of Justice, published by Andrew Home, in the reign of Edward I. as also a collection of Judgments; and, if we may credit Harding’s chronicle , they were used in Westminster-hall in the reign of Henry IV. In the chronicle said to be written by John Brompton, we meet some laws ascribed to king Alfred. They are in number 51; and before them is a preface, wherein the king recites many things concerning the excellency and use of laws. In the close he says, he collected from the laws of his ancestor king Ina, such as seemed to him most reasonable; and having communicated them to the learned men of his kingdom, he, with their assent, published them to be the rule of his people’s actions. These laws borrowed from king Ina were, if we believe himself, many of them taken from the British constitutions; and those, if credit is to be given to their authors, were excerpts from the Greek and Trojan laws. Although there remain but few laws which can be positively ascribed to Alfred, yet his biographers inform us, that to him we owe many of those advantages which render our constitution so dear and valuable, and that to him we are indebted for trial by jury; and if we rely on sir John Spelman’s conjecture, his institutions were the foundation of what is called the common law, so styled either on account of its being the common law of all the Saxons, or because it was common both to Saxons and Danes 1. It is said also, but this is a disputed point, that he was the first who divided the kingdom into shires; what is ascribed to him is not a bare division of the country, but the settling a new form of judicature; for, after having divided his dominions into shires, he subdivided each shire into three parts, called tythings, which though now grown out of date, yet there are some remains of this ancient division in the ridings of Yorkshire, the laths of Kent, and the three parts of Lincolnshire. Each tything was divided into hundreds or wapentukes, and these again into tythings or dwellings of ten householders each of these householders stood engaged to the king, as a pledge for the good behaviour of his family, and all the ten were mutually pledges for each other; so that if any one of the tything was suspected of an offence, if the headboroughs or chiefs of the tything would not be security for him, he was imprisoned; and if he made his escape, the ty thing and hundred were fined to the king. Each shire was under the government of an earl, under whom was the reive, his deputy, since, from; ji cs, called shire-reive, or sheriff . Alfred also framed a book called the Book of Winchester, and which contained a survey of the kingdom; and of which the Doomsday book, still preserved in the exchequer, is no more than a second edition.

In the management of affairs of state, after the custom of his ancestors the kings of the West Saxons, he made use of the great council of the kingdom, consisting of bishops, earls, the king’s aldermen, and his chief thanes or barons. These, in the first part of his reign, he convoked as occasion served; but when things were better settled, he made a law, that, twice in the year at least, an assembly or parliament should be held at London, there to provide for the well-governing of the commonwealth; from which ordinance his successors varied a little, holding such assemblies not in any place certain, but wherever they resided, at Christmas, Easter, or Whitsuntide. As to extraordinary affairs, or emergencies, which would not admit of calling great councils, the king acted therein by the advice of those bishops, earls, and officers in the army, who happened to be about his person. He was certainly a great and warlike prince; and though the nation could never boast of a greater soldier, yet he never willingly made war, or refused peace when desired. He secured his coasts by guardships, making the navy his peculiar care; and he covered his frontiers by castles well fortified, which before his time the Saxons had never raised. In other affairs he was no less active and industrious; he repaired the cities demolished by the Danes; he erected new ones, and adorned and embellished such as were in a decayed condition . It is affirmed that one sixth part of his revenues was applied to the payment of his workmen’s wages, wha had besides meat and drink at the king’s expence. In respect to religious foundations, as Alfred was remarkable for his piety, so he excelled most of his predecessors in this particular; for, besides re-edifying and restoring almost every monastery in his dominions, which the poverty of the times or the fury of the Danes had brought to ruin, he built many, and improved more, besides other acts of munificence towards the church . He is said by some to have founded the university of Oxford; yet this matter is warmly disputed, and has employed several learned pens; but Anthony Wood has insisted upon it: so much, however, is certain, that Alfred settled and restored that university, endowed it with revenues, and placed in it famous professors . Though he had always a very numerous court, and took particular pleasure in seeing his nobility about him, yet he found out a method of doing this without prejudice to the public. He formed three different households, each under a separate lord chamberlain: and these waited in their turns, a month every quarter; so that during the year, each of the king’s servants was four months at court, and eight at home.

In private life, Alfred was the most amiable man in his dominions; of so equal a temper, that after he had once taken the crown, he never suffered any sadness or unbecoming gaiety to enter his mind; but appeared always of a palm, yet cheerful disposition, familiar to his friends, just, even to his enemies, kind and tender to all. He was a remarkable oeconomist of his time; and Asserius has given us an account of the method he took for dividing and keeping an account of it. He caused six wax-candles to b made, each of twelve inches long, and of as many ounces weight on the candies the inches were regularly marked; and having found that one of them burnt just four hours, he committed them to the care of the keepers of his chapel, who from time to time gave him notice how the hours went; but as in windy weather the candles wer wasted by the impression of the air on the flame, to remedy this inconvenience he invented lanthorns, there being then no glass in his dominions . When Alfred came to the crown, learning was at a very low ebb in his kingdom f; but by his example and encouragement, he used his utmost endeavours to excite a love for letters amongst his subjects. He himself was a scholar; and had he not been illustrious as a king, would have been famous as an author . When we consider the qualifications of this prince, and the 'many virtues he possessed, we need noj; wonder that he died universally lamented, which happened after a reign of above 28 years, and on the 28th of October, A. D. 900, as some writers inform us; though there is a disagreement in this particular, even amongst our best historians. He was buried in the cathedral of Winchester; but the canons of that church pretending they were disturbed by his ghost, his son and successor Edward caused his body to be removed to the new monastery, which was left unfinished at his death. Here it remained till the dissolution of monasteries, when Dr. Richard Fox, bishop of Winchester, caused the bones of all our Saxon kings to be collected and put into chests of lead, with inscriptions upon each of them, shewing whose bones they contained; these chests he took care to have placed on the top of a wall of exquisite workmanship, built by him to inclose the presbytery of the cathedral. Here they remained undisturbed until the cathedral was pillaged by the parliamentary soldiers, under sir William Waller, during the rebellion in 1642, when the chests were thrown down, and most of their contents dispersed.

, a sculptor and architect of Bologna, was the disciple of Louis Carrache, and the friend of Dominic, who brought him to Rome, where he died in 1654. In the church of St. Peter of the Vatican is a bas-relief of his representing St. Leon before Attila, in great estimation by connoisseurs: and at Bologna is an admirable groupe of his, the beheading of St. Paul. His other works are, the statue of St. Philippa de Neri; all the fountains and decorations of the villa Pamphili, the faade of the church of St. Ignatius, and the great altar of the church of St. Nicholas Tolentine, which is a chefd'ceuvre. Algardi revived sculpture from the neglect into which it had fallen previously to his time, and became the founder of a school of eminent artists, who owe their high reputation to following his steps. Pope Innocent XI. gave him six thousand Roman crowns for the bas-relief of St. Leon, and presented him with a gold chain which he ordered him to wear all his life. His epitaph in the church of St. John and Petrona, very justly remaiks, that his works wanted nothing but age to place them on a footing with the most perfect specimens of antiquity. Milizia bestows high praise on Algardi in his “Memorie de gli architetti,” Bassan. 1785. His private character appears to have been Tery excellent.

, an eminent Italian writer, was born at Venice, Dec. 11, 1712. His father, a rich merchant, had two other sons, and three daughters; one of the sons died an infant; the other, Bonomo Algarptti, who took the charge of the family on the father’s death, survived the subject of this article, and was his executor. Francis studied first at Rome, then at Venice, and lastly at Bologna, under the two celebrated professors Eustace Manfredi and Francis Zanotti, who loved him for his sweetness of temper, and by whose instructions he made a very rapid progress in mathematics, geometry, astronomy, philosophy, and physics. He was particularly fond of this last study, and of anatomy. Nor was he less assiduous in, acquiring a perfect knowledge of ancient and modern languages. Before his first visit to France he became known to the learned world, by the many excellent papers he had printed in the Memoirs of the institute of Bologna; and in one of his rural retreats, in 1733, he wrote his “Newtonianismo per le Dame,” in which he endeavoured to familiarize Newton’s system to the ladies, as Fontenelle had done that of Des Cartes. He was now only in his twenty-first year, and this work, which was published in 1734, acquired him much reputation. It was almost immediately translated into French by Duperron de CastCra; and, although very incorrect, this was the only edition from which the French critics formed their opinion of its merits, and from which a translation was also made into German, but not into English, as the French biographer asserts. Our celebrated countrywoman, Mrs. Carter, used the original, in her translation, published in 1739, and revised in the press by Mr. (afterwards Dr.) Samuel Johnson,. It was entitled “Sir Isaac Newton’s philosophy explained, for the use of the ladies, in six dialognes on Light and Colours,” 2 vols, 12mo.

In his early years Algarotti had cultivated a poetical turn, and after some favourable attempts of the lyric kind, he wrote several poetical epistles on subjects of philosophy and science. These were collected, with others of Frugoni and Bettinelli, and published with some pretended letters of Virgil, in which a bold attack was made on the merits of Dante and Petrarch. This publication made a considerable noise in Italy, and gave great offence to the admirers of these illustrious poets; but'Algarotti declared himself ignorant of the writer, who is now known, to be Bettinelli.

Algarottihad also studied the fine arts, and produced many excellent specimens of painting and engraving. In particular he designed and engraved several plates of heads in groupes, one of which, containing thirteen in the antique style, is dated Feb. 15, 1744. He travelled likewise over Italy, with a painter and draftsman in his suite; and what he has published on the arts discovers extensive knowledge and taste. Frederick II. who had become acquainted with his talents when prince-royal, no sooner mounted the throne, than he invited him to Berlin. Algarotti was then in London, and, complying with his majesty’s wish, remained at Berlin many years. Frederick conferred on him the title of count of the kingdom of Prussia, with reversion to his brother and descendants. He made him also his chamberlain, and knight of the order of Merit, bestowing on him at the same time many valuable presents, and other marks of his esteem; and after Algarotti left Berlin, the king corresponded with him for twenty-five years. The king of Poland, Augustus III. also had him for some time at his court, and gave him the title of privy-­counselloir of war. Nor was he held in less esteem by the sovereigns of Italy, particularly pope Benedict XIV. the duke of Savoy, and the duke of Parma. The excellence of his character, the purity of his morals, his elegant manners, and the eclat which surrounds a rich amateur of the arts, contributed to his celebrity perhaps as much as the superiority of his talents, and his acknowledged taste. Wherever he travelled he was respected equally by the rich, and the learned, by men of letters, by artists, and by men of the world. The climate of Germany having sensibly injured his health, he returned first to Venice, and afterwards to Bologna, where he had determined to reside, but his disorder, a consumption of the lungs, gained ground rapidly, and put an end to his life, at Pisa, March 3, 1764. He is said to have met death with composure, or, as his biographer terms it, with philosophical resignation. In his latter days he passed his mornings with Maurino (the artist who used to accompany him in his travels), engaged in the study of painting, architecture, and the fine arts. After dinner he had his works read to him, then printing at Leghorn, and revised and corrected the sheets: in the evening he had a musical party. The epitaph he wrote for himself is taken from Horace’s non omnis moriar, and contains only the few words, “Hicjacet Fr. Algarottus non omnis” The king of Prussia was at the expense of a magnificent monument in the Campo Santo of Pisa; on which, in addition to the inscription which Algarotti wrote, he ordered the following, “Algarotto Ovidii emulo, Newtoni discipulo, Fredericus rex,” and Algarotti’s heirs added only “Fredericus Magnus.” The works of Algarotti were published at Leghorn, 1765, 4 vols. 8vo; at Berlin, 1772, 8 vols. 8vo; and at Venice, 17 vols. 8vo, 1791--1794. This last, the most complete and correct edition, is ornamented with vignettes, the greater part of which were taken from the author’s designs. These volumes contain 1. Memoirs of his life and writings, and his poetry. 2. An analysis of the Newtonian system. 3. Pieces on architecture, painting, the opera, essays on vario is languages, on history, philology, on Des Cartes, Horace, &c. 4 and 5. Essays on the military art, and on the writers on that subject. 6. His travels in Russia, preceded by an Essay on the metals of that empire: the congress of Cytherea, the life of Pallavicini, the Italian poet; and a humorous piece against the abuse of learning. 7. Thoughts on different subjects of philosophy and philology. 8. Letters on painting and architecture. 9 and 10. Letters on the sciences. 11 to 16. His correspondence, not before published, with the literati of Italy, England, and France. 17. An unfinished critical essay on the triumvirate of Crassus, Pompey, and Gassar. Among his correspondents we find the names of the Italians, Manfredi and Zanotti, his first masters, Fabri of Bologna, Metastasio, Frugoni, Bettinelli, Frisi the celebrated mathematician and physician, Mazzuchelli, Paradisi, &c.; the Prussians, Frederic II. several princes of the same family, and Form ey, &c.; the English, lords Chesterfield and Hervey, Mr. Hollis, lady Montague, &c.; jand the French, Voltaire, Maupercuis, du Chastellet, mad. du Boccage,; &c. His Essays on painting, on the opera, his Letters to lord Hervey and the marquis Maffei, and his Letters, military and political, have been translated and published in English. His biographers have generally handed down his character without a blemish; aiui Fabroni, on whom ive mostly rely, is equally lavish in his praises. Wiule we take his personal merits from these authorities, we have evident proof from his works that he was an universal scholar, and wrote with facility and originality on every subject he took in hand. They present a greater variety of reading and thought than almost any scholar of the eighteenth century; but they are not without redundancy, and sometimes affectation. His fame is said to be fixed on a more solid basis in his own country, than in those where he has been viewed only througn the medium of translations.

, an Arabian philosopher, was born at Thous in 1058, studied in the college of the celebrated Iman-Al-Haremein, and became a man of great learning. On the death of his preceptor he presented himself to the vizir Neddham El-mulk, who bestowed many gifts and honours upon him, and gave him, the superintendance of a college which he had founded at Bagdad. Algazeli, after retaining this office four years, embraced a solitary life, travelled into Syria and Palestine, and employed himself in the composition of his works, until his death in 1111. Among his papers was a treatise censuring with great freedom some articles of the Mahometan faith; this was of course immediately committed to the flames. He left, however, many other works, some of which have been translated either into Latin or Hebrew. His treatise on “Religious Sciences” is highly celebrated in the East. In 1506 was published at Cologn, another of his works under the title of “Philosophica et logica Algazeli,” 4to. Averroes, who lived after him, wrote against his philosophical opinions, in a piece entitled “Destructio destructionum philosophise Algazeli,” and which is printed in the 9th vol. of his Aristotle. In all, except the first mentioned work, Algazeli is a strenuous supporter of the Mahometan religion.

, Allacen, or Abdilazum, was a learned Arabian, a native of Bassorah. He wrote upon Astrology; and his work upon optics was printed in Latin, at Basil, in 1572, under the title of “Opticae Thesaurus,” by Risner. Alhazen was the first who shewed the importance of refractions in astronomy, so little known to the ancients. He is also the first author who has treated on the twilight, upon which he wrote a work, and takes occasion to speak also of the height of the clouds. He first, however, distinguished himself as a projector. He boasted frequently that he could construct a machine to prevent the inundations of the Nile. This being reported to the caliph, he offered him presents, workmen, and every species of encouragement; but Alhazen, having soon discovered the impossibility of accomplishing his scheme, and dreadinothe anger of the caliph, put on a feigned madness, which he continued as long as the caliph lived. The rest of his life he spent, in writing, or in copying books, which he sold. He died at Cairo in 1038. Casiri, in his Bibl. Arab. Hisp. gives a long catalogue of his works, some of which are in the Bodleian, and some in the library of Leyden. The work above mentioned, edited by Risner, is supposed to have been of service to Kepler.

, the cousin and son-in-law of Mohammed, ought, perhaps, to have been caliph after Mohammed’s death; but beipg opposed by Omar and Othman, he retired into Arabia, and there made a collection of the doctrines of Mohammed, and in this he permitted some things condemned by Abubeker, which gained him many proselytes. After the death of Othman, he was declared caliph by the Egyptians and the inhabitants of Mecca and Medina, in the year of the hegira 35, and of our Lord 655; but after a reign of four years and three quarters, he was mortally tvounded in a mosque, and died three or four days after, A. D. 661. Ali had nine wives, who brought him fourteen sons and eighteen daughters. If we consider him, with regard to his courage, moderation, piety, and understanding, he will be found one of the greatest men that was ever born among the Arabians. The Persians annually celebrate the day of his martyrdom, follow his doctrine, and hold the memory of Abubeker, Omar, and Othman, in abhorrence, while the Turks reverence them, and detest Ali.

Ali deserves a place in literary history, as he had cultivated his mind with a care unusual in his age and country. He left many collections of sentences, proverbs, and pieces of poetry. Golius and Lette have published fragments of these sentences: the first, at Leyden, 1629, and the other in 1746, at the end of Ben Zobair’s poem. Vather published Goli-us’s fragments in French, Paris, 1660. Ockley, in the third edition of his history of the Saracens, has given an English translation of 169 sentences of Ali; and Wasmuth, in the preface to his Arabic grammar, says that Tocherning published a century of his proverbs. Guadagnoli is the first who published his poems, with a Latin translation, Rome, 1642; but Knypers has edited a more correct edition, Leyden, 1745, 8vo. This contains sir small poems, the first of which had been given by Golius at the end of Erpenius’s grammar, Leyden, 1656, and the second, third, and fourth, by Agapito, in his Arabic grammar, Rome, 1687.

, an adventurer, who acted a most distinguished part against the Ottoman empire in the last century, was born in Natolia in 1728, and received at his birth the name of Joseph. His father was a Greek priest, of a distinguished family, who educated him with great care, designing him to succeed him: but, at thirteen years of age, Joseph being hunting in a neighbouring forest, robbers fell on his company, and carried him off to Grand Cairo: here he was sold to Ibrahim, a lieutenant of the janisaries, who had him circumcised, clothed him in the dress of the mamalukes, and called him Ali: he gave him masters in the Turkish and Arabic languages, and in horsemanship, and, by kind treatment, made him by degrees satisfied with his new station. In a course of years, he succeeded in these languages, shewed wonderful dexterity in the use of his arms, and became so dear to his master, that he raised him rapidly in his household, and created him a cachef or governor, at the age of twenty-two.

In this station, he manifested his equity and good administration of justice, improved the discipline of the mamalukes, and laid the foundation of his future greatness. Here he gained the favour of the pasha Rahiph, who, discovering his merit, became his protector. He remained several years in this station, until his patron Ibrahim was elected emir al hagi, or prince of the caravan, who took him with him to escort the pilgrims: in their march they were attacked by the Arabs; Ali fell upon them at the head of the mamalukes, repulsed the enemy, and killed a great number on the spot. On his return, several tribes being collected were determined to avenge their defeat: the young cachef gave them battle, and obtained a signal victory. Ibrahim did justice to the services of his lieutenant in full council, and proposed to create him a sangiak, which, after some opposition, was accomplished.

Become now one of the members of the republic, he never forgot his obligations to his patron. In 1758, the emir al hagi was murdered by the party of Ibrahim the Circassian. From this moment, All meditated vengeance he concealed his resentment, and employed all the resources of his mind to arrive at the post of scheik elbalad, the first dignity of the repuhlic. In 1763 he attained that post; and soon after revenged the blood of his patron, by sacrificing Ibrahim the Circassian with his own hand. This action raised him up numerous enemies; the sangiaks, attached to the party of the Circassian, conspired against him; he was on the point of being murdered, but saved himself by flight, and repaired to Jerusalem. Having gained the esteem of the governor of that city, he thought himself in safety; but his enemies, fearing him even in exile, wrote to the Porte to demand his death, and orders were immediately sent to the governor to strike off his head. Fortunately, Rahiph, his old friend, was one of the divan, and gave him notice to fly from Jerusalem: Ali therefore anticipated the arrival of the capigi bachi, and took refuge with scheik Daker, prince of St. John of Acre. This old man received him with open arms, was not long in discovering the merit of his new guest, and from that moment loaded him with caresses; he exhorted him to bear adversity with courage, flattered his hopes, soothed his sorrows, and made him taste of pleasures even in his disgrace. Ali Bey might have passed his days happily with scheik Daker; but ambition would not permit him to remain inactive; he carried on a secret correspondence with some of the sangiaks attached to his interest. The prince of Acre, on his part, wrote to his friends at Grand Cairo, and urged them to hasten the recal of the schiek elbalad. While this was going on, Rahiph, now grand vizir, procured him to be invited to return to Grand Cairo, and resume his dignity: he set off immediately, and was received with the acclamations of the people. On all sides the storm was gathering around him: all those who were offended at the murder of Ibrahim the Circassian, were constantly laying snares for him; they only waited a favourable opportunity: the death of Rahiph, which happened in 1763, furnished them with it; they threw off the mask, and declared openly against him. He escaped into Arabia Felix, visited the coasts of the Red Sea, and once more took refuge with the scheik of Acre, who received him with the same tenderness. Whilst he was there, the sangiaks of the party of the Circassian persecuted those who were devoted to the interests of Ali. This imprudence opened the eyes of the majority; they perceived that they were the dupes of a few ambitious men; and, to strengthen their party, recalled the scheik elbalad, and promised to support him with all their power: he set otf immediately. Ou his return to Grand Cairo, in 1766, All held a council: he represented to them that moderation had only excited the friends of Ibrahim to revenge, that nothing but flight would have saved him from their plots; and that to secure the common safety, these turbulent spirits must be sacrificed. The wholeassembly applauded this resolution, and the next day they took otf the heads of fottr of them. This execution insured the tranquillity of Ali: he saw himself at the head of the government, and, in the space of six years, raised sixteen of his mamalukes to the dignity of beys, and one of them to that of aga of the janisaries.

Supreme chief of the republic, he adopted every measure to render his power durable: not content with increasing his mamalukes to 6000, he took into pay 10,000 mograbi: he also caused his troops to observe the most rigid discipline, and, by continual exercise, made them good soldiers. He attached the young men of his household to him, by the paternal attention he paid to their education; and above all by bestowing favours and rewards on those who were the most worthy. His party became so powerful, that such of his colleagues as were not his friends dreaded his power, nor dared to thwart his projects. Believing his authority established on a solid basis, he turned his attention to the welfare of his people: the Arabs, dispersed over the deserts, and on the frontiers of Egypt, committed ravages not to be suppressed by a fluctuating government: he declared war, and sent against them bodies of cavalry, which beat them everywhere, and drove them back into the depth of their solitudes. Egypt began to respire, and agriculture, encouraged, flourished once more in that rich country. Having rendered the chief of each village responsible for the crimes of the inhabitants, he punished them until the authors of the offence were delivered into the hands of justice. In this manner, the principal citizens looked after the public safety; and, for the first time since the commencement of the Turkish empire, the traveller and merchant could pass through the whole extent of the kingdom without the apprehension of art insult.

The scheik elbalad unfortunately accumulated favours oit Mohammed Abou Dahab, a traitor, who secretly aspired to the sovereign power. The sangiaks bribed him to put the scheik out of the way; but fearing for his own Jife, he deferred it, and kept the gold, and to increase the confidence of his friend, he discovered the conspiracy.

In 1768 the Russians declared war against the Porte: the scheik sent 12,000 men to serve in the Turkish army. Even this circumstance of duty was made use of to his disadvantage; and it was represented at Constantinople, that these troops were designed to serve in the Russian army: the calumny was credited, and a capigi, with four attendants, sent to take off his head. All had intelligence by his friends, and dispatched a confident, with 12 mamalukes, who seized the capigi and his attendants, took from them their order, and put them to death. The whole will shew us by how precarious a tenure life is held in the Ottoman empire. The scheik, possessed of this order, assembled the chiefs, and laid before them the despotism of the Ottoman court. This had the desired effect; sixteen of the beys exclaimed that war ought to be declared against the grand signior. The Turkish pasha was ordered to quit fcgypt, and the scheik secured the assistance of the prince of Acre.

Mean time, Abou Dahab conquered Yemen, deposed the scheriff of Mecca, and substituted in his place emir Abdalla; who, to pay his court to Ali, gratified him with the title of sultan of Egypt. Ismae'I made himself master of all the towns on the eastern shore of the Arabian gulf.

In 1771, Ali sent Abou Dahab with 40,000 men to attempt the conquest of Syria, and wrote to count Orloff, the Russian admiral, then at Leghorn, making him large offers to form an alliance with him. The count in return thanked him, wished him success, and made him great promises, which were never realised. He also negotiated with Venice, promising to assist her to retake her possessions from the Turks; but the republic declined this bold enterprise. In the mean time Abou Dahab took some towns of Syria, and drove the Ottomans before him; but he had long meditated the ruin of Ali, his patron and his friend, and had accepted the command of the army, in order to gain it to his interest. Having secured them, he erected the standard of rebellion, withdrew the garrisons from the conquered places, and re-entered Egypt. Not daring to attack the capital, he kept along the Red Sea, crossed the deserts, and entered Upper Egypt. His revolt was now manifest; he gained the beys who commanded there, and marched towards Cairo. Ali repented his placing the command in the hands of a traitor. He collected an army, which he entrusted to Ismatjl bey, who likewise betrayed him and joined Abou Dahab. Upon this, Ali, by the advice of his friends, determined to retire to St. John of Acre. He wrote to count Orloff for assistance; and in the middle of the night, accompanied by the beys his friends, and 7,000 troops, he left Cairo, and tied across the deserts. He reached Gaza, but from agitation of mind was taken very ill: in this situation the venerable scheik Daker came to visit him, consoled him that his condition was not desperate, and that the Russian squadron was at hand. With this consolation, and the assistance of a Russian physician, in a few weeks he recovered.

A Russian squadron appearing before Acre, he wrote again to count Orloff for assistance, and sent also an ambassador to the empress. In August 1772, Ali took Yaffa and Rama. These successes inspired him with the hope of returning to Cairo. The chiefs of the janisaries in that capital also invited him to do so; and therefore collecting the garrisons of the conquered towns, he began his march with 52,250 mamalukes, 3,400 mograbi, and 650 horse. Abou Dahab met him with 12,000 men, and was defeated. Abou, by instilling into the minds of the Mahomruedans, that Ali designed to abolish their religion, and introduce Christianity, procured an army of 20,000 men. The janisaries, however, refused to join him. Ali was unprepared for this event; he abandoned himself to despair, and fell dangerously ill. His friends advised him to retire to St. John of Acre, but he declared he would sooner perish than retreat aw inch. On the 13th of April, 1773, the armies met. Both parties charged with fury, and notwithstanding the inferiority of Ali’s troops, they had at first the advantage; but the mograbi, corrupted hy the promises of Abou Dahab, deserted, and the fortune of the day was changed. Most of Ali’s friends fell round him; the survivors pressed him to retire, but he replied, that his hour was come. The mamalnkes bravely perished with their arms in their hands. Ali slew two soldiers who attempted to sieze him; and the lieutenant of Abou Dahab advancing, Ali, though wounded with two balls, shot him with a pistol. He fought with the utmost bravery, but, being beat down by the stroke of a sabre, was seized and carried to the tent of the conqueror, where he died of his wounds eight days after.

, or Ali-Beigh, first interpreter to the sultan Mahomet IV. was born at Leopold, in Poland, under the name of Bobrowski, about the beginning of the seventeenth century. Dr. Hyde calls him Albert Bobowski. He was carried away while a youth by the Tartars, and sold to the Turks, who, perceiving his talents, had him brought up in the seraglio, where he spent twenty years. After this he went into the service of a man of rank, to Egypt, where, in consequence of his excellent behaviour, he was made free, and, according to the custom of the Turks, had a new name given him, that of Ali-Bey. On his return to Constantinople, his general knowledge of the Western and Eastern languages, gradually advanced him to the rank of Tergjuman Bashi, or first interpreter of the Porte. He composed a grammar and a lexicon of the Turkish language, about the year 1653, and translated at the request of Dr. Basire, the catechism of the church of England into the Turkish language. At the request of another gentleman, he translated the whole Bible, which was sent into Europe to be printed, but remains in manuscript in the library at Leyden. Dr. Hyde had the Psalms translated, and written, in Ali’s hand. His death, which took place at Constantinople in 1675, was much regretted by the Christians at Constantinople, but particularly by the English, for whom he had great affection and esteem, and to whom he often intimated his desire to have come over to England, and to return into the bosom of the Christian church. It is said indeed that this design was on foot when he died. In 1691, Dr. Hyde published “Tractatus Alberti Bobovii. &c. de Turcarum Liturgia, peregratione Meccana, circumcisione, aegrotorum visitatione, &c.” with notes, Oxford. This curious work was brought over by Dr. Thomas Smith, who presented it to Dr. Hyde, and advised him to translate it. It is the most succinct and probably one of the most authentic accounts we have of the religious ceremonies of the Turks. The “Dialog! Turcici” of Ali Bey, and his translation of Commenius’s Janua Linguarum, are in the royal library at Paris. It is thought that he furnished Ricaut with valuable materials for his history of the Turkish empire, and that he had a principal hand in the translation into Turkish of Grotius on the truth of the Christian religion.

, whom Crescembini has placed among the poets of Italy, but who more properly belongs to the class of historians, or antiquaries, lived in the latter part of the fourteenth and the beginning of the fifteenth century. He was educated in the house of Louis de Gonzaga, the first of that name, and captain of Mantua, and he appears to have made considerable proficiency in the study of law and philosophy. He afterwards embraced a military life and served under Guy and Louis de Gon­/aga; and when more advanced in years, was employed in. political aftairs. He is supposed to have died in 1417. The only work attributed to him is a metrical chronicle or history of Mantua, which Muratori has published in the fifth Yolume of his “Antiquitates Italian mediae aevi,” but in which he cautions his readers against expecting poetry or truth. The only valuable part is what concerns his own time in Mantua, which Muratori thinks future historians may consult with advantage.

, a supposed writer, whose name leads to a dissertation, rather than a life, passes for the author of a poem in old German, and very popular in Germany, under the title of “Reineke de Voss,” or “Reynard the Fox.” It is a kind of satire on the manners of the times during the ‘feudal system. All that is known of Alkmar is, that he lived about the year 1470, and was governor, or preceptor, of one of the dukes of Lorraia. The first edition of Reynard was printed at Lubeck in 1498, and it was frequently reprinted at Rostock, Francfort, ancl Hamburgh; and as the name of H. d’ Alkmar occurs in the preface of the Lubeck edition, which was long considered to be the first, he has as uniformly passed for the author of the poem. There is, however, in the library of the city of Lubeck, a copy of a work with the same title and nearly the same contents, but more full, and in prose, which was printed at Delft in 1485; and one has been discovered still older, printed at Goudesor Tergow, by Gerard Leew, in 1479. These two Reynards are exactly the same, written in the Dutch or Flemish dialect, which differs little from thatof Friesland, Westphalia, or Lower Saxony. It would appear then, that Alkmar had done no more than to versify 'and enlarge the fictions of the old Reynard. He says himself, in the preface, that he translated the present work from the Welch, and the French. Whatever may be the case with the Welch, , as he mentions the French, his evidence accords with known facts, and with the opinion of Le Grand d'Aussay, in his “Notices et Extraits des manuscrits de la bibliotheque de Paris” (vol. V. p. 249), namely, that the poem of Reynard is of French origin, and that Pierre de St. Cloud was the author, whose Reynard was written in prose in the thirteenth century; and that the poem of the same name, the production of Jaquemars Gélée or Giellée, at Lisle, is only an imitation of the former. There are, however, many resemblances to Reynard in the German poets of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, from which it may perhaps be inferred that Reynard is of German origin, and older than the work of Pierre de St. Cloud. It has always been a very popular work in Germany, and the grammarian Gottsched published a fine edition, with an introduction, interpretation, and plates, while the celebrated Goethe has taken great pains to restore the text, and paraphrase it in hexameters. It has also been translated into Latin, Italian, Danish, Swedish, and English. Caxton’s edition, 1481, is described by Ames and Herbert, and more fully by Mr. Dibdin in his new edition of Ames’s Typographical Antiquities, vol. I. The Latin edition of Schopperus is very elegant, and has often been reprinted. Dreyer, syndic of Lubeck, published a curious work in 1768, 4to, on the use that may be made of Reynard the Fox in studying German antiquities and law. It yet remains to be noticed that Tiaden, a German writer, ascribes Reynard to one Nicholas Baumann, who died in 1503; but the opinions already given, and the dates of the ancient editions, seem to render this very improbable.

, was born at Chartres, and died at Paris the 2d of May, 1753. He gave to the French theatre several comedies that met with tolerable success; and to the Italian theatre, “l'Embarras des Richesses,” which was far better received; the “Tour de Carnaval,” and some other pieces. His “Ecole des Bourgeois,” abounds in that true comic humour which characterises the plays of Moliere. There are likewise of his: 1. “Les Bigarrures Calotines.” 2. “Lettres à Milord * * *, concerning the Baron and the Demoiselle le Couvreur.” 3. “Anecdotes of Russia, under Peter I.” 1745, 12mo. 4. “Connoissauce de la Mythologie,” 1762, 12mo. This last work is methodical and well digested; but he was only the editor of it. It was written by a Jesuit, who gave it to M. Boudot. Allainval lived in great poverty, sleeping generally in hackney chairs, or coaches in the streets, and died equally poor, in the hotel de Dieu, to which he was carried when struck with the palsy.

, a Scotch portrait and historical painter of the preceding century, was a native of Edinburgh, and patronised by sir William Erskine. He received the rudiments of his art in the academy of painting instituted, and carried on for a considerable time, by Messrs. Foulis, in Glasgow, Thence'he went to Italy, where he spent many years in unremitting application to the study of the great models of antiquity. At Rome in 1773, he gained the prize medal given by the academy of St. Luke for the best specimen of historical composition, and it is believed he was the only Scotchman (Gavin Hamilton excepted) who had then attained; that honour. After his return in 1777, he resided a few years in London; but about 1780 he went to Edinburgh, and was appointed director and master of the academy established in that metropolis by the board of trustees for manufactures and improvements, for the purpose of diffusing a knowledge of the principles of the fine arts, and elegance of design, in the various manufactures and works which require to be figured and ornamented; a charge for which he was peculiarly well qualified, by the extensive knowledge he possessed of every branch of the art. He was much admired for his talents in composition, the truth with which he delineated nature, and the characteristic humour that distinguished his pictures, drawings, and etchings. There are several engravings from his pictures, one “The Origin of Painting, or the Corinthian maid drawing, the shadow of her lover;” and four, in aqua tfnta, by Paul Sandby, from drawings made by Allan when at Rome, representing the sports during the carnival. Several of the figures introduced in them, are portraits of persons well known to the English who visited Rome between 1770 and 1780. Mr. Allan died Aug. 6, 1796. In private life, his character was marked by the strictest honour and integrity, and his manners were gentle, unassuming, and obliging.

, esq. an English antiquary, was an attorney at Darlington, but, having a strong propensity to the study of our national antiquities, devoted his time and fortune to this rational and useful pursuit. His first production, printed in his own house, was, “' ue recommendatory Letter of Oliver Cromwell to William Lenthall, esq. speaker of the House of Commons, for erecting a college and university at Durham, and his Letters Patent (when lord protector) for founding the same; with the Address of the provost and fellows of the said college, &c.” 4to. “A sketch of the Life and Character of Bishop Treror,” 1776. “The Life of 'St. Cuthbert,” 1777. “Collections relating to Sherborn Hospital,” and others mentioned in Cough’s British Topography, vol.1, p. 332. Being possessed of twenty manuscript volumes relating to the antiquities of the counties of Durham and Northumberland, bequeathed to him, in 1774, by the late rev. Thomas Randall, vicar of EHingham in Northumberland, he published “An Address and Queries to the public, relative to the compiling a complete Civil and Ecclesiastical History of the ancient and present state of the County Palatine of Durham,” 1774. He also engraved several charters in fac-simile, and seals of bishops and others. Mr. Hutchinson, the historian of Durham, who carried this plan into execution, acknowledges the generous access he had to Mr. Allan’s library and manuscripts; nor is it any discredit to Mr. Hutchinson’s industry to say, that his work proceeded under the guidance of Mr. Allan’s judgment. In the preface to Mr. Hutchinson’s third volume of the History of Durham, is a very curious account of the difficulties he had to encounter from the delay, &c. of the printer, and an ample acknowledgment of Mr. Allan’s great liberality and spirit. Mr. Allan presented to the Society of Antiquaries of London, of which he was a member, twenty-six quarto volumes of Mss. relating chiefly to the university of Oxford, extracted from the several public libraries there by Mr. W. Smith, formerly fellow of University college, and rector of Melsonby in Yorkshire. Mr. Allan died at the Grange, Darlington, in the county of Durham, July 31, 1800, leaving a numerous family, of which the eldest son is a member of the Society of Lincoln’s Inn.

, keeper of the Vatican library, and a celebrated popish writer of the 17th century, was born in the isle of Chios, of Greek parents, 1586. At nine years of age he was removed from his native country to Calabria; bat some time after sent to Rome, and admitted into the Greek college, where he applied himself to the study of polite learning, philosophy, and divinity, and embraced the Roman Catholic religion. From thence he went to Naples, and was chosen great vicar to Bernard Justiniani, bishop of Anglona. From Naples he returned to his own country, but went soon from thence to Rome, where he studied physic under Julius Caesar Lagalla, and took a degree in that profession. He afterwards made the belles lettres his object, and taught in the Greek college at Rome. Pope Gregory XV. sent him to Germany, in 1622, in order to get the elector Palatine’s library removed to Rome; but hy the death of Gregory, he lost the reward he might have expected for his trouble in that affair. He lived some time after with cardinal Bichi, and then with cardinal Francis Barberini; and was at last, by pope Alexander VII. appointed keeper of the Vatican library. Allatius was of great service to the gentlemen of Port Royal in the controversy they had with Mr. Claude, concerning the belief of the Greeks on the subject of die Eucharist: Mr. Claude often calls him Mr. Arnaud’s great author, and gives him a character, by no means favourable, although in general very just. “Allatius,” says he, “was a Greek, who had renounced his own religion to embrace that of Rome; a Greek whom the pope had chosen his librarian: a man the most devoted to the interests of the court of Rome; a man extremely outrageous in his disposition. He shews his attachment to the court of Rome in the very beginning of his book `De perpetua consensione,‘ where he writes in favour of the pope thus: `The Roman pontiff,’ says he, `is quite independent, judges the world without being liable to be judged; we are bound to obey his commands, even when he governs unjustly; he gives laws without receiving any; he changes them as he thinks fit; appoints magistrates; decides all questions as to matters of faith, and orders all affairs of importance in the church as seems to him good. He cannot err, being out of the power of all heresy and illusion; and as he is armed with the authority of Christ, not even an angel from heaven could make him alter his opinion'.” No Latin ever shewed himself more incensed against the Greek schismatics than Allatius, or more devoted to the see of Rome. One singularity in his character is, that he never engaged in matrimony, nor was he ever in orders; and pope Alexander having asked him one day, why he did not enter into orders? “Because,” answered he, “I would be free to marry.” “But if so,” replied the pope, “why don't you marry ?” “Because I would be at liberty,” answered Allatius, “to take orders.” If we may believe Joannes Patricius, Allatius had a very extraordinary pen, with which, and no other, he wrote Greek for 40 years; and we need not be surprised that when he lost it he was so grieved that he shed tears. He wrote so fast that he copied, in one night, the “Diarium Romanorum Pontiftcium,” which a Cistertian monk had lent to him. Niceron gives him the character of a man laborious and indefatigable, of a vast memory, and acquainted with every kind of learning; but adds, that in his writings there is a display of more reading than judgment, and, that biographer might have added, than of candour or urbanity of style, at least in his controversial pieces. He died Jan. 1669, aged eighty-three, after founding several colleges or schools in the island of Chios, his native place. His principal works were, 1. “De Ecclesiæ Occidentalis et Orientalis perpetua consensione,” Cologn, 1648, 4to; which is regarded by the most impartial writers among the Protestants, as the production of a disingenuous and insidious mind. His object is, to prove that Latin and Greek churches always concurred in the same faith; and the Catholics look upon this as his ablest performance. 2. “De utriusque ecclesiæ, &c. in dogmate de purgatorio eonsensione,” Rome, 1655, 8vo. 3. “De libris ecclesiasticis Graecorum,” Paris, 1645, 8vo. 4. “De Templis Grsecorumrecentioribus,” Cologn, 1645, 8vo. 5. “Græcioe orthodoxae scriptores,” Rome, 1652 and 1657, 2 vols. 4 to. 6. “Philo Byzantinus de septem orbis spectaculis, Gr. et Lat. cum notis,” Rome, 1640, 8vo. 7. “Eustathius Antiochenus in hexameron, et de Engastrimytho,” Lyons, 1629, 4to. 8. “Symmichta, et Symmiha, sive opusculorum Græcorum ac Latinorum vetustiorum ac recentiorum libri duo,” Cologn, 1653, fol. 9. “De Mensura temporum antiquorum et proecipue Græcorupi,” Cologn, 1645, 8vo. 10. “Apes Urbanæ,” Rome, 1633, 8vo, a title borrowed from the Bees in pope Urban VIII.'s arms; the book gives an account of all the learned men who flourished at Rome from 1630 to the end of 1632, with a catalogue of their works. Fabricius printed an edition of it at Hamburgh, 1711, 8vo. 11. “Dramaturgia,” in Italian, an alphabetical collection of all the Italian dramatic works published in his time. This was reprinted at Venice, 4to, with considerable additions, and brought down to 1755. 12. “Poeti antichi raccolti da Codici manuscriti della Bibliotheca Vaticana e Barberina,” Naples, 1661, 8 vo, a very scarce work, containing the productions of many ancient Italian poets, not before published, but, according to Ginguene, full of errors. Moreri and Niceron mentions other works by Aliutius, which show the variety of his studies, and the rapidity with which he could pass from one subject to another.­Of his tediousnessan'd digressive powers, M. de Sallo complains with some humour in the Journal des Savans. After noticing a lamentation of the virgin Mary, as a remarkable piece inserted in one of Allatius’s works, he adds: “This lamentation was composed by Metaphrast, and that, was sufficient for Allatius to insert a panegyric upon Metaphrast, written by Psellus. As Metaphrast’s name was Simeon, he thence took an opportunity of making a long dis+ sertation upon the lives and works of such celebrated men. as had borne the same name. From the Simeons he passes to the Simons, from them to the Simonideses, and lastly to the Simonactides.”

, an English non-conformist divine, was the son of Mr. Tobias Allein, and born at the Devizes, in Wiltshire, 1633. He discovered an extraordinary tincture of religion, even in his childhood; at eleven years of age he was much addicted to private prayer; and on the death of his brother Edward, who was a worthy minister of the gospel, he entreated his father that he might be educated for that profession. In four years he acquired a competent knowledge of Greek and Latin, and was declared by his master n't for the university. He was, however, kept some time longer at home, where he was instructed in logic, and at sixteen was sent to Lincoln college, Oxford. In 1651 he was removed to Corpus Christi college, a Wiltshire scholarship being there vacant. While at college he vras remarkably assiduous in his studies, grave in his temper, but cheerfully ready to assist others. He might in a short time have obtained a fellowship, but he declined that for the sake of the office of chaplain, being pleased with the opportunity this gave him of exerting his gift in prayer, the liturgy being then disused. In July 1653, he was admitted bachelor of arts, and became a tutor. In this arduous employment he behaved himself with equal skill and diligence; several of his pupils became very eminent non-conforming ministers, and not a few attained to considerable preferment in the established church. In 1655 he became assistant in the ministry to Mr. G. Newton, of Taunton, in Somersetshire, where he married the same year. His income was small, but was somewhat increased by the profits of a. boarding-school, which Mrs. Allein kept. During seven years that he lived in this manner, he discharged his pastoral duty with incredible diligence; for, besides preaching and catechising in the church, he spent several afternoons in a week in visiting the people of the town, and exhorting them to a religious life. These applications were at first far from being welcome to many families; but his meekness, moderation, and unaffected piety, reconciled them to his advice, and made him by degrees the delight of his parishioners. He was deprived in 1662, for nonconformity. He preached, however, privately, until his zeal and industry in this course brought him into trouble. On the 26th day of May, 1663, he was committed to Ivelchester gaol, and was with seven ministers and fifty quakers confined in one room, where they suffered great hardships; tut they still continued to preach till the assizes. These were held before Mr. justice Foster, and at them Mr. Allein was indicted for preaching on the 17th of May preceding; of which indictment he was found guilty, and sentenced to pay a hundred marks, and to remain in prison till his fine was paid. At the time of his receiving sentence, he said, that he was glad that it had appeared before his country; that whatever he was charged with, he was guikv of nothing but doing his duty; and all that did appear by the evidence was, that he had sung a psalm, and instructed his family, others being there, and both in his own house. He continued in prison a year, which broke his constitution; but, when he was at liberty, he applied himself to his ministry as earnestly as ever, which, brought on him a painful disorder. The five miles act taking place, he retired from Taunton to Wellington, where he continued but a short time, Mr. Mallack, a merchant, inviting him to lodge at a house of his some distance from Taunton. In the summer of 1665, he was advised to drink the waters near the Devizes, for his health. But before he left Mr. Mallack’s house, viz. on the I Oth of July in that year, some friends came to take their leave of him; they were surprised praying together, and for this were sentenced to sixty days imprisonment, which himself, seven ministers, and forty private persons, suffered in the county gaol. This hindered his going to the waters; and his disease returning, he lost another summer. At length, in 1667, he went, but was far from receiving the benefit he expected. After some time he went to Dorchester, where he grew better; but applying himself again to preaching, catechising, and other duties, his distemper returned with such violence, that he lost the use of his limbs. His death was then daily expected; but by degrees he grew somewhat better, and at length went to Bath, where his health altered so much, that his friends were in hopes he would have lived several years; but growing suddenly worse again, he died there, in the month of November, 1668, being somewhat above thirty-five years old. He was a man of great learning, and greater charity; zealous in his own way of worshipping God, but not in thft least bitter towards any Christians who worshipped in another manner. He preserved a great respect for the church, notwithstanding all his sufferings; and was eminently loyal to his prince, notwithstanding the severities of the times. His writings breathe a true spirit of piety, for which they have been always and deservedly esteemed. His body lies in the chancel of the church of St. Magdalen, of Taunton, and on his grave-stone are the following lines

His principal works are, 1. “A familiar Explanation of the Assembly’s Catechism,” 8vo, 1656. 2. “A call to Archippus,” 1664, 4to, in which he advises the ejected ministers to continue their public services. 3. “An Alarm tothe unconverted,” 1672, 8vo and 12mo, afterwards published under the title of “A sure Guide to Heaven;” but the original title was resumed, and it has been reprinted oftener, even to this day, than almost any book of the kind. 4. “Christian Letters,” 1672, afterwards given as an appendix to his life. 5. “Cases of Conscience,” 1672. G. “Remains, being a Collection of sundry Directions, Sermons, &c.” 1672. Besides these, he wrote several small practical pieces, which are printed among the works of Mr. Richard Allein. He left also, imperfect, a “Body of Natural Theology,” in Latin. One section, “De Providentia,” was prepared for the press and licensed; but, according to Wood (who, it may here be noticed, gives a very unfavourable account of our author), was never printed, for want of encouragement.

, the son of a clergyman of the same name, rector of Ditchet, Somersetshire, for fifty years, was born at that place in 1611; the first part of his education under his father fitted him for the university in 1627. That year he entered a commoner of St. Alban’s hall, in Oxford, where he took the degree of bachelor of arts. Thence he removed to New Inn Hall, where he took his master’s degree, and entering into orders, became an assistant to his father, who bei,;g inclined to puritanism, die son fell into the same opinions; and possessing great zeal and learning, he soon acquired a proportionable reputation. In March 1641, he succeeded to the living of Batcomb, in Dorsetshire, the duty of which he performed with much industry and fidelity, but being a zealous covenanter, had some disturbances with the king’s forces in those parts. He was, however, a great enemy to that enthusiastic spirit which prevailed in this country, on the ruin of the established church; this appears by his subscribing a representation, entitled “The Testimony of the Ministry of Somersetshire to the Truth of Jesus Christ, and to the Solemn League and Covenant,” printed in 1648. His industry and affection to the cause procured himself and his father to be constituted assistants to the commissioners appointed by parliament, for ejecting scandalous ministers. This was in 1654; and Mr. Wood tells us, what is probable enough, that they acted with great severity. However, on the Restoration, Mr. Allein shewed a disposition to yield obedience to the government, but could not accede to the terms of conformity, which occasioned his being ejected from his living, after he had held it upwards of twenty years. After this, he continued to exercise his function privately, preaching sometimes in his own house, at others in the houses of gentlemen in the neighbourhood. He was once apprehended at the seat of Mr. Moore, who had been a member of parliament, and who had invited him thither to preach to his family and some of his neighbours. Mr. Moore paid the tine, which was rive pounds, for him. He still went on in the way of his profession, notwithstanding he was often summoned to the quarter sessions, and severely reprimanded as the keeper of a conventicle. He, however, escaped imprisonment, as his great learning, piety, and exemplary life, had gained him so high a reputation, that it would have been very unpopular to have sent him to a gaol. After the five mile act passed, he was obliged to leave Batcomb, and retire to Frome Selwood, where he continued in the constant exercise of his ministry, notwithstanding the dangers he was exposed to. He died the 22d of December 1681, being upwards of 64 years of age. He was distinguished for his plain, practical manner of preaching, and for the delight he took in the pastoral office. His writings, which were mostly tracts on religious subjects, were much esteemed and often printed. The principal of these is a work entitled “Vindicise Pietatis, or a Vindication of Godliness,” which was, and is, in high reputation among persons of Calvinistic sentiments. It consists of three parts, published 1664 6. As it was printed without a licence, the king’s bookseller caused the copies to be seized, but afterwards purchased them from the king’s kitchen, where they were sent as waste-paper, and bound them up and sold them; being however discovered, he was obliged to make submission to the privy council, and the hooks were ordered to be destroyed. This occasioned the first edition to be long scarce, and created the mistakes as 10 date into which both Wood and Calamy have fallen, and which are not rectified by the editor of the Biographia Britannica, who does not appear to have examined the book. Although a zealous non-conformist, Mr. Allein was not tinctured either with spleen to the church, or disloyalty to his prince; on the contrary, he lived in a fair correspondence with the clergy of his neighbourhood, and the gentry paid him great respect, although of opposite sentiments.

, an English lawyer and antiquary, was born at Great Hadham in Hertfordshire, about the end of the seventeenth century, and was educated at Eton; whence he went to King’s college, Cambridge, and took his bachelor’s degree in 1707, and his master’s in 1711. He afterwards studied law, was called to the bar, and by the influence of Arthur Onslow, speaker of the house of commons, became a master in chancery. His reputation as a lawyer was inconsiderable, but he was esteemed a good classical scholar, and a man of wit and convivial habits. He became afterwards an alderman of the corporation of Guildford, and an useful magistrate in that neighbourhood. He died April 11, 1754, and was buried in the Temple church. He collected a biographical account of the members of Eton college, which by his will, dated 1753, he ordered to be placed in the libraries of the two colleges, and a third copy to be given to his patron, Mr. Onslow. He also compiled, at his leisure hours, or rather made collections for, an English dictionary of obsolete words, of words which have changed their meaning, as villain, knave, and of proverbial or cant words, as helter-skelter, which he derived from hiiariter cderiter. It is not known what became of this manuscript. He bequeathed his fortune, and probably his books, to a brother who was a Turkey merchant.

, a non-conformist clergyman of Norwich, was born in that city in 1608, and educated at Caius college, Cambridge. He appears to have been minister of St. Edmund’s, Norwich, where he was silenced by bishop Wren, in L636, for refusing to read the book of Sports, and other non-compliances peculiar to the times. Two years afterwards he went to New England, and was a preacher at Charlestown until 1651, when he returned to Norwich, and had the rectory of St. George’s, from which he was ejected for nonconformity in 1662, and during the same period he preached in a meeting called the congregational church. He afterwards preached in the latter place, as he had opportunity, and without molestation, till the time of his death, Sept. 21, 1673. He published several pious practical treatises; but the work which obtained him most reputation, was his “Chain of Scripture Chronology, from the creation to the death of Christ, in seven periods,” 1639, 4to. One of his biographers compares him to Bucholtzer, who, being weary of controversy, betook himself to chronology, saying that he would rather compute than dispute.

, an English minor poet of the seventeenth century, was the son of James Allestry, a bookseller of London, who was ruined by the great fire in 1666, and related to provost Allestry, the subject of the next article. Jacob was educated at Westminster school, and entered at Christ-church, Oxford, in the act-term 1671, at the age of eighteen, and was elected student in 1672. He took the degree in arts; was music-reader in 1679, and terrte filius in 1681; both which offices he executed with, great applause, being esteemed a good philologist and poet. He had a chief hand in the verses and pastorals spoken in the theatre at Oxford, May 21, 1681, by Mr. William Savile, second son of the marquis of Halifax, and George Cholmondeley, second son of Robert viscount Kells (both of Christ-church), before James duke of York, his duchess, and the lady Anne; which verses and pastorals were afterwards printed in the “Examen Poeticum.” He died of the consequence of youthful excesses, October 15, 1686, and was buried, in an obscure manner, in St. Thomas’s church-yard, Oxford.

, an eminent English divine, was born in March 1619, at Uppington near the YVrekin in Shropshire. He was at first educated at a free-school in that neighbourhood, and afterwards removed to one at Coventry, taught by Philemon Holland the translator. In 1636, he was sent to Oxford, and entered a commoner in Christ-church, under the tuition of Mr. Richard Busby, afterwards master of Westminster school. Six months after his settlement in the university, Dr. Fell, dean of Christ-church, having observed the parts and industry of young Allestry, made him a student of that college, where he applied himself to his books with great assiduity and success. When he had taken the degree of bachelor of arts, he was chosen moderator in philosophy, in which office he continued till the disturbances of the kingdom interrupted the studies and repose of the university. In 1641, Mr. Allestry, amongst other of the Oxford students, took ar;ns for the king, under sir John Biron, and continued therein till that gentleman withdrew from Oxford, when he returned to his studies. Soon after, a party of the parliament forces having entered Oxford and plundered the colleges, Mr. Allestry narrowly escaped being severely handled by them. Some of them having attempted to break into the treasury of Christ-church, and having forced a passage into it, met with nothing but a single groat and a halter, at the bottom of a large iron chest. Enraged at their disappointment, they went to the deanry, where having plundered as much as they thought fit, they put it all together in a chamber, locked it up, and retired to their quarters, intending next day to return and dispose of their prize; but, when they came, they found themselves disappointed, and every thing removed out of the chamber. Upon examination it was discovered, that Mr. Allestry had a key to the lodgings, and that this key had been made use of. Upon this he was seized, and would probably have suffered severely, had not the earl of Essex called away the forces on a sudden, and by that means rescued him from their fury. In October following, he took arms again, and was at the battle fought betwixt the king and the parliament’s forces under the command of the earl of Essex upon Keinton-field in Warwickshire; after which, understanding that the king designed immediately to march to Oxford, and take up his residence at the deanry of Christ-church, he hastened thither to make preparations for his majesty’s reception; but in his way was taken prisoner by a party of horse from Boughton-house, which was garrisoned by lord Say for the parliament: his confinement, however, was but short, as the garrison surrendered to the king. And now Mr. Allestry returned again to his studies, and the spring following took his degree of master of arts. The same year he was in extreme danger of his life by a pestilential distemper, which raged in the garrison at Oxford; but as soon as he recovered, he entered once more into his majesty’s service, and carried a musquet in a regiment formed out of the Oxford scholars. Nor did he in the mean time neglect his studies, “but frequently (as the author of the preface to Dr. Allestry’s Sermons expresses it) held the musquet in one hand and the book in the other, unitinEf the watchfulness of a soldier with the lucubrations of a student.” In this service he continued till the end of the war; then went into holy orders, and was chosen censor of his college. He had a considerable share in that test of loyalty, which the university of Oxford gave in their decree and judgment against the Solemn League and Covenant. In 1648, the parliament sent visitors to Oxford, to demand the submission of that body to their authority: those who refused to comply were immediately proscribed; which was done by writing their names on a paper, and affixing it on the door of St. Mary’s church, signifying that such persons were, by the authority of the visitors, banished the university, and required to depart the precincts within three days, upon pain of bein,; taken for spies of war, and proceeded against as such. Mr. Allestry, amongst many others, was accordingly expelled the university. He now retired into Shropshire, and was entertained as chaplain to the honourable Francis Newport, esq. and upon the death of Richard lord Newport, that gentleman’s father, in France, whither he had Hed to avoid the violence of the prevailing party, was sent over to France to take care of his effects. Having dispatched this affair with success, he returned to his employment, in which he continued till the defeat of king Charles II, at Worcester. At this time the royalists wanting an intelligent and faithful person to send over to his majesty, Mr. Allestry was solicited to undertake the journey, which he accordingly did; and having attended the king at Roan, and received his dispatches, returned to England. In 1659, he went over again to his majesty in Flanders; and upon his return was seized at Dover by a party of soldiers, but he had the address to secure his letters, by conveying them to a faithful hand. The soldiers guarded him to London, and after being examined by a committee of the council of safety, he was sent prisoner to Larnbeth-house, where he contracted a dangerous sickness. About six or eight weeks after, he was set at liberty; and this enlargement was perhaps owing to the prospect of an approaching revolution; for some of the heads of the republican party, seeing every thing tend towards his majesty’s restoration, were willingby kindnesses to recommend themselves to the royal party.

Soon after the restoration, Mr. Allestry was made a canon of Christ-church; at the same time he undertook one of the lectureships of the city of Oxford, but never received any part of the salary; for he ordered it to be distributed amongst the poor. In October 1660, he took the degree, of D.D. and was appointed one of the king’s chaplains in ordinary, and in Sept. 1663, regius professor of divinity, in which chair he sat seventeen years, and acquitted himself with honour. In 1665 he was appointed provost of Eton college, where he raised the school, which he found in a low condition, to an uncommon pitch of reputation. The west side of the outward quadrangle of that college was built from the ground at his expense. The excellent Dr. Hammond, who was his intimate friend, left him his valuable library, which he bequeathed himself to his successors in the divinity chair. His eagerness for study 3 and his intention of mind while he was employed in it was so great, that it impaired his constitution, and hastened his death. In 1680, finding his health and sight much weakened, he resigned his professorship of divinity to Dr. Jane. And now the decay of his constitution terminating in a dropsy, he removed to London, to have the advice of physicians; but medicines proving ineffectual, he died January 27th, 1680; and was buried in EJton chapel, where a marble monument, with an, elegant Latin inscription, was erected to his memory.

There are extant forty sermons by Dr. Allestry, for the most part preached before the king, upon solemn occasions, fol. 1684. Mr. Wood likewise mentions a small tract, written by him, entitled, “The Privileges of the University of Oxford, in point of Visitation,” in a letter to an honourable personage, 1647. The first eighteen of his sermons 'were published in 1669, fol. for a benevolent purpose. He gave them to Allestry the bookseller, mentioned in the preceding article, who was his kinsman, and was ruined by the great fire. These, with the others, were afterwards published by Dr. Fell, bishop of Oxford, who has done great justice to his memory in the life prefixed.

, a French advocate, was born at Montpeliier, and died at Paris, March 7, 1785, in the eighty-second year of his age. Having no talents to make a figure at the bar, he became an author by profession, and compiled a great number of works for the booksellers, some of which had considerable success. The principal productions of his industry were, 1. Several dictionaries, particularly “L'Agronome,” 2 vols. 8vo; a good abridgment of the “Maison Rustique;” a “Dictionnaire Theologique,” and another “Des Conciles,” both in 8vo, concise, but not remarkable for perspicuity. 2. “Manuel de l'homme du monde,” 8vo; and “L'Encyclopedie de Penseés,” 8vo; compilations made with little care. 3. “Synopsis Doctrinæ Sacræ,” 8vo, a collection of the passages in the Bible which regard the articles of belief. 4. “Tableau de l'histoire de France,” 2 vols. 12mo, which was adopted into some schools, and although negligently written, and with little attraction, gives the principal facts of the French history with fidelity and simplicity. 5. “Les Princes celebres qui ont regné dans le monde,” 4 vols. 12mo. 6. “L'Histoire des Papes,” 2 vols. 12mo. 7. “L'Histoire des Singes,” 2 vols. 12mo. This transition from the history of princes and popes to that of apes and monkeys, may be thought a proof of the versatility of our author’s genius: his history of princes, however, is the best of the three; that of popes is said to be superficial, and not very impartial. 8. “Les ornamens de la memoire,” 12mo, in which the title is more happy than usual in such works, is a collection of the beauties of the French poets, and has been often reprinted and enlarged. 9. “Les Lemons de Thalie,” 3 vols. 12mo; these are portraits and characteristic pieces from the comic poets. 10. “Connoisances des Poetes Françoises,” 2 vols. 12mo. 11. “Catechisme de l'age mur,” 12mo, an abridgment of the proofs of religion by question and answer. 12. “L'Albert moderne,” 2 vols. 12mo. 13. “L'Esprit des Journalistes de Trevoux,” 4 vols. 12mo. 14. “L'Esprit des Journalistes de Hollande,” 2 vols. 12mo. The former of these is a judicious selection. He compiled likewise several books for schools, and abridgments of the Greek history, the “Magasin des Adolescens,” lives of the saints, &c. &c. This copious list, in which we have not given all his compilations, is no small testimony to the industry of M. Alletz, who was at least virtuously, and often usefully employed, and whose character made his death, although at a very advanced period, be much regretted by his friends and family.

, bishop of Exeter in the reign of queen Elizabeth, was born at Great Wycomb in Buckinghamshire, and educated at Eton school. In 1528 he went from thence to King’s college, Cambridge, where he took a bachelor’s degree, but removed to Oxford, and spent some time in the academical studies of that unitersity. He afterwards married, was presented to a living, and became a zealous reformer. On queen Mary’s accession he left his cure, and retired into the north of Epgland, where he maintained himself by keeping a school and practising physic. On queen Elizabeth’s accession, when he could avow his principles with safety, he went to London, and was appointed to read the divinity lecture at St. Paul’s, in which he acquired great reputation; and in July 1560, was consecrated bishop of Exeter. He was not created doctor of divinity until November 1561. He died April 15, 1570, and was buried at Exeter. He wrote, I. “The Poor Man’s Library,” 2 vols. folio, 1571. These volumes contain his twelve lectures at St. Paul’s, on the first epistle of St. Peter. 2. “A Hebrew Grammar,” but it is uncertain whether it was ever published. He translated the Pentateuch in the version of the Bible undertaken by command of queen Elizabeth. Three epistles of Alley to Matthew Parker, in Latin, are preserved among the Mss. of Corpus Christi college, Cambridge. His “Judgment concerning the Doctrine and Discipline of the Church” is in Strype’s Annals. Wood and Godwin agree in placing b shop Alley’s death in 1570; but Tanner says, that it was on April 15, 1571, and Fuller carries it down so low as 1576. He left a son, Roger Alley, who was archdeacon of Cornwall; and his great grandson, the rev. Peter Alley, died so lately as August 1763, at the very extraordinary age of one hundred and ten years and two months. He was for seventy-three years rector of Donamow, in Queen’s County, Dublin, and served his own cure till within a few days of his death.

, a celebrated comedian in the reigns of queen Elizabeth and king James, but more justly celebrated as the founder of the college at Dulwich, in Surrey, was born in London, in the parish of St. Botolph without Bishopsgate, Sept. 1, 1566, as appears from a memorandum of his own writing. Dr. Fuller says, that he was bred a stage-player; and that his father would have given him a liberal education, but that he was ntft turned for a serious course of life. He was, however, a youth of good capacity, of a cheerful temper, and tenacious memory, and in his person of a stately port and aspect; all which advantages are qualifications for, and sometimes incitements to, the theatrical profession. By several authorities we find he must have been on tue stage some time before 1592; for at this time he was in high favour with the town, and greatly applauded by the best judges, particularly by Ben Jonson. Haywood, in his prologue to Mariow’s -Jew of Malta, calls him Proteus for shapes, and Roscius for a tongue. He usually played the capital parts, and was one of the original actors in Sluikspeare’s plays; in some of Ben Jonson’s he was also a principal performer: but what characters he personated in either of these poets, is difficult now to determine. This is owing to the inaccuracy of their editors, who did not print the names of the players opposite to the characters they performed, as the modern custom is, but gave one general list of actors to the whole set of plays, as in the old folio edition of Shakspeare; or divide one from the other, setting the dramatis personae before the plays, and the catalogue of performers after them, as in Jonson’s.

It may appear surprising, how one of Mr. Alleyn’s profession should be enabled to erect such an edifice as Dulwich college, and liberally endow it for the maintenance of so many persous. But it must be observed that he had some paternal fortune, which, though small, probably laid the foundation of his future affluence; and it is to be presumed that the profits he received from acting, to one of his provident and managing disposition, and one who by his excellence in playing drew after him such crowds of spectators, must have considerably improved his fortune: besides, he was not only an actor, but master of a playhouse, built at his own expence, by which he is said to have amassed considerable wealth. This was the Fortune play-house, near Whitecross street, by Moorfields. There is a tradition in the neighbourhood of this place, that in digging the foundation of this house, there was found a considerable treasure; so that it is probable the whole or greatest part of it might fall to Mr. Alleyn. He was also keeper of the king’s wild beasts, or master of the royal bear-garden, which was frequented by vast crowds of spectators: and the profits arising from these sports are said to have amounted to 500l. per annum. He was thrice married; and the portions of his two first wives, they leaving him no issue to inherit, probably contributed to this benefaction. Such donations have been frequently thought to proceed more from vanity and ostentation than real charity; but this of Mr. Alleyn has been ascribed to a very singular cause. Mr. Aubrey mentions a tradition, that Mr. Alleyn, playing a daemon with six others, in one of Shakspeare’s plays, was, in the midst of the play, surprised by an apparition of the devil, which so worked on his fancy, that he made a vow, which he performed by building Dulwich college. Whatever may be in this story, he began the foundation of this college, under the direction of Inigo Jones, in 1614; and the buildings, gardens, &c. were finished in 1617, in which he is said to have expended about 10,Ooo/. After the college was built, he met with some difficulty in obtaining a charter for settling his lands in mortmain; for he proposed to endow it with 800l. per annum, for the maintenance of one master, one warden, and four fellows, three whereof were to be clergymen, and the fourth a skilful organist; also six poor men, and as many women, besides twelve poor boys, to be educated till the age of fourteen or sixteen, and then put out to some trade or calling. The obstruction he met with arose from the lord chancellor Bacon, who wished king James to settle part of those lands for the support of two academical lectures; and he wrote a letter to the marquis of Buckingham, dated Aug. Is, 1618, entreating him to use his interest with his majesty for that purpose . Mr. Alleyn’s solicitation was, however, at last complied with, and he obtained the royal licence, giving him full power to lay his foundation, by his majesty’s letters patent, bearing date the 2 1st of June, 1619; by virtue whereof he did, in the chapel of the said new hospital at Dulwich, called “The College of God’s Gift,” on the 13th of September following, publicly read, and published, a quadripartite writing in parchment, whereby he created and established the said college; he then subscribed it with his name, and fixed his seal to several parts thereof, in presence of several honourable persons, and ordered copies of the writings to four different parishes. Those honourable persons were Francis lord Verulam lord chancellor; Thomas earl of Arundel, earl marshal of England; sir Edward Cecil, second son to the earl of Exeter; sir John Howard, high sheriff of Sussex and Surrey; sir Edward Bowyer, of Camberwell; sir Thomas Grymes of Peckham; sir John Bodley, of Stretham; sir John Tonstal, of L'arshalton; and divers other persons of great worth and respect. The parishes in which the said writings were deposited, were St. Botolph’s without Bishopsgate, St. Giles’s without Cripplegate, St. Saviour’s in Southwark, and the parish of Camberwell in Surrey. The contents or heads of the said statutes, or quadripartite writings, containing the laws and rules of this foundation, are as follow: 1. A recital of king James’s letters patent. 2. Recital of the founder’s deed quadripartite. 3. Ordination of the master, warden, &c. 4. Ordination of the assistant members, &c. 5. The master and warden to be unmarried, and always to be of the name of Alleyn or Allen. 6. The master and warden to be twenty-one years of age at least. 7. Of what degree the fellows to be. 8. Of what degree the poor brothers and sisters to be. 9. Of what condition the poor scholars are to be. 10. Of what parishes the assistants are to be. 11. From what parishes the poor are to be chosen, and the members of this college. 12. The form of their election. 13. The warden to supply when the master’s place is void. 14. The election of the warden. 15. The warden to be bound by recognizance. 16. The warden to provide a dinner for the college upon his election. 17. The form of admitting the fellows. 18. The manner of electing the scholars. 19. Election of the poor of Camberwell. 20. The master and warden’s oath. 21. The fellow’s oath. 22. The poor brother’s and sister’s oath. 23. The assistant’s oath. 24. The pronunciation of admission. 25. The master’s office. 26. The warden’s office. 27. The fellow’s office. 23. The poor brother’s and sister’s office. 29. Thac of the matron of the poor scholars. 30. The porter’s office. 31. The office of the thirty members. 32. Of residence. 33. Orders of the poor and their goods. 34. Of obedience. 35. Orders for the chapel and burial. 36. Orders for the school and scholars, and putting them forth apprentices. 37. Order of diet. 38. The scholars’ surplices and coats. 39. Time for viewing expences. 40. Public audit and private sitting days. 41. Audit and sitting chamber. 42. Of lodgings. 43. Orders for the lands and woods. 44. Allowance to the master and warden of diet for one man a piece, with the number and wages of the college servants. 45. Disposition and division of the revenues. 46. Disposition of the rent of the Blue-house. 47. The poor to be admitted out of other places, in case of deficiency in the parishes prescribed. 48. The disposition of forfeitures. 49. The statutes to be read over four several times in the year. 50. The dispositions of certain tenements in St. Saviour’s parish, Southwark.

He was himself the first master of his college, so that, to make use of the words of Mr. Haywood, one of his contemporaries, “he was so mingled with humility and charity, that he became his own pensioner, humbly submitting himself to that proportion of diet and clothes which he had bestowed on others.” We have no reason to think he ever repented of this distribution of his substance; but on the contrary, that he was entirely satisfied, as appears from the following memorial in his own writing, found amongst his papers: “May 26, 1620, My wife and I acknowledged the fine at the common pleas bar, of all our lands to the college: blessed be God that he hath given us life to do it.” His wife died in 1623; and about two years afterwards he married Constance Kmchtoe, who survived him, and received remarkable proofs of his affection, if at least we may judge of it by his will, wherein he left her considerable property. He died Nov. 25, 1626, in the sixty-first year of his age and was buried in the chapel of his new college, where there is a tomb-stone over his grave, with an inscription. His original diary is still preserved.

, a celebrated Piedmontese physician, and professor of -Botany, in the university of Turin, was born in 1725, and died in 1804. On account of his high reputation for learning, he was elected a member of many scientific societies, such as the institute of Bologna, and the royal societies of London, Montpellier, Gottingen, Madrid, &c. Of his numerous medical and botanical publications, the following are the principal: 1, “Pedemontii stirpium rariorum specimen primum,” Turin, 1755, 4to, containing the description and figures of thirty plants, either new or little known, which grow on the mountains of Piedmont. 2. “OryctographiiE Pedemontan;e specimen,” Paris, 1757, 8vo; an account of the fossils in Piedmont. 3. “Tractatio de miliarium origine, progressu, natura, et curatione,” Turin, 1758, 8vo; a medical treatise much esteemed. 4. “Stirpium præcipuarum littoris et agri Nicaeensis enumeratio methodica, cum elencho aliquot animalium ejusdem maris,” Paris, 1757, 8vo. This work is often quoted by naturalists under the abridged title of “Enumeratio stirpium Nicaeensis.” The principal part of it was collected by John Giudice, a botanist at Nice, and a friend of Allioni, to whom he bequeathed his papers. 5. “Synopsis methodica horti Taurinensis,” Turin, 1762, 4to, a methodical catalogue of the plants in the botanic garden of Turin, divided into thirteen classes. 6. “Flora Pedemontana, sive enumeratio methodica stirpium indigenarum Pedemontii,” Turin, 1785, 3 vols. fol. This splendid work, which is illustrated with ninety-two plates, was the fruit of long labour and study, and added greatly to the author’s reputation. In it he describes 2813 plants, which he found growing wild in the duchy of Piedmont, of which those in the third volume are new. It has been, however, said, that those already known acquire a kind of novelty by his descriptions, which are drawn from nature, and not from books; and the work derives an additional value, especially on the spot, from the very cautious manner in which he speaks of the medical properties of any of these plants. The arrangement resembles that of Haller in his history of the Swiss plants. Haller had a great regard for Allioni, and corresponded with him till his death. 7. “Auctuarium ad Flora Pedemontana,” Turin, 1789, containing some additions and corrections to the former. Besides these works, he wrote several papers in the memoirs of the academy of Turin; and from all his writings seems to deserve an honourable place among those who have contributed to the advancement of the botanical and medical sciences. Loeffling consecrated a genus to his memory, under the name of Allionia, which Linnæus has adopted. It is a genus of the monogynia order belonging to the tetrandria class of plants.

, a very learned and eminent divine of the church of England, although a native of France, and well known by his numerous and excellent writings, was born in 1641 at Alençon; and having received a liberal education, which highly improved his great natural parts, he became minister of the reformed church at Rouen. At this place, before he was thirty-five years of age, he distinguished himself by publishing some very able pieces, which excited much notice, and he was invited to Charenton, then the principal church the reformed had in France, and whither the most considerable persons of the Protestant religion constantly resorted. As he now saw himself in a condition to promote the interest of the church, he applied himself to the task with all imaginable zeal, and preached several valuable sermons in defence of the faith, against the artful attempts of the bishop of Meaux, who was then labouring to overturn the reformed religion, by seeming concessions to its professors. Upon the revocation of the edict of Nants, Mr. Allix found himself obliged to quit France, and had prepared a pathetic discourse, which he intended to have delivered as his farewell to his congregation, but was obliged to omit it, although it was afterwards printed.

In 1685, when the above edict was revoked, and the Protestant religion banished from France, Mr. Allix came into England, either in that or the following year, and met with a most favourable reception, on account of his extensive learning, and especially his knowledge in ecclesiastical history. Soon after his arrival, his first object was to acquire the English language, which he attained in a high degree of perfection. In 1690, he was complimented with the degree of D. D. by the university of Cambridge, and in the same year he had the treasurership of the church of Salisbury given to him; and some foreign memoirs say he was made canon of Windsor, but this does not appear to have been the case. It was proposed that he should have published here an authentic “History of the Councils,” for which laborious and important work he was well qualified; but by some accidents intervening, and for want of encouragement, this undertaking miscarried. He wrote and published, however, several treatises relating to ecclesiastical history, which displayed great learning, were very interesting, and very useful to the Protestant cause, which was then in considerable danger. These pieces, of which we shall give a list, were remarkably well received, and the author became in as great credit here, as ever he had been in France, for his ingenious and solid defences of the reformed religion, from reason and authority, and from the practice of early ages, as well as the precepts of the gospel. In 1699 he wrote a very learned treatise in defence of the Trinity, which has always been considered as an able and argumentative performance, and is mentioned with great respect by the late bishop Horsley, in his letters to Dr. Priestley. He wrote several other learned and ingenious treatises on curious and important subjects, and was, for upwards of thirty years, a strenuous and affectionate defender of the established church. Some of these pieces exposed him, however, to very severe censures; and among the rest, Bayle, who had formerly complimented him very highly, attacked him with contemptuous language; but the opinion of Bayle, where orthodoxy is concerned, is not deserving of much respect. One of his antagonists, Mr. Stephen Nye, rector of Hormead, accuses him of Tritheism; and in Moreri’s Dictionary, printed in 1740, it is insinuated that he was inclined to Socinianism, a charge the most absurd and incredible that could be brought. Dr. Allix, however, continued steady and fixed in his principles, and was so well known to be a zealous defender of the doctrine of the church of England on that subject, that Whiston thought proper to consult him, when he first proposed writing in support of his own opinions, as appears by what he says on this subject in his “Historical Preface,” which, however, Dr. Allix found it necessary to correct in a short relation of his interview with Whiston.

Dr. Allix enjoyed a very uncommon share of health and spirits, as appears by his latest writings, in which there is not only all the erudition, but all the quickness and vivacity that appeared in his earliest pieces. Those who knew him, derived the same pleasure from his conversation, that the learned found in his productions; for, with an extensive share of learning, he had a remarkable liveliness of temper, and expressed himself on the driest subjects with much sprightliness, and in a manner out of the common road. He was consulted by the greatest men of his age, on the deepest and most intricate parts of learning, and received the praise of the ablest critics of his time. It was not any single branch of literature, or a few related to each other, that could occupy his thoughts, but the whole circle of sciences which fall under the cognizance of a general scholar and sound divine. His sermons shew him to have been an admirable orator, and at the same time a profound scholar, and the several ancient authors whose writings he published, testify his skill in criticism, and his perfect acquaintance with antiquity. His treatises on ecclesiastical history discover a vast fund of reading, and an exact comprehension of his subject, with a warm zeal for the Protestant religion. He laboured also to serve it by the tracts he rescued froro oblivion, to shew, which they did effectually, that the charge of novelty on which the Papists insisted so loudly, was not only unreasonable, but entirely groundless. His thorough acquaintance with Hebrew and Rabbinical learning was displayed in his laborious performance in defence of the doctrine of the Trinity, in which his sincerity is as conspicuous as his learning. If in the prosecution of those deep and recondite studies, he sometimes mistook his way, and erred in his computations, as when he fixed the year of Christ’s second coming at 1720, it was no more than had befallen the greatest men who have travelled this road before him, particularly Joseph Mede and bishop Lloyd; neither have these instances convinced other eminent men that the roads are impassable, since the very learned dean Prideaux, and the sagacious sir Isaac Newton, have devoted many of their hours to the like inquiries. Dr. Allix continued his application to the last, and died at London, Feb. 21, 1717, in the seventy-­sixth year of his age, leaving behind him the reputation of a man, equally assiduous in the right discharge of all the offices of public and private life, and every way as amiable for his virtues and social qualities, as venerable from his uprightness and integrity, and celebrated for his various and profound learning.

His works are, 1. “Response a la Dissertation sur Bertram et Jean Scot, ou Erigene,” printed at the end of Claude’s answer to M. Arnaud’s Perpetuity of the Faith, 1670. 2. “Ratramne, ou Bernard, Pretre, du Corps et du Sang du Seigneur,” Lat. et Fr. Rouen, 1672, 12mo. 3. “Dissertatio de Trisagii origine,” Rothomagi, 1674, 8vo. Maimbourg erroneously ascribes this to another person. 4. “Dissertatio de Sanguine D. N. J. Christi,” date uncertain. 5. “Dissertatio de Tertulliani vita, et scriptis.” 6. “Dissertatio de Conciliorum quorumvis definitionibus ad examen revocandis,” 8vo, circa 1680. 7. “Anastasii, Sinaitæ contemplationum in Hexahemeron liber xii hactenus desideratus,” Gr. et Lat. cum notis, &c. Lond. 1682, 4to. 8. “Douze Sermons sur divers textes,” Rotterdam, 1685, 12mo. 9. “Les Maximes du vrai Chretien,” which was printed at Amsterdam, 1687, and joined with “Bonnes et saintes pensées pour touts les jours du mois.” 10. “L'Adieu de St. Paul aux Ephesiens, Sermon,” Amst. 1688, 12mo. This was his intended farewell sermon noticed above. 11. “Reflections upon the books of the Holy Scripture, to establish the truth of the Christian Religion,” Loud. 1688, 2 vols. This work was dedicated to king James II. from whom the author had received some obligations. The dedication, which is wanting in some editions, may be seen in the Biographia Britannica. Bishop Watson, in his late “Tracts,” republished these Reflections, which he says have always been held in great repute for the plainness and erudition with which they are written. 12. “Determinatio F. Joannis Parisiensis cle modo existendi Corpus Christi in sacramento Allans, &c. cui est prefixa prefatio historica de dogmate Transubstantiationis,” Lond. 1686, 8vo. 15. “Some remarks upon the ecclesiastical history of the ancient Churches of Piedmont,” Lond. 1690, 4to. This is a very elaborate work, in which the author traces the history of opinions with great acuteness and fidelity. 14. “Remarks upon the ecclesiastical history of the ancient Churches of the Albigenses,” Lond. 1692, 4to; a performance of a similar kind with the former, and throwing much light on the opinions of the reformed churches. 15. “The judgment of the ancient Jewish Church, against the Unitarians, in the controversy upon the Holy Trinity, and the divinity of our blessed Saviour,” Lond. 1689, 8vo. This was occasioned by the controversy between bishop Bull and the Unitarians, and is the able defence of the doctrine of the Trinity to which we have already alluded. 16. “De Messiæ duplici adventu dissertationes duæ adversus Judeos,” Lond. 1701, 12mo. It was in this treatise our author fell into the erroneous computation respecting Christ’s second coming. 17. “Preface and arguments on the Psalms.” 18. “Nectarii Patriarchte Hierosolymitani confutatio Imperil Papæ in Ecclesiam,” Lond. 1702, 8vo; a translation from the original in Greek. 19. “Aug. Hermanni Franke manuductio ad lectionem Scrip. Sac.” Lond. 1706, 8vo; our author wrote only a short prefatory recommendation to this book. 20. “Dissertatio de J. C. Domini nostri anno et mense natali,” Lond. 1707 and 1710. 21. “The Prophecies which Mr. Whiston applies to the times immediately following the appearance of the Messiah, considered and examined,” Lond. 1707, 8vo. 22. “Preparations a la Cene,” 8vo, often printed at Geneva. 23. “Remarks upon some places of Mr. Whiston’s books, either printed or in manuscript,” Lond. 1711, 8vo. This pamphlet is uncommonly scarce. Besides these, the late Dr. Flexman assured Dr. Kippis that the following pieces may be attributed to our author, “Theses Theologicæ de ultimo judicio,” Salmur, 1660, 4to, probably academical exercises; “A discourse concerning Penance,” Lond. 1688, 8vo; “An historical discourse concerning the necessity of the Ministers’ intention in administering the Sacrament,” 1688, 8vo; “An Examination of the scruples of those who refuse to take the Oaths,” 1689, 4to; “Animadversions on Mr. Hill’s Vindication of the primitive Fathers, against the right rev. Gilbert, bishop of Sarum,” 1695, 4to.

, called Bronzing, an eminent painter, was born at Florence in 1535, and was the disciple of Agnolo Bronzino, likewise a distinguished painter, who educated him with all the tenderness of a parent, Allori having been deprived of his own father, when he was but five years old. He was very studious, and applied himself diligently, not only to imitate the manner of his master, but the different manners of those masters who were in the greatest reputation. When he commenced painter, his first work was a crucifixion, intended for an altar-piece, which was much praised, but his success in portrait-painting induced him to employ a great deal of his time in that branch. Michael Angelo was the master whose works he studied with the greatest attention, and he designed a picture of the Last Judgment, after the manner of that great genius, which is preserved at Rome, and will perpetuate the honour of Allori. He died in 1607, aged 72. It is said that he wrote some burlesque poems, and a dialogue on Design. The existence of this last is denied by his French biographer, but we find its title in Haym’s Biblioteca Italiana, “Dialogo di Alessandro Allori pittore Florentine sopra l'arte del disegnare le figure principiando da Muscoli, Ossa, Nervi, Vene, Membra, Notomia, e figura perfetta,” Florence, 1590.

, professor of divinity in the college of Navarre, at Paris, and one of the most able scholastic writers of his time, was a native of Sens, and died young at Paris in 1515. During his short life, he published a considerable number of works, on logic, physics, morality, and divinity. The two which procured him most fame are, 1. “De autoritate Ecclesise, &c.” Paris, 1512, 4to, in which he defends the doctrine of the council of Pisa, against Cajetan, who had raised the pope’s authority above that of the councils. 2. “De potestate ecclesiastica et laicali contra Ockam.” These are both in the edition of his works, published at Paris, 1517, fol.; but in that edition we do not meet with his “Moralia,” Paris, 1525, 8vo.

, count d'Abrantes, a Portugueze, was the first governor of India, to which place he was dispatched in 1505, by king Emanuel, with the high character of viceroy. His fleet had a dangerous passage out, and almost continual storms off the Cape of Good Hope, without being able to make it, but at last reached Quiloa. The king of that place having given some cause to suspect his conduct, Almeida resolved to besiege the city, and after landing 500 men, the natives fled, and the Portugueze entered and plundered it. The plunder was however deposited in one house, and shared among the soldiers, Almeida taking as his own share, only one arrow. He then began to build a fort, and offered the people the protection of the Portugueze, which they accepted, and received a king from them, who promised to be obedient to king Emanuel.

From hence he sailed with his fleet for Melinda, but by tempestuous weather was driven three leagues beyond; from thence they proceeded to the island of Anchidive, where he built a fort, and sent some of his ships out to cruize. Here he received deputies from the king of Onor, to treat of peace, and also the submission of a piratical chief, of the name of Timoia; but a circumstance soon happened to shew the former was not sincere, and the viceroy saited to Onor, and burned some ships i:i the harbour. A day or two after, he sent his son to burn the other ships, when a smart action ensued, and the Portugueze were obliged to retreat. Almeida sailed next day to Cananor, where he found it necessary to build a strong fort to protect his countrymen against the Arabians, who, jealous of the Portugueze, did them every injury in their power. While Almeida remained here, he had the happiness to receive an embassy from the king of Narsinga, offering friendship, and his daughter as a wife for John the son of Emanuel. He had also a visit from the king of Cananor, from whom he obtained liberty to build his fort. From this place he dispatched his son on an expedition to Caulan.

On the arrival of Cugna with a reinforcement from Portugal, and on receiving intelligence of several Arabian ships richly laden being in the port of Panama (about 50 miles off) escorted by a fleet of ships of war of Calicut, he resolved to attack them in the harbour. He sailed for that purpose with 12 ships of war. On his passage he was informed that the ships were not yet afloat, but lay in the docks, under cover of a rampart, and a strong garrison of 4000 men. Almeida had only 700, and with these he resolved to attack the enemy. He attempted to land and burn the ships; and after a violent conflict succeeded. This was a strong proof of the superiority of the Portugueze at this time in war, for the enemy fought with desperate, courage, there being many among them who had taken an oath to conquer or die. These devotees had all their heads shaven, and were destroyed to a man. Almeida, having made good his landing, advanced to the city, and set it on fire, being fearful of the consequences of permitting his men to plunder it. The men murmured at being deprived of such a rich booty, but this the viceroy disregarded; and to keep them employed, dispatched his son with a squadron to cruize against the Arabians, who in an engagement with the enemy’s fleet lost his life. Almeida, who had often shewn that he possessed great fortitude, now gave a striking proof of it; and to those who lamented the death of young Almeida with too much sorrow, he said, “That he had never wished a long, but a glorious life for his son; and for his part, he thanked God for honouring him with so glorious a death.”

In the mean time a set of men, who had their own advantage in view, inflamed the animosity between Almeida and Albuquerque; and the former not only still refused to deliver up his government, but ordered Albuquerque to be confined. Contigna, however, another commander, arriving from Portugal, reconciled them to each other, and Almeida to the surrender of his government. The viceroy immediately embarked, and soon after sailed for Portugal. Unfortunately stopping at a place not far from the Cape of Good Hope, a slight quarrel arose between the Portugueze and natives, and in an action with them, Almeida received a wound in his throat with a javelin, March 1, 1509, and died immediately. Thus expired this brave, honest, and renowned commander by his own imprudence. Before he went to India, he had distinguished himself greatly in the wars of Grenada. In India his exploits have been spoken of. As soon as he fell, the rest of the Portugueze fled. Two officers who saw him fall endeavoured to persuade their countrymen to recover his body; but finding entreaties ineffectual, they rushed upon the enemy, were soon, overpowered by numbers, and fell.

was son of the former, and had he enjoyed longer life, would probably have equalled him in fame. His first exploit was against Caulan, in India, whither he was dispatched by his father to destroy all the ships in that harbour; he executed his orders with so much expedition, that he came in sight of the town before they were apprized of his arrival, and destroyed 27 ships. Soon after he was sent on a cruize against the Maldive islands, to intercept all Arabian ships. The strength of the currents in those seas, drove him as far south as Cape Comorin, and the island of Ceylon, and he put into a port in the latter. The king hearing of his arrival, and having before heard of the fame of the Portugueze in those parts, treated him with great respect, and entered into a treaty, by which he agreed to pay a yearly tribute to the king of Portugal, on condition of receiving protection and defence. The tribute was to be 250,000 Lb. weight of cinnamon; and the first year’s payment was immediately put on board. On his return, he was ordered to the Anchidive islands; when being informed of a large fleet fitting out at Calicut, Lawrence immediately sailed to that place, engaged it, and after a fierce conflict, gave them a total defeat. He then returned to Cananor, where he was received by the king of that place, who was a friend of the Portugueze, with great honour: he afterwards continued with his father, until he sailed on the fatal expedition in which he lost his life. He was dispatched with eight ships to annoy the Arabians, and at first was successful. He put into the port of Chaul, a large and opulent city, adjoining to the kingdom of Canibaya. Here he received advice that the sultan of Egypt had fitted out a considerable force, manned with his bravest soldiers. It consisted of five large ships, and six galleys, to which the king of Cambaya joined 30 sloops of war. When they appeared off Chaul, the Portugueze concluded they were the ships of Albuquerque, and made no preparation to engage; the Egyptian admiral entered the river, but his allies remained out at sea.

The next day Lawrence Almeida weighed anchor and attacked the admiral’s ship, but in the action he was wounded. His officers, finding they were becalmed, and could not come to close quarters with the enemy, advised him to return. This he declined, and soon received another desperate wound in the face with a dart. The action continued at a distance, Almeida not being able to get near his enemy. Other captains were more fortunate, as they boarded and took two ships. The next day, the fleet from sea came in and joined the enemy. The Portugueze held a council, and were almost unanimously of opinion, that they ought to put to sea in the night, which they endeavoured to effect, but the enemy pursued and came up with the admiral’s ship, in the rear, and surrounded her. An unfortunate shot rendering it impossible to steer her, she ran aground. The Portugueze captains had a strong desire to assist their admiral, but the violence of the tide prevented them. However, they sent a boat to bring Almeida away; but he refused to quit his fellow-soldiers in this distress, hoping also that he should be able to defend himself until the tide returned. The enemy did not dare to board his vessel, but continued a fierce cannonade at a distance, which was returned with spirit. Almeida at last received another wound, in his thigh, which quite disabled him, and being placed in a chair which was lashed to the mast, he continued to animate his men, until a shot in the breast killed him. The Portugueze on board this unfortunate ship were now reduced to 20, who still continued to defend themselves, but the enemy succeeded in boarding her, and to their honour, treated the few brave survivors with great humanity.

, a Portuguese historian, was born at Vizeu in that kingdom, in 1580, and after an education among the Jesuits, was sent to the Indies, where, having completed his studies, he became rector of the college of Bacaim. In 1622, Vitteleschi, general of the Jesuits, sent him as ambassador to the king of Abyssinia, who received him with much respect; but his successor having banished the Jesuits from his dominions, Almeida returned to Goa in 1634, and became provincial of his order in India, and inquisitor. He died at Goa in 1646. His works are: 1 “A history of Upper Ethiopia,” to which his brother Jesuit, Bathazar Tellez, added many facts and documents, and published it at Coimbra, 1660, fol. 2. “Historical letters,” written from Abyssinia to the general of the Jesuits, and published at Rome, in Italian, 1629, 8vo. He left also some manuscripts on the errors of the Abyssinians, and the misrepresentations of the dominican Urreta in his history of Ethiopia.

, a Portugueze priest, who had the courage in Portugal to study and teach philosophy, xipon more rational and experimental principles than had ever been known in that country, was born in 1722. His most celebrated work, written in Portuguese, and entitled “Itecreaceo Filosofica,” 5 vols. 8vo, 1751, occasioned a revolution in the philosophical studies of the Portugueze, and would probably have involved the author in much danger, had not the Jesuits been soon after banished from that kingdom. He was nevertheless a zealous advocate for the pretensions of the court of Rome, at the time of the famous rupture between Joseph II. and that court; and this rendered him so obnoxious to the marquis de Pombal, that he was obliged to seek an asylum in France, during the ministry of that nobleman. On his return to Portugal, the royal academy of sciences of Lisbon was eager to admit him a member; but it was soon evident that Almeida had not kept pace with the progress which the nation had made in twenty-five years, and he was suffered to eclipse himself, although without losing any of the respect due to his former services in promoting liberal science. He published, after his return to Lisbon, a moral romance, called “The Happy Independant,” which had little success; and it was said that a better title would have been “The Happy Impertinent.” He died in 1805, leaving behind him several manuscripts, for the publication of which he had obtained the permission of the Censor. His works altogether are said to amount to forty volumes, besides five of translations; but we have not been able to obtain a list of their titles or subjects. At the time of his death he was a member of the Royal Academy of Lisbon, and of the Royal Society of London.