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

About the latter end of the year 1542, we find Alasco at Embden, where he took upon him the office of pastor, and preached constantly at a church in that town. In the following year he was engaged by Anne, countess dowager of Oldenburg, in East Friesland, to introduce and establish the reformed religion in that territory. This he was pursuing with great success, when he was invited by Albert, duke of Prussia, to a similar undertaking; but as that prince was a zealous Lutheran in the article of the sacrament, and Alasco had candidly informed him of his strict adherence to the Zuinglian doctrine on the same subject, the engagement did not take place, and Alasco continued for some years, nearly in the same quarter, labouring to promote the reformation by assiduous preaching, lecturing, and exhortation.

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.

It is to be regretted that a reception so hospitable, an establishment so munificent, and a toleration so complete, should not have induced this learned reformer to abate the zeal of controversy. But he had not enjoyed his new office long before he published a book against the church of England, her ritual, ecclesiastical habits, and the gesture of kneeling at the sacrament. It is an excuse, indeed, that he was requested by Edward VI. to write on some of these subjects; and it was probably owing to this circumstance, that no censure was passed en his book.

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.

In 1555, Alasco went to Franckfort on the Maine, where he obtained leave of the senate to build a church for reformed strangers, and particularly for those of the Netherlands. While here, he wrote a defence of his conduct to Sigismond, king of Poland, against the aspersions of Joachim Westphale (one of the most violent controversial writers on the side of Luther), Bugenhagen, and others. In the same year, with the consent, if not at the desire of the duke of Wirtemberg, he maintained a disputation against Brentius, then a Lutheran, upon the subject of the eucharist. The unfair representation Brentius published of this controversy, and the garbled account he gave of Alasco’s arguments, obliged the latter to publish an apology for himself and his church, in 1557; in which he proved that their doctrine did not militate with the Augsburgh confession concerning the presence of Christ in the supper; but that, if they had differed from that confession, it did not follow that they were to be condemned, provided they could justify their dissent from the holy scriptures. Westphale was yet more illiberal than Brentius in his censure of Alasco and his flock; and reviled them with a virulence that would have better become their professed persecutors.

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.”

Of his works we have a catalogue in Melchior Adam, Verheiden, and others, but mostly without dates. His book on the sacrament, already noticed, bore this title: “Brevis et dilucida de Sacramentis ecclesiae Christi tractatio in qua fons ipse et ratio totius sacramentariae nostri temporis controversies, paucis exponitur,” Lond. 1552, 8vo. Together with this, says Strype, was bound up a tract entitled “Consensio mutua in re Sacramentaria ministrorum Tigurinae ecclesiae, et D. Jo. Calvini, ministri Genevensis ecclesiae, data Tiguri, Aug. 30, 1549.” The whole was introduced by an epistle dedicatory to king Edward, which Strype has given at large. It treats chiefly of the controversy respecting the habits, and was reprinted in 1633, when these matters were considered as of sufficient Importance to hazard the existence of church and state. Of this work on the sacrament, an abridgement was afterwards published under the title “Epistola continens in se summam controversiæ de cœna Domini breviter explicatam.” His other works are: 1. “Confessio de nostra cum Christo Domino communione, et corporis item sui in coena exhibitione, ad ministros ecclesiarum Frisii orientalis.” 2. “Epistola ad Bremensis Ecclesiae ministros.” 3. “Contra Mennonem catabaptistarum prineipem.” 4. “De Recta Eccles arum instituendaruni ratione Epistolse tres,” 6. “Epistola ad regeni Polonise Sigismundum, &c. in qua doctrinae ministeni tidem, ac nominis sui existimationem, contra adversariorum calumnias vindicat.” 6. “Purgatio ministrorum in ecclesiis peregrinis Francofurti, qua demonstrat ipsorum doctrinam de Christ! domini in coena sua pncsentia non pugnare cum Augnstana confessione, ut adversarii eos accusabant.” 7. “Responsio ad virulentam, calumniisque et mendariis consarcinatam, Joachirri Westphali Epistolam, qua purgationem ecclesiarum peregrinarum Francofurti convellere conatur.” -8. “Forma ac ratio totius Ecclesiastici Ministeni Edwardi VI. in peregrinorum maxime Germanorum ecclesia.” He also published a form of prayer and religious service, used in the church at London, df which we find a notice of a translation from Latin into French, printed at London in 1556.

, 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.

, an eminent virtuoso, was born at Urbino, Oct. 15, 1692, and promoted to the rank of cardinal by Innocent XIII. He died Dec. 2, 1779, aged 87, He showed great dignity in his embassy to the emperor; and displayed much learning while he held the place of librarian of the Vatican. He had great taste and knowledge of antiquities, and became a munificent patron of learning and learned men. His house, known by the name of the Villa Albani, was decorated with valuable statues and other treasures of the fine arts. He also found leisure from his political engagements to write some historical and literary works, which are held in much esteem. In 1762, his collection of drawings, consisting of three hundred volumes, one third of which are original drawings of the first masters, the others, collections of the most capital engravings, were sold to his present majesty of Great Britain, for 14,000 crowns.

, nephew to the preceding, and heir to his taste and munificence, was born in Rome, 1720, and educated for the church, in which he was speedily promoted to the highest honours, being advanced to the purple, soon after he entered the priesthood, in 1747, and not long afterwards appointed arch-priest of the Basilic of St. Maria Maggiore, and bishop of Porto, one of the seven suburban sees which depend on the pope as on their immediate metropolitan. He derived more lustre, however, from following the example of his uncle in patronizing learning and learned men, and in adding to those rare and valuable monuments of art, which so long rendered the villa Albani the resort of the virtuosi of Europe.

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.

The cardinal w r as now in his seventy-seventh year, and. in all probability expected to close his life in the full enjoyment of his. splendid and unrivalled collections, when the French took possession of Rome. The depredations they committed in the Vatican and other public places of Rome, and the violences offered by them to the most eminent persons in that metropolis, may be easily accounted for from their characteristic rapacity, and the hatred which they then professed for religion under any shape. But the outrages which they practised on the family of Albani had such a Jjase and spiteful motive, as to brand them with eternal infamy. Owing to the successive marriages of the two last princesses of Carrara and of Modena, the family of Albani was a relative to the imperial house of Austria; and the French thought that the distress and humiliation, of the one would be communicated to the other. The estates were confiscated, the magnificent and elegant palace, within the precincts of Rome, was, sacked, and the unrivalled villa was plundered and destroyed. “This palace,” says Mr. Duppa, “which is not yet razed to the ground, nor its villa made an absolute heath, now remains (1798) a melancholy monument of the Vandalism of the eighteenth century. Every statue, every bust, every column, every chimney-piece, every piece of marble that served for ornament or use, was torn from its situation, and was either sent to Paris, or became the perquisite of certain agents employed by the Directory to see that there might be nothing wanting to the entire completion of its ruin: even the shrubs in the garden were rooted up, and sold.”

During this devastation, the cardinal took refuge, first, in a Camaidolese convent on the southern frontiers of the Roman state; but, it being intimated that he could not be safe there, he went to Naples; and, on the approach of the French, to Messina. In 1800 he was present at Venice, at the election of the reigning pope; and when the Austrian and Neapolitan troops reconquered the Roman territory, he returned to Rome, where he took private lodgings, but never had strength of mind to view either his palace or villa, nor could they be mentioned in his presence without throwing him into the deepest sorrow. Here he died, in 1803, in the eighty-fourth year of his age. He was handsome in person, sprightly and eloquent; sincere, cordial, unassuming, and affable; and both from his intellectual and moral qualifications, he was justly considered as one of the most accomplished characters of the age.

, 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.

, an Arabic prince of Batan in Mesopotamia, was a celebrated astronomer, about the year 880, as appears by his observations. He is also called Muhammed ben Geber Albatani (Mahomet, the son of Geber) and Muhamedes Aractensis. He made astronomical observations at Antioch, and at Racah or Aracta, a town of Chaldea, which some authors call a town of Syria or of Mesopotamia. He is highly spoken of by Dr. Halley, as a man of great acuteness, and accuracy in making observations. Finding that the tables of Ptolemy were imperfect, he computed new ones, which were long used as the best among the Arabs: these were adapted to the meridian of Aracta or Racah. He composed in Arabic a work under the title of “The Science of the Stars,” comprizing all parts of astronomy, according to his own observations and those of Ptolemy. The original of this, which has never been published, is in the library of the Vatican. It was translated into Latin by Plato of Tibur, and was published at Nuremberg in 1537, with some additions and demonstrations of Regiomontanus; and the same was reprinted at Bologna in 1645, with this author’s notes. Dr. Halley detected many faults in these editions. (Philos. Trans, for 1693, No. 204.) In this work Albategni gives the motion of the sun’s apogee since Ptolemy’s time; as well as the motion of the stars, which he makes one degree in seventy years. He made the longitude of the first star of Aries to be 18 2‘; and the obliquity of the ecliptic 23 35’; and upon his observations were founded the Alphonsine tables of the moon’s motion.

, 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.

, a native of Bologna, flourished in the middle of the sixteenth century. He was the author of a work entitled “El Cardinale,” Bologna, 1599, 4to. and of “Trattato del modi di ridurre a pace l'inimicitie private,” Venice, 8vo, 1614; a subject which has been treated by J. B. Olevano. In 1573, Zanetti published at Rome six volumes of Albergati’s moral works.

, an Italian lawyer, the sort of Alberic Rosiati of Bergamo, one of the most learned men of his time, was born at Arezzo, near Florence, in the fourteenth century. He studied under the celebrated Baldi, and made a rapid progress in philosophy, law, history, &c. He afterwards became an advocate at Arezzo, but went to Florence in 1349. Here his learning, talents, and integrity, procured him one of those titles which were frequently bestowed at that time on men of celebrity. He was called doctor solids veritatis. By the republic of Florence he was entrusted to negociate several very important affairs, particularly with the Bolognese in 1558; and as the recompense of his services, he was ennobled. He died at Florence in 1376, leaving three sons; two eminent in, the church, and one as a lawyer. His works are principally “Commentaries on the Digest,” on “some books of the Civil Code,” and consultations, much praised by Bartholi. His father, mentioned above, wrote on the sixth book of the Decretals, a work much esteemed and often reprinted, and a Dictionary of Law, with other professional treatises.

, a historian and monk of the Cistertian order, in the monastery of Trois-Fontaines, in the diocese of Chalons-sur-Marne, was born near that place, in the beginning of the thirteenth century. He is the author of a “Chronicle” containing the remarkable events from the creation to 1241. Leibnitz and Menckenius have printed it, the first in Vol. II. of his “Accessiones Histories,” Leipsic, 1698, 4to; and the second in vol. I. of“Scriptores rerum Germanicarum et Saxonic.” ibid. 1728, foL This chronicle, of which the imperial library at Paris possesses a more complete manuscript than those used by the above editors, is valued on account of the curious particulars it contains, although it is not very exact in chronological points, particularly in the very ancient periods. Alberic wrote also several poetical pieces, of which mention is made in father du Visch’s “Bibl. ordin. Cisterc.”

, 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.

Our own history shews, that his spirit was always very high, and his temper very violent. During the time that he was prime minister of Spain, colonel Stanhope, afterwards lord Harrington, the English envoy, carried him a list of the ships of his country that were then before Barcelona, and would act against it, if he persisted in his endeavours to enioroil the peace of Europe, by arming the Porte against the Emperor, and by making the Czar and the king of Sweden go to war with England, in order to establish the Pretender upon the English throne. Alberoni snatched the paper which contained the numbers out of the envoy’s hands, and, according to the continuator of Rapin’s history, threw it on the ground with much passion. Mr. Seward, from whose “Anecdotes of distinguished Persons” we have taken the principal part of this article, says, that he tore it in a thousand pieces. Col. Stanhope, nothing abashed, went on coolly with the thread of his conversation, which may be seen in the continuation of Rapin. That Alberoni wrote with the same spirit he acted, is evinced by three letters of his to lord Melcombe, which Mr. Seward has published.

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.

M. Beauchamp, his latest biographer, observes, that it has been said he was rather an intriguer than a politician; that he was as ambitious as Richelieu, and as supple as Mazarine, but had less forecast and less depth than either. Such is the character, adds M. Beauchamp, which most French writers have given of Alberoni, either from judging of events after they happened, or from prejudice against him, because he showed himself the enemy of France. But if we reflect, that within a very few years Alberoni retrieved a considerable part of the ancient glory of the Spanish monarchy; that in midst of his complicated and extensive designs, his genius, which comprehended every branch of public administration, established regulations favourable to agriculture, arts, and commerce; that he neglected no endeavours which might inspire the Spaniards with a love of industry, while he prompted them to display their ancient valour; and if we lastly consider, that the failure of his projects was owing to the indiscretion of his agents, it may probably appear, that he wanted nothing to place him in a rank with Ximenes or Richelieu, but that success which justifies every thing, and which oftener depends on chance than on genius.

, or Alberic, canon and guardian of the church of Aix in Provence, his country, and where he died, about the year 1120, in his sixtieth year, is the author of a “History of the First Crusade,” from the year 1095 to 1120, the second year of the reign of Baldwin II. king of Jerusalem. Albert was not a witness of the exploits he records, but appears to have had recourse to the best information for his facts. Like most of his contemporaries, however, he abounds in the marvellous, and often disfigures the names of persons and places. Rhener Reinech printed this work, for the first time, in 1584, at Helmstadt, '2 vols. 4to, under the title of “Chronicon Hierosolimitanum,” with notes by the editor, and by Matthew Dresser; and Bougar reprinted it in the first volume of his “Gesta Dei per Francos.” Some late compilers of biography have divided Albert into two persons, Albert and Alberic, both of whom wrote the above chronicle; but Albert went to the crusade, and Alberic staid at home.

, 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.

, grandson of the constable de Luynes, was the ninth child of Louis-Charles, duke de Luynes, grand almoner of France. He was born in 1672, and had in his youth the title of the chevalier d‘Albert. In 1688, he served as a volunteer at the siege of Philipshurgh; in 1690 he was twice wounded in the battle of Fleurus; and in 1693, commanded the Dauphin regiment of dragoons at Steinkirk, where he was again wounded. In 1703, he accompanied marshal Villars into Bavaria, where the elector promoted him to the rank of lieutenant-general. He was then known by the title of count d’ Albert, and was successively chamberlain, master of the horse, minister, and colonel of the Bavarian guards. The elector having arrived at the throne in 1742, by the royal title of Charles VII. appointed count d' Albert field marshal, and sent him to France as ambassador extraordinary. The same year the emperor created him a prince of the holy Roman empire, by the title of prince of Grimberghen, taken from the rich domains he acquired by marrying a princess of Berghes. He died Nov. 10, 1758, aged eighty-seven. Amidst all his campaigns and political engagements, he cultivated a taste for literature. His works are “Le Songe d'AlcU biade,” a supposed translation from the Greek, Paris, 1735, 12mo, reprinted with “Timandre instruit par son genie,” and other pieces, published at Amsterdam, 1759, 12 mo, under the title “Recueil de differentes pieces de litterature.”

, 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.

lived in the thirteenth century, in the reign of the emperor Frederic II. While he was judge and governor of Gavardo, he was taken prisoner, and in confinement wrote a treatise, entitled “De dilectione Dei et proximi, de formula vitae honestac.” He afterwards wrote two others, “De consolatione et consilio,” and “De doctrina loquendi et tacendi.” Bastian de Rossi, called in the academy of De la Crusca l'Inferiguo, published an Italian edition, compared with several manuscripts, under the title of “Trattati di Albertano, &c.” Florence, 1610, 4to, a very rare book. There was a second edition, finely printed, at Mantua, 1732, 4to.

, 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.

, otherwise called Ridolfo Fioraventi, a celebrated mechanic, born at Bologna, lived in the 15th century. Astonishing performances are ascribed to this artist. In 1455 he transported, at Bologna, the campanile of St. Mary del Tempis, with all its bells, to the distance of 35 paces. In the town of Cento he righted that of the church of St. Blaise, which was got five feet and a half out of its perpendicular. Being invited to Hungary, he rebuilt several bridges on the Danube, and constructed many other works, with which the reigning sovereign was so highly satisfied, that he created him a chevalier, and allowed him to coin money with the impress of his own bust. He was likewise employed by Ivan Vassillievitch, grand duke of Russia, in the construction of several churches.

, a painter of some distinction, but whose reputation is chiefly established by his engravings, was born in 1552 atBorgo S. Sepolcbro, from which he derived one of his names. From his father, Michele Alberti, he learned the first rudiments of historical painting, in which art he made very considerable progress. His greatest works are in fresco at Rome; and he also painted in oil, and combined some thought with much practice. From whose instructions he became an engraver is uncertain, but his best style of execution seems evidently to have been founded on the prints of C. Cort and Agostino Caracci, though in his friezes and other slighter plates he owed much to the works of Francesco Villemena. The engravings of Alberti are never very highly finished, or powerful in effect. The lights are scattered and left untinted, as well upon the distances, as upon the principal figures of the fore-ground, which destroys the harmony, and, prevents the proper gradation of the objects. The drawing of the naked parts of the figure, in the works of this artist, is rarely incorrect: the extremities are well marked, and the characters of the heads generally very expressive: but his draperies are apt to be rather stitf and hard. His prints may be considered as very extraordinary efforts of a great genius, whilst the art was as yet at some considerable distance from perfection. The number of plates, great and small, engraved by this artist, amounts to nearly one hundred and eighty, of which seventy-five are from his own compositions, the rest from Michael Angelo Buonaroti, Raphael, Polidoro, Andrea del Sarto, &c. The “Miracle of St. Philip Benizzo” is one of the most excellent. Alberti died in 1615.

, brother of the above, was born near Florence in 1558, and received his early instructioa from his father, but afterwards went to Rome, where he studied geometry, and also the works of Buonaroti, and other great masters. He devoted his principal attention to perspective, in which branch he arrived at eminence, and gave a demonstrative proof of his great abilities in one of the pope’s palaces, having painted a design in that style which procured him much fame. The chief nobility at Rome were solicitous to employ him, and he worked in many of the chapels and convents with general approbation, for he recommended himself to all persons of taste by the elegance of his composition, the firmness and delicacy of his pencil, the grandeur of his thoughts, the judicious distribution of the parts, and by the spirit visible throughout the whole.

, a preacher at Tundern in Hanover, was born, in 1725, and having finished his education, spent some years in England, where, after he had acquired the language, he wrote “Thoughts on Hume’s Essays on Natural Religion,”, and on this occasion disguised himself under the name of Alethophilns Gottingensis. On his return to Germany, he published “Letters on the state of Religion and the Sciences in Great Britain,” Hanover, 1752—54, and “An Essay on the religion, worship, manners and customs of the Quakers,” 1750. He died in 1758.

, 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.

, an eminent Italian artist, and one of the earliest scholars that appeared in the revival of letters, was of a noble and very ancient family at Florence, but was born at Venice in the end of the fourteenth, or beginning of the fifteenth century. Various authors have given 1398, 1400, and 1404, as the date of his birth. In his youth he was remarkable for his agility, strength, and skill in bodily exercises, and an unquenchable thirst of knowledge possessed him from his earliest years. In the learned languages he made a speedy and uncommon proficiency. At the age of twenty, he first distinguished himself by his Latin comedy entitled “Philodoxius,” copies of which he distributed among his friends, as the work of Lepidus, an ancient poet. The literati were completely deceived, and bestowed the highest applauses on a piece which they conceived to be a precious remnant of antiquity. It was written by him during the confinement of sickness, occasioned by too close an application to study, and appeared first about the year 1425, when the rage for ancient manuscripts was at its height, and Lepidus for a while took his rank with Plautus and Terence. Even in the following century, the younger Aldus Manutius having met with it in manuscript, and alike ignorant of its former appearance, and the purpose it was intended to serve, printed it at Lucca, 1588, as a precious remnant of antiquity. Alberti took orders afterwards in order to have leisure to prosecute his studies. In 1447 he was a canon of the metropolitan church of Florence, and abb of St. Savino, or of St. Ermete of Pisa. Although he became known to the world as a scholar, a painter, a sculptor, and an architect, it is to his works of architecture that he owes his principal fame. He may be regarded as one of the restorers of that art, of which he understood both the theory and practice, and which he improved by his labours as well as his writings. Succeeding to Brunelleschi, he introduced more graceful forms in the art; but some consider him notwithstanding as inferior to that celebrated architect. Alberti studied very carefully the remains of ancient architecture, which he measured himself at Rome and other parts of Italy, and has left many excellent specimens of his talents. At Florence, he completed the Pitti palace, and built that of Ruccellai, and the chapel of the same family in the church of St. Pancras; the facade of the church of Santa Maria Novella, and the choir of the church of Nunziata. Being invited to Rome by Nicholas V. he was employed on the aqueduct of PAqua Vergine, and to raise the fountain, of Trevi; but this having since been reconstructed by Clement XII. from the designs of Nicholas Salvi, no traces of Alberti’s work remain. At Mantua, he constructed several buildings, by order of Louis of Gonzaga, of which the most distinguished are the churches of St. Sebastian, and that of St. Andrew: the latter, from the grandeur and beauty of its proportions, is esteemed a model for ecclesiastical structures. But his principal work is generally acknowledged to be the church of St. Francis at Rimini.

As a writer, Alberti was not less esteemed. He was well acquainted with philosophy, mathematics, antiquities, and poetry, and enjoyed the intimacy of Lorenzo de Medici. On one occasion this Meecenas of his age, with a view to pass the sultry season more agreeably, assembled some of the most eminent literary men in the grove of Camaldoli, amongst whom were Marsilio Ficino, Donato Acciajuoli, Alamanno Rinuccini, Christoforo Landino, and our Alberti. The subjects of their conversations, in which Alberti took a distinguished part, were published by Landino, in his “Disputationes Camaldulenses,” and a short sketch has been given by Mr. Roscoe in his life of Lorenzo.

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.

, avery eminent German physician, and one of the ablest scholars, and supporters of the opinions of Stahl, was born at Nuremberg, Nov. 13, 1682. He became professor of medicine at Hall, and an author of great celebrity. The object of the principal part of his works is to oppose the system of the mechanicians, and to establish that of Stahl; and although he may not be completely successful in this, it is generally agreed that his works contributed to throw great light on the sound practice of physic. Haller has given a copious list of his works, as well as of the disputations he maintained. Those which have contributed most to his fame, are, 1. “Introductio in universam medicinam,” 3 vols. 4to, Hall, 1718, 1719, 1721. In this he maintains the power of nature in the cure of diseases, and the danger of interfering with her operations. 2. “Systema Jurisprudentiae Medicse,” 1725 47, 6 vols. 4to, a work which embraces every possible case in which the opinion of the physician may be necessary in the decisions of law. 3. “Specimen medicoe Theologicae,” Hall, 1726, 8vo. 4. “Tentamen lexici medici realis,” 2 vols. 4to, 1727—1731, ibid. 5. “De Sectarum in medicina noxia instauratione,” 1730, 4to. 6. “Commentatio ad constitutionem criminalem Caroli V.” 1739, 4to. In most of these works the subjects are treated in a philosophical as well as practical manner. Albert! died at Hall, 1757, aged seventy-four.

, 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.

, author of the best French and Italian, and Italian and French Dictionary we have, was born at Nice, 1737. The success of the first three editions of this work encouraged him to publish a fourth, enlarged and corrected, Marseilles, 1796, 2 vols. 4to. His “Dizionario universale critico enciclopedico della lingua Italiana,” printed at Lucca, 1797, is much esteemed, and to foreigners may supply the place of the dictionary de la Crusca. Alberti was employed on a new edition, when he died at Lucca in 1800. The abbé Francis Federighi, his assistant in the work, was requested to complete it, and it was accordingly published in 1803, Lucca, 6 vols. 4to.

, a celebrated divine and politician of Venice, was born there in 1430, and at the age of ten, entered into the religious order of the Servites, where he made profession for six years. He afterwards taught philosophy, and became a popular preacher, and his zeal and talents pointed him out as the proper person to succeed to the vacant bishopric of Torcello, which, however, was given to another. The republic of Venice employed him in many affairs of state, and even sent him as ambassa dor to Turkey. He died in the prime of life in 1475, when his reputation was such, that a medal was struck in honour of his memory. He left, according to Sansovino, several works in Latin, on the knowledge of God, the history of the Servites, and other theological subjects, and an explanation of some passages in Dante. Possevin, in his “Sacred Apparatus,” improperly attributes the two firstmentioned works to Paul Nicoletti.

, called also Albertus Teutonicus, Frater Albertus de Colonia, Albertus Ratisbonensis, and Albertus Grotus, of the family of the counts of Bollstrcdt, was born, according to some, in 1193, and according to others, in 1205, at Lavingen in Suabia. It has been supposed that the epithet of Great, which was certainly conferred upon him by his contemporaries, in whose eyes he appeared a prodigy of learning and genius, was the family name Grsot, but none of the counts of Bollstcedt ever bore such a name. He received his early education at Pavia, where he surpassed all his schoolfellows, and that every circumstance belonging to him might have an air of miracle, it is said that he owed his rapid progress to a vision in which the holy Virgin appeared to him, and promised that he should be one of the greatest luminaries of the church. By the advice of one of his masters, the celebrated dominican Jordanus, he resolved to enter into that order in 1221. After having for some time taught the scholars of the society, he went to Paris, and gave lectures on Aristotle with great applause. As the Aristotelian philosophy had been just before forbidden by a papal bull, some of the biographers of Albertus have questioned his lecturing on the subject at Paris; but the fact is recorded by all the ancient writers on his history, and it is even probable that he was the means of having the bull rescinded as he was permitted publicly to comment on Aristotle’s physics. In 1254, his reputation was such among the Dominicans, that he was raised to the dignity of provincial in Germany. In this character he took up his residence at Cologn, a city at that time preferable to most others for a man so addicted to study, and for which he entertained so strong a predilection, that neither the invitation of pope Alexander IV. to come to Rome, nor his promotion to the bishopric of Ratisbon, in 1260, were inducements sufficient to draw him from Cologn for any considerable time. It was at Cologn probably, that he is said to have constructed an automaton, capable of moving and speaking, which his disciple, the celebrated Thomas Aquinas, broke in pieces, from a notion that it was an agent of the devil. This city is likewise said to have been the site of another of his miracles, that of raising flowers in winter to please William, count of Holland. Such tricks, or such reports of his ingenuity, procured him the reputation of a magician, in an age in which he probably had attained only a superior knowledge of mechanics. What he really did, or how far he was indebted to the arts of deception, in these and other performances, it is difficult to determine; but we know that the most common tricks, which now would only make a company of illiterate villagers stare, were then sufficient to astonish a whole nation.

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.

, archbishop of Prague, slightly mentioned in our former edition, deserves some farther notice on account of his character having been much misrepresented by Popish writers, from design, and by one or two late Protestant writers, from ignorance of his real history. He was born at Mahrisch-Netistadt in Moravia, and probably there first educated. When a young man, he entered the university of Prague, and studied medicine, in which faculty he took his degree in 1387. To the study of medicine he joined that of the civil and canon law, and in order to prosecute these sciences with more success, went to Italy, where at that time the ablest lawyers were; and at Padua, in 1404, received his doctor’s degree. On his return, he taught medicine in the university of Prague for nearly thirty years, and attained such reputation, that Wenceslaus IV. king of Bohemia, appointed him his first physician. In 1409, on the death of the archbishop of Prague, Wenceslaus recommended him to be his successor, and the canons elected him, although not very willingly. For some time they had no reason to complain of his neglecting to suppress the doctrines of Wicklifte and Huss, which were then spreading in Bohemia; but afterwards, when Huss came to Prague, and had formed a strong party in favour of the reformation, he relaxed in his efforts, either from timidity or principle, and determined to resign his archbishopric, which he accordingly did in 1413, when Conrade was chosen in his room, a man more zealous against the reformers, and more likely to gratify his clergy by the persecution of the Hussites. Albicus lived afterwards in privacy, and died in Hungary, 1427, and so little was his character understood, that the Hussites demolished a tomb which he bad caused to be built in his life-time, while the Popish writers were equally hostile to him for the encouragement he had given to that party. They reproached him in particular for his extreme parsimony and meanness while archbishop. Balbinus, however, the historian of Prague, asserts, that in his household establishment he was magnificent and bountiful. His last biographer allows, that in his old age he was more desirous of accumulating than became his character. During the time he held the archbishopric, he had the care of the schools and students, and bestowed every attention on the progress of literature. The only works he left are on medical subjects; “Practica medendi,” “Regimen Pestilentiae,” “Regimen Sanitatis,” all which were published at Leipsic in 1484, 4to.

, 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.

, son of the preceding, and one of the most celebrated anatomists of modern times, was born at Francfort in 1697. He received his first instructions from his father, and from the celebrated professors at Leyden, Rau, Bidloo, and Boerhaave; and in 1713 visited France, where he formed an acquaintance with Winslow and Senac, and afterwards corresponded with them on, his favourite science, anatomy. But he had scarce spent a year there when he was invited by the curators of the university of Leyden, to be lecturer in anatomy and surgery, in place of Rau. With this request, so flattering to a young man, he resolved to comply, although contrary to his then views and inclination, and on his arrival was created doctor in medicine without any examination. Soon after, upon the death of his father, he was appointed to succeed him as professor of anatomy, and on his admission, Nov. 9, 1721, he read a paper, “De vera via ad fabricae humani corporis cognitionem ducente,” which was heard with universal approbation.

His brother, Christian Bernard, was professor of anatomy at Utrecht, and died there in 1752. He published, 1. “Specimen anatomicum exhibens novam tennium homipis intestinorum descriptionem,” Leyden, 1722, 4to; 1724, 8vo. 2. “De anatome errores detegente in medicina,” Utrecht, 1723, 4to.

, a historian and poet, whose name also was originally Weiss, or White, was born at Schneeberg, in Misnia. After studying at Leipsic and Francfort, he was appointed professor of poetry at Wittemberg, and soon after historiographer, and private secretary to the house of Saxony, a situation which he held under the electors Augustus and Christian I. He died at Dresden in 1598. The faults in the style and arrangement of his historical works are rather those of his age, while his learning and accuracy have justly entitled him to the praise he has received from his countrymen. Among his numerous works are: 1. A chronicle of Misnia, “Meisnische Landund Berg-Chronica,” Wittemberg and Dresden, 1580, 1599, fol. 2. “Scriptores varii de Russorum religione,” Spire, 1582. 3. “Genealogical tables of the house of Saxony,” in German, Leipsic, 1602. 4. “Historiæ Thuringorum novæ specimen,” which is printed in the “Antiquit. regni Thuringici,” by Sagittarius. His “Latin Poems” were printed at Francfort, 1612, 8vo.

, 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.

, or Albricius, a philosopher and physician, born in London in the eleventh century; but of whom our accounts are very imperfect and doubtful. He is said to have studied both at Oxford and Cambridge, and to have afterwards travelled for improvement. He had the reputation of a great philosopher, an able physician, and well versed in all the branches of polite literature. Of his works, Bale, in his third century, has enumerated only the following: “De origine Deorum;” “De Ratione Veneni;” “Virtutes Antiquorum;” “Canones Speculative.” He adds, that in his book concerning the virtues of the ancients, he gives us the character of several philosophers and governors of provinces. But the full title of this work, which is extant in the library of Worcester cathedral, is “Summa de virtutibus Antiquorum Principum, et Philosophorum.” The same library contains a work by Albricius, entitled “Mythologia.” None of these have been printed. In the “Mythographi Latini,” Amsterdam, 1681, 2 vols. 12tno, is a small treatise “De Deorum imaginibus,” written by a person of the same name; but it is doubtful whether this was not Albricus, bishop of Utrecht in the eighth century. The abbé de Bceuf attributes it to the bishop; but D. Rivet in his literary history thinks it was of older date than either.

, 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.

Being now invested with the supreme command, he prepared a fleet, and sailed against Calicut; where, in a desperate and imprudent attack, he was dangerously wounded and forced to retreat.

Albuquerque, being recovered, went to sea with twentythree ships, two thousand Portuguese, and several Indian auxiliaries, designed for Ormuz; but, by the persuasion ofTimoia, a piratical prince^ changedhis intention, and proceeded to attack Goa. The forts near it on the continent were taken and destroyed: and learning that the city was in the greatest consternation, he sent deputies to offer the people his protection, and the enjoyment of their religion. The citizens accepted the conditions, and Albuquerque catered Goa the following day, being the 16th of Feb.1510. This city has long been the head of the Portuguese dominions in India. Here Albuquerque fixed his winter quarters, and behaved himself in such a manner as to merit universal esteem. But, while he was thus employed, some of the chief Portuguese began to murmur against him. However, by seizing and imprisoning the leaders, he quieted the disturbance. The enemy, being informed of the dissentions among the Portuguese, made an attack upon the island; and landing men, laid siege to the city, pressing it hard. The situation of Albuquerque became now truly distressing; an enemy vastly superior without, discontent among his officers within, and his troops greatly diminished. These circumstances determined him to embark on board his ships, and evacuate the city; which he effected after a fierce combat, having first set fire to the magazines.

He then steered to a place called Rapander to winter; but the enemy soon obliged him to remove, and take shelter between the continent and the island of Divar, where he was informed his enemies were also preparing to make an attack upon him,. In this extremity, being very scarce of provisions, he determined to make a desperate effort on a strong castle, called Pangin. Accordingly, having stationed a force to prevent succours being sent to it, he proceeded under cover of the night, and succeeded in surprising both the fort and camp of the enemy, both which were taken without much resistance. Such an unexpected turn of good fortune determined him not only to object to offers of peace, but also to make an attack on Goa. In this he succeeded, having in the attack killed 3000 of the enemy, and began to aim at greater enterprizes. Having collected his forces, he sailed from Goa for the island of Sumatra, and in every voyage made many captures; there having concluded a treaty with the princes of this island, he proceeded to the city of Malacca, and made himself master of it. Having settled affairs there, he returned to Goa, laid siege to the city of Benastar, and having been unsuccessful, consented to a peace with the Zamorin. He then built a fort at Calicut, and sailed to Aden, in hopes of making himself master of it, but was disappointed, and obliged to return. Soon after he fell sick and died, Dec. 16, 1515, having first had the mortification to hear of his being recalled by the king.

To this great man the Portuguese owe the foundation of the immense power they once possessed in India; and, had they pursued the maxims he laid down, might possibly have enjoyed to this day. He was a man of great humanity, dreaded for his bravery, and beloved for his benevolent disposition. His death was most sincerely felt by all the people of Goa, where he was buried with great funeral honours.

, son of the preceding, was born in 1500, and on his father’s death, Emmanuel king of 'Portugal made him take the name of Alphonso, that he might be the more frequently reminded of his illustrious viceroy, and in time promoted him to the highest offices in the kingdom. He published, in the Portuguese language, memoirs of his father, Lisbon, 1576, fol. under the title “Commentarios de grando Alfonso de Alboquerque, capitan general da India.”

, 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.”

, the son of Garsia, a celebrated physician of the twelfth century, became one of the professors of Salerno, where he studied. His reputation soon extended throughout the whole kingdom of Naples, and even to Sicily, to which he was invited by the emperor Henry VI. then afflicted with a dangerous complaint. Alcadinus cured him, and was appointed his physician in ordinary, an office which he continued to hold under his son Frederic II. For this prince, when young, he composed a series of Latin epigrams, in elegiac verse, entitled “De Balneis Puteolanis,” which were first printed in a collection under the title of “De Balneis omnibus quae extant apud Graecos et Arabes,” Venice, 1553, fol. with a small work “De Balneis Puteolorum, Bajorum et Pithecusarum,” which was printed in 8vo, Naples, 1591, and often reprinted in similar collections. Alcadinus left also two other treatises. 1. “De triumphis Henrici imperatoris.” 2. “De his quae a Frederico II. imperatore, prseclare et fortiter gesta sunt.” The time of his death is not ascertained.

, 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.

He is generally allowed to have been one of the greatest lyric poets of antiquity, and as he lived before the separation of the twin-sisters, poetry and music, he was probably the friend and favourite of both. His numerous poems, on different subjects, were written in the Æolian dialect, and chiefly in a measure of his own invention, which has ever since been distinguished by the name of Alcaic. He composed hymns, odes, and epigrams, upon very different subjects; sometimes railing at tyrants, and singing their downfall; sometimes his own military exploits; his misfortunes; his sufferings at sea; his exile; and all, according to Quintilian, in a manner so chaste, concise, magnificent, and sententious, and so nearly approaching to that of Homer, that he well merited the golden plectrum bestowed upon him by Horace:

Sometimes he descended to less serious subjects, as the praises of Bacchus, Venus, &c.; but these were thought inferior tp his other poems. His genius, it is also said, required to be stimulated by intemperance, and it was in a kind of intoxication that he composed his best pieces. Of all his works, however, there are only a few fragments preserved by Athenaeus and Suidas, and printed by Henry Stephens at the end of his Pindar, among the “Poet. Lyric, diversarum editionum,” Geneva, 1623, tbi. and 12mo, and in the “Corpus Poetarum” of Maittaire, fol. 1714.

, 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.

, or Abdelazyz, an Arabian astrologer, lived in the reign of Seif-Eddaulah, prince of the dynasty of the Hamdanites, or about the middle of the tenth century of the Christian sera. His reputation extended to Hurope, where John Hispalensis translated into Latin, about the twelfth or thirteenth century, his treatise “On judicial Astrology.” This was printed at Venice in 1503, 4to, under the title “Alchabitius cum commento,” and under the title a figure representing the circle and the armillary sphere. There is, however, an edition mentioned by Panzer of the date 1473, 4to, which is the most scarce and valuable. Bayle says that he wrote also a treatise on optics, which was found in a German convent.

, 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.

, born at Milan 1522, the nephew and heir of the preceding, was likewise a lawyer of considerable eminence, and a professor of law at Pavia, where cardinal Borromeo was his pupil. Pius VI. employed him as datary or chancellor of Rome, and afterwards made him a cardinal. His contemporaries, particularly Vettori and Muret, applaud him as a man of general learning, and the ornament of his age. He died at Rome in 1580, and left several works which have not been printed.

, 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.

, a celebrated Athenian, of whom Barthelemi has justly remarked, that some historians have stigmatized his memory with every reproach, and others have honoured it with every eulogium, without its being possible for us to charge the former with injustice, or the latter with partiality. He was born in the eighty-second olympiad, about the year 450 B. C. Clinias, his father, was descended from Ajax of Salamis, and his mother, the daughter of Megacles, was of the family of the Alcmteonides. In his person, while a youth, he was beautiful, and when a man, remarkable for his comeliness; his fortune was large beyond most of the nobility of Athens. His abilities were so great, that an ancient author (C. Nepos) has asserted that nature in him had exerted her utmost force, since, whether we consider his virtues or his vices, he was distinguished from all his fellow-citizens; he was learned, eloquent, indefatigable, liberal, magnificent, affable, and knew exactly how to comply with the times; that is, he could assume all those virtues when he thought proper; for, when he gave a loose to his passions, he was indolent, luxurious, dissolute, addicted to women, intemperate, and impious. Socrates had a great friendship for him, corrected in some degree his manners, and brought him to the knowledge of many things of which he would otherwise have remained ignorant: he also prevented the Athenians from resenting many of those wanton acts of pride and vanity which he committed when a lad. His family had always been on good terms with the Lacedemonians; Clinias, his father, indeed, disclaimed their friendship, but Alcibiades renewed it, and affected to shew great respect to people of that country, until he observed the ambassadors of Lacedemon applied themselves wholly to Nicias, his rival, and his dependants; he then resented it very much, and used every influence on the minds of the Athenians to the prejudice of that people.

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.

Alcibiades next promoted a league with the Argives, in order to keep the war at a distance, in case the feuds between Sparta and Athens were revived. This happened in, the twelfth year of the Peloponnesian war. The next summer he was invested with the command of a considerable army, passed into the territory of Argos and to Patrae, and at both places laboured to persuade them to build walls towards the sea, to enable them to receive succours from Athens; but jealousy of the Athenian power prevented them. No action took place this year.

The Athenians, in the sixteenth year of the war, determined to send a fleet into Sicily, to the assistance of the Egistines; Nicias was appointed to command, and Alcibiades and Lamachus were his colleagues. During the preparations for this expedition, an accident happened which put the whole city of Athens into confusion: the Hermae, or statues of Mercury, of which there were a multitude in the city and neighbourhood, were all defaced in one night, nor could the authors of this fact be discovered, notwithstanding a proclamation was issued, offering impunity and a reward for the informer; yet, in consequence of a clause therein, inviting any person of what condition soever to discover any former sacrileges, some servants and slaves deposed, that a long time before, certain young men, heated with wine, had ridiculed some religious mystery, and that Alcibiades was among them. His enemies immediately commenced a prosecution against him, to which Alcibiades offered to answer, asserting his innocence, and protesting against accusations brought against him while he should be absent. His enemies, determined to attempt his destruction, procured others to move that he should have liberty to depart on his command, and that, after his return, a day of trial should be assigned him; to this proposition he was unwillingly obliged to consent.

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.

Alcibiades went to Sparta, where he was well received. In the spring, when Agis king of Sparta invaded Attica, he gave him advice to seize and fortify Dicelea. This was a severe stroke on the Athenians; but their misfortunes fell much heavier on them in Sicily, and their allies began to waver. They afterwards had some slight successes at sea, which discouraged the Peioponnesians; but Alcibiades exerted his eloquence to persuade them to continue the war; he advised them to send a small fleet to Ionia, promising to engage the cities to revolt from the Athenians, and to negociate a league between Sparta and theking of Persia, the advantages of which he pointed out to them. The Lacedemonians entering into his measures, he passed over into Ionia, and there actually effected what he had promised. He also found means to draw Tissaphernes, the king of Persia’s lieutenant, into a league with them. The Spartans, however, were displeased with the terms of it, and seeking to have them altered, the Persians likewise grew displeased. Alcibiades did not long continue in favour with the Spartans; and having debauched the wife of Agis, that prince conceived the most inveterate hatred against him, and persuaded the Lacedemonians to send orders, to their general in Ionia to put the Athenian to death. Alcibiades gained some intelligence of this, retired to Tissaphernes, and laying aside the Lacedemonian, as he had before done the Athenian, became a perfect Persian. By the politeness of his address, he gained so much on Tissaphernes, although a professed enemy to all Greeks, that he gave his name to his gardens of pleasure, after he had spent immense sums in adorning them; they were afterwards called Alcibiades. When the Athenian saw that Tissaphernes placed a confidence in him, he gave him much information respecting the affairs of Greece; told him that it was not the interest of the Persian monarch that Athens should be destroyed, but that she and Sparta should be supported as rivals to each other, and that then the Greeks would never have an opportunity to turn their united arms against his master; but added, that if it should become necessary to rely on one of them, he advised him to trust to Athens, because she would be content with the dominion of the sea; but that the pride of the Spartans would always stimulate them to new conquests, and excite in them a desire of setting the Greek cities in Asia at liberty.

Tissaphernes approving of these counsels, Alcibiades wrote privately to some officers of the Athenian army at Samos, intimating that he was treating with the Persian on their behalf; but would not return to his native country until the demoeratical form of government was abolished. The reasons he advanced for this measure were, that the Persian king hated a democracy, but would immediately assist Athens, if the government was put into the hands of a few. These fickle people, the Athenians, prone to novelty, dissolved the democracy, and sent deputies to treat with Alcibiades and Tissaphernes; and, in case the terms offered by the Persian vtere reasonable, they were to declare that the Athenians would vest the sovereignty in the hands of a few. Before the deputies arrived, Alcibiades had discovered tha.t Tissaphernes did not incline to keep the Athenians on any terms; therefore, he set up such high conditions in the name of the Persians, that the Athenians themselves broke off the treaty. The democracy of Athens was, however, destroyed, and a new form of government was set up. This did not give general satisfaction the army at Samos declared for the democracy and, at the request of their general Thrasybulus, recalled Alcibiades.

On his return to the army, the deputies from Athens were, by his request, received. The army declared to them they would not acknowledge the present government, but would sail to Athens and restore the democracy: this he opposed, and persuaded them to remain where they were; and told the deputies to return and demand of the tyrants to. resign their authority. On their return, evert thing was in confusion at Athens; a new form of government was proposed, and Alcibiades recalled, and the favourers of an oligarchy withdrew to the enemy, Alcibiades meantime sailed with thirteen gallies to Arpendus, where he had frequent conferences with the Persian lieutenant. In hjs return, he took nine gallies belonging to the Peloponnesian fleet: and with this addition to his own squadron, he constrained the Halicarnassians to pay a large sum of money, and fortified Cos. An engagement soon after took place between the Athenian and Peloponnesian fleets; and, while the event was doubtful, Alcibiades came in sight with twenty gallies, and secured the victory.

The Athenians, after this, dividing their fleet into three parts, Alcibiudes, with his squadron, fell in with th enemy’s fleet under Mindarus, and fled from them, till he came in sight of the other divisions, and then pursued them in his turn towards Claros, sinking and taking their ships. When the enemy approached the shore, they were joined by the Persians; a second battle ensued, and a second victory was obtained. Thus, Alcibiades gained ttvo victories in one day; and his fame now rose so high among his countrymen that they sent one thousand foot, three hundred horse, and thirty gallies, to reinforce him. He sailed, and did good service in the Hellespont, and afterwards sat down before Byzantium, then well fortified and defended by a Lacedemonian garrison. Some of the inhabitants betrayed the city, and let in Alcibiades and his army; while the garrison made so brave a defence, that he was on the point of being driven out; but, making a proclamation that the Byzantines should be safe in their persons and effects, they joined him, and the garrison was almost aliput to the sword.

Alcibiades, and his colleague Theramenes, returned in triumph to Athens; they brought with them such immense spoils as had not been seen at Athens since the Persian war. The people almost deserted the city to behold Alcibiades when he landed. After he had made his harangue in the assembly, they directed the record of his banishment to be thrown into the sea, ordered him to be absolved from the curses he lay under, created him general, and conferred many other favours upon him. The sweetness of his temper, his complacence, and his applying the riches he brought home to the discharge of taxes, made the most virtuous of the citizens confess he deserved the honours that were paid him. He did not long remain in a state of inactivity, but put to sea again with a fleet of one hundred ships for the Hellespont, to assist some cities still kept firm to the Athenians he left part of his fleet under Antiochus, with strict orders not to engage; but the latter disregarded his instructions, and was defeated. On this news, Alcibiades returned; but met with another stroke of ill fortune; for his enemies had found means to persuade the Athenians that the defeat was owing to his inattention, and that he held a correspondence with the Lacedemonians: they instantly deprived him of his command, and appointed ten new generals. To Conon, one of the ten, he delivered the fleet; but refused to return to Athens, and in his own ship passed into Thrace, built a castle there for his own security, and founded a little principality in the sight of his many and powerful enemies.

Alcibiades, though an exile, endeavoured to restore the power of his country. He was in a small town of Phrygia, Under the government of Pharnabazus, when he was informed of the levies the younger Cyrus was making in Asia Minor, and concluding that this prince meditated an expedition against his brother Artaxerxes, he determined to repair to the court of the king of Persia, to apprise him cf the danger, and to obtain succours for the deliverance of his country. But assassins sent by the satrap suddenly surrounded his ho^use, and wanting the courage to attack him, set fire to it. Alcibiades rushed forth sword in hand through the flames, repulsed the barbarians, and fell beneath a shower of darts. This happened when he was only forty years old, in the ninety-fourtn olympiad, or 404 B.C.

That elevation of sentiment, says the abbe Barthelemi, which is produced by virtue, was not to be sought in the heart of Alcibiades; but in it was found that intrepidity which is inspired by the consciousness of superiority. No obstacle, no danger, could either surprize or discourage him; he seemed persuaded that when minds of a certain order do not perform all they wish, it is because they have not courage to attempt all they can. Compelled by circumstances to serve the enemies of his country, it was as easy for him to acquire their confidence by the ascendancy he had over them, as to govern them by the wisdom of his counsels: he possessed this pre-eminence peculiar to himself, that he uniformly procured a triumph for the party that he favoured, and that his numerous actions were never tarnished by a single reverse of fortune.

In negotiations, he sometimes employed the light of his understanding, which was as vigorous as profound; sometimes he had recourse to stratagems and perfidy, which no reasons of state can ever justify; on other occasions he availed himself of the pliability of a character which the thirst of power or the desire of pleasing accommodated without difficulty to every conjuncture and change of situation. In every nation he commanded respect, and swayed the public opinion. The Spartans admired his frugality; the Thracians his intemperance; the Boeotians his love of the most violent exercises; the lonians his taste for indolence and voluptuousness; the satraps of Asia a luxury they could not equal. He would have shown himself the most virtuous of men had he never known the example of vice; but vice hurried him on without making him its slave. It should seem as if the profanation of laws and the corruption of manners were considered by him only as so many victories gained over manners and the laws; it might be said too, that his faults were no more than the errors of his vanity. Those excesses of levity, frivolity, and imprudence which escaped his youth or idle hours, were no longer sjeen on occasions that demanded firmness and reflection. He then united prudence with activity, and pleasure never stole from him any of those moments which were necessary to the advancement of his glory, or the promotion of his interest.

, a rhetorician, born at Elaea, about the year 420 B. C. was contemporary with Isocrates, and the disciple of Gorgias. He composed a work on rhetoric, quoted by Plutarch; another in praise of death, mentioned by Cicero and Menander, and other works, noticed by Athenseus and Diogenes Laertius. There are only now extant two orations, one of Ulysses against Palamedes: the other, a declamation against the rhetoricians of his time, Περι Σοφιστων. They are both in Reiske’s collection, vol. VIII. The abbé Auger translated them along with his Isocrates.

, a Platonic philosopher, is supposed to have lived about the beginning of the second century. We have no account of his life, nor is he known but by his “Introduction to the doctrine of Plato,” with which he appears to have been very well acquainted. Marsilius Ficinus translated it into Latin, and it was published, for the first time, with various pieces by Jamblicus, Proclus, Porphyry, Synesius, and other Platonists, Venice, by Aldus, 1497, fol. It has often been reprinted, and Charpentier wrote a commentary on it, which was published at Paris, 1575, 4to. Dennis Lambin gave an edition in Gr. and Lat. with scholia, Paris, 1567, 4to; and Michael Vascosan another, ibid. 1532, 8vo. Daniel Heinsius has inserted it in his editions of Maximus Tyrius, Leyden, 1608, 1617, and Oxford, 1667, 8vo. It is also, in Latin, in the first editions of Apuleius, Rome, 1469, and 1472; Venice, 1521, &c.; and our countryman, Stanley, printed it in his “History of Philosophy.” It was very recently translated into French, and published by M. Combes Dounous, Paris, 1800, 12mo. There is another Alcinous, mentioned by Philostratus in his lives of the Greek sophists.

, a Greek author, of whom little is known, unless by his “Epistles,” which afford much amusing information respecting the domestic manners of the Greek courtesans, fishermen, and parasites. Dr. Jortin is of opinion that he drew them up for the use of his scholars, to teach them to speak and write Greek with purity and fidelity; but this opinion the English translators have very amply refuted. The best edition of these letters is that of Bergler, Gr. and Lat. with learned notes, Leipsic, 1709, 1715, 12mo, the latter a very rare edition. There is another, Utrecht, 1791, 8vo, and reprinted, with some additions by M. Wagner, Leipsic, 1798, 2 vols. 8vo. M. Bast, a French scholar, has lately found some unpublished letters, and very important variations, among the manuscripts in the imperial library of Paris, and has some intention of publishing them in a new edition of Alciphron. An excellent translation of the Epistles was published, London, 1791, 8vo. The first and second books, and the eloquent preface, by Mr. Monro, now rector of Easton, in Essex; and the third, with the notes, by the rev. William Beloe, the able translator of Herodotus.

, 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.

, successively bishop of Rochester, Worcester, and Ely, in the latter end of the fifteenth century, was born at Beverley in Yorkshire, and educated at the University of Cambridge, where he took the degree of doctor of laws. In 146 1, he was collated to the church of St. Margaret’s, New Fish-street, London, by Thomas Kemp, bishop of that diocese, and in the same year was advanced to the deanry of St. Stephen’s college, Westminster. In 1462 he was appointed master of the rolls. Six years after, he obtained two prebends; one in the church of Sarum, and the other in that of St. Paul’s, London. In 1470, he was made a privy counsellor, and one of the ambassadors to the king of Castille; and next year, he was, together with others, a commissioner to treat with the commissioners of the king of Scotland. About the same time, he was appointed by Edward IV. to be of the privy council to his son Edward, prince of Wales, He was also in 1471 promoted to the bishopric of Rocheser; and in 1472, constituted lord high chancellor of England, in which office he does not appear to have continued longer than ten months. In 1476,. he was translated to jhe see of Worcester, and appointed lord president of Wales. During his being bishop of Worcester, he very elegantly enlarged the church of Westbury. He was in disgrace with the Protector Richard duke of York, and was removed from his office of preceptor to Edward V. on account of his attachment to that young prince. Soon after the accession of Henry VII. he had again, for a short time, the custody of the great seal. At length, in 1486, he was raised to the bishopric of Ely, and according to A. Wood, he was made president of the council of king Edward IV. in the same year, which is a palpable mistake, as Henry VII. came to the crown in 1485. Bishop Alcock, in 1488, preached a sermon at St. Mary’s church at Cambridge, which lasted from one o'clock in the afternoon till past three.

He was a prelate of singular learning and piety, and not only a considerable writer, but an excellent architect, which occasioned his being made comptroller of the royal works and buildings, under Henry VII. He founded a school at Kingston upon Hull (Fuller says, at Beverley); and a chapel on the south side of the church in which his parents were buried. He built the beautiful and spacious hall belonging to the episcopal palace at Ely, and made great improvements in all his other palaces. Lastly, he founded Jesus college, Cambridge, for a master, six fellows, and as many scholars; which, under the patronage of his successors, the bishops of Ely, has greatly increased in buildings and revenues; and now consists of a master, sixteen fellows, and thirty scholars. He wrote several pieces, particularly “Mons perfections ad Carthusianos,” Lond. 1501, 4to; “Galli Cantus ad Confratres suos curatos in Synodo apud Barnwell, 25 Sept. 1498,” Lond. per Pynson, 1498, 4to. At the beginning is a print of the bishop preaching to the clergy, with a cock (his crest) at each side, and there is another in the first page. “Abbatia Spiritns sancti in pura conscientia, fundata,” Lond. 1531, 4to. “In Psalmos penitentiales,” in English verse. “Homilise vulgares.” “Meditationes piae.” “Spousage pf a virgin to Christ,” 1486, 4to. Bishop Alcock died Oct. 1, 1500, at his castle at Wisbech, and was buried in the middle of a sumptuous chapel, which he had built for himself at the east end of the north aile of the presbytery pf Ely cathedral, and which is a noble specimen of his skill in architecture.

, 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.

His first design was to lecture on anatomy and chemistry at Oxford, where these sciences were at that time superficially taught; but had many difficulties placed in his way by the regular lecturers, and was permitted only to read privately in a room furnished him by the indulgence of the principal and fellows of Jesus college. Yet persevering, and exhibiting uncommon talents and zeal, he became popular, and in Nov. 17, 1741, was incorporated M. A. of Jesus college, by decree of convocation; and about 1749 read his lectures in the museum, although without the appointment of the Regius professor. He proceeded B. M. in 1744, and D. M. in 1749. In 1744 he was elected a fellow of the Royal Society, and in 1754 was made fellow of the college of physicians, London, to which city he had many urgent invitations, as the most proper place for one whose medical fame was now completely established. But his health had been for some time atfected by a gouty disorder, which debilitated both body and mind in such a degree, as to oblige him even to leave his favourite Oxford. Accordingly in 1759, he retired to his native place, Runcorn, where it was hoped that freedom from lecturing and extensive practice, with change of air and exercise, might enable him to resume his profession. On his arrival, however, at Runcorn, he insensibly fell into practice, which he did not think proper to decline, as it obliged him to frequent and short journies, and change of air; and this restored, in some measure, his usual vigour and spirits. But after some years, his old disorder began to return at shorter intervals, and with more violence, accompanied with hypocondriacal affections and giddiness, which terminated in a paralytic stroke, of which he died Dec. 8, 1779, and was buried in Runcorn church. He was a man of great knowledge in his art, and had a familiar acquaintance with natural philosophy, mathematics, and astronomy. In practice, he was uncommonly successful.

, 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.”

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.

Charlemagne often solicited him to return to court, but he excused himself, and remained at Tours until his death, May 19, 804. He was buried in the church of St. Martin, where a Latin epitaph of twenty-four verses, of his own, composition, was inscribed upon his tomb. This epitaph is preserved by father Labbe, in his Thesaurus Epitaphiorum, printed at Paris 1686. He understood the Latin, Greek, and Hebrew languages extremely well; was an excellent orator, philosopher, mathematician, and, according to William of Malmesbury, the best English divine alter Bede and Adhelme. How greatly France was indebted to him for her flourishing state of learning in that and the following ages, we learn from a German poet, cited by Camden in his Britannia:

His works, which consist of fifty-three treatises, homilies, commentaries, letters, poems, &c. were first collected and published at Paris, by Andrew Duchesne, fol. with a life of the author; but a more complete edition was published in 1777, at Ratisbon, 2 vols. fol. by M. Froben, prince-abbe of St. Emmeraude. Father Chifllet published also in 1656, 4to, “The Confession of Alculnus,” which Mabillon proves to have been genuine. The last mentioned edition of 1777, contains most of the pieces written by A leu in us, which were pointed out by Du Pin; and the editor having procured a great number of manuscripts from Italy, France, Germany, England, and Spain, was enabled not only to revise and correct what had been already published, but to make very considerable additions; the whole arranged in a methodical order, carefully collated, and illustrated with historical and critical introductions, disquisitions, and notes.

, 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.

, a celebrated artist, was born at Zoust in Westphalia, in 1502; but we have no account of his family, nor are we quite certain of his Christian name, some calling him Henry, and some Albert. It is said, that he went to Nuremberg, and studied under Albert Durer, as he copied his style. As a painter, he attained considerable fame: the principal part of his works are in the churches and convents of Germany. Des Piles mentions a “Nativity” by him, which he accounts worthy of the admiration of the curious. He is, however, chiefly known by his engravings; and as, like many of the ancient engravers, particularly of Germany, he applied himself chiefly to the engraving of small plates, he has been classed by French authors among those they call little masters, and in this class he claims the first rank. The mechanical part of his engraving is extremely neat, and executed entirely with the graver. The light parts upon his flesh he has often rendered very soft and clear, by the addition of small long dots, which he has judiciously interspersed. His drawing of the naked figure, which he seems very fond of introducing, is much correcter than is usually found among the old German masters; and much less of that stiff taste, so common to them, appears in his best works. But Florent le Comte’s observation is certainly very just, that his men figures are far more correct than his women. His heads are very expressive in general, and his other extremities well marked, but sometimes rather heavy. But as his prints are very numerous, amounting, according to abbe de Marolles, to no less than 350, they cannot be supposed to be all equal; it is, therefore, necessary to see many of his prints, before any adequate judgment can be formed. The first collection of them was formed by the burgomaster Six, but to this many additions were made by Mariette, to the amount of 390 pieces, comprising many duplicates with differences. This collection was sold in France, in 1805, for 660 francs. He died at Soest, in 1558, in very poor circumstances,

, the son of Diego Garcia, one of the great officers of the house of Ferdinand and Isabella, was born about the end of the fifteenth century, and died at the age of ninety, in the reign of Philip II. His father sent him, when very young, to study at Louvain, under the care of John Louis Vives, and he made extraordinary proficiency in Greek, Latin, and philosophy. Charles V. made him his private secretary, and he was retained in the same station by Philip II. and enjoyed great favour at court. He is extolled by his countrymen, as a man of piety, wisdom, and Christian philosophy. His works are principally translations. 1. A translation of Xenophon, in elegant Spanish, Salamanca, 1552, fol. 2. Translations of the greater part of the works of Plutarch, Isocrates, Dio Chrysostom, Agapetus the deacon: 3. A Translation of Thucydides, Salamanca, 1554, fol. He also wrote a “History of the taking of Africa,” a sea-port on the coast of Barbary; and left behind him a collection of the military treatises which had appeared in Greek, Latin, andFrench, translated into Spanish for the use of his countrymen. His taste, and his rank in society, gave him a considerable influence in the progress of Spanish literature, during his long life.

, two brothers, natives of Malaga, whose history has not been separated by their biographers. They studied the belles lettres, antiquities, and civil law, with equal ardour and equal reputation. They both became ecclesiastics, and even in their persons there was a very close resemblance. Joseph obtained a prebend of Cordova, which he resigned in favour of Bernard, that he might enter among the Jesuits. He afterwards became rector of the college of Granada. While among the Jesuits, he published a work on the “Exemption of the regular Orders,” Seville, 1605, 4to; and another entitled “De religiosa disciplina tuenda,” ibid. 4to, 1615. Bernard, his brother, was appointed grand vicar by the archbishop of Seville, don Pedro de Castro, but obtained permission to reside at Cordova. He was one of the most learned and high esteemed of the Spanish literati of his time, and eminent for his knowledge of the Greek, Hebrew, and Oriental languages and antiquities. He has left two works, in Spanish: 1. “Origen de la lengua Castellana,” Rome, 1606, 4to; 1682, fol.; to which he acknowledges his brother Joseph contributed liberally. 2. “Varias antiguedades de Espana Africa y otras provincias,” Antwerp, 1614, 4to. He also wrote a letter to pope Urban VIII. on the relics of certain martyrs, Cordova, 1630, fol., and a collection of letters on the sacrament. He had composed a “Boe'tia illustrata,” the loss of which is regretted by the Spanish antiquaries. Joseph was born in 1560, and died in 1616; but the dates of the birth and death of Bernard are not known.

, a native of Zamora, in the kingdom of Leon, towards the end of the reign of Philip II. deserves some mention, to distinguish him from the preceding. He entered when very young into the society of the Jesuits, and attained so much character on account of his learning, as to be appointed first professor at Salamanca, and was the first Jesuit on whom the university, jealous of the power and ambition of that order, conferred the degree of doctor. He died, at Salamanca in 1657. He wrote, 1. “Commentaria et disputationes in tertiam partem S. Thomas, de incarnati verbi mysteriis et perfectionibus,” Lyons, 2 vols. fol. 2. Separate treatises, “De visione et scientia Dei De voluntate Dei De reprobatione et praedestinatione,” afterwards printed together at Lyons, 1662.

, 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.

, the first bishop of Durham, was promoted to that see in the year 990, being the twelfth of the reign of king Ethelred. He was of a noble family; but, according to Simeon of Durham, more ennobled by his virtues and religious deportment. He sat about six years in the see of Lindisfarne, or Holy Island in Northumberland, during which time that island was frequently exposed to the incursions of the Danish pirates. This made him think of removing from thence; though Simeon of Durham says, he was persuaded by an admonition from heaven. However, taking with him the body of St. Cuthbert, which had been buried there about 113 years, and accompanied by all the monks and the rest of the people, he went away from Holy Island; and after wandering about some time, at last settled with his followers at Dunelm, now called Durham, where he gave rise both to the city and cathedral church. Before his arrival, Dunelm consisted only of a few scattered huts or cottages. The spot of ground was covered with a very thick wood, which the bishop, with the assistance of the people that followed him, made a shift to cut down, and clear away. After he had assigned the people their respective habitations by lot, he began to build a church of stone; which he finished in three years time, and dedicated to St. Cuthbert, placing in it the body of that saint. From that time the episcopal see, which had been placed at Lindisfarne by bishop Aidan (see Aidan), remained fixed at Durham; and the cathedral church was soon endowed with considerable benefactions by king Ethelred, and other great men.

Aldhun had a daughter named Ecgfrid, whom he gave in marriage to Ucthred, son of Waltheof earl of Northumberland, and with her, six towns belonging to the episcopal see, upon condition that he should never divorce her. But that young lord afterwards repudiating her, with a view to a nobler alliance, Aldhun received back the church lands he had given with her. This prelate educated king Ethelred’s two sons, Alfred and Edward; and, when their father was driven from his throne by Swane, king of Denmark, he conducted them, together with queen Emma, into Normandy, to duke Richard the queen’s brother. This was in the year 1017, a little before bishop Aldhun’s death; for the next year, the English having received a terrible overthrow in a battle with the Scots, the good bishop was so affected with the news, that he died a few days after, having enjoyed the prelacy twenty-nine years. RaduU phus de Diceto calls this bishop Alfhunus, and bishop Godwin, Aldwinus.

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.

, another son of the above Sylvester, was born at Rome, where he was promoted to be secretary of the briefs after the death of Poggio in 1568. He died in the prime of life. He was the author of a translation of “Diogenes Laertius,” which was published at Rome in 1594, fol. at the expence of cardinal Peter Aldobrandini, his nephew; and also of a commentary on Aristotle’s treatise on hearing. These works have been praised by Veltori, by Buonamici, and by Casaubon. There have been several other cardinals of the same name and family.

, 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.

, bishop of Mans, the son of a Saxon gentleman and of Geraldine of Bavaria, both of royal descent, but subjects of the French empire, was born about the year 800, and spent his early years in the court of Charlemagne. Afterwards his inclination for the church prevented his accepting those employments in the state which Louis le Debonnaire would have conferred upon him. He went to Metz, and took orders, and the emperor recalled him and appointed him to be his chaplain and confessor. In the year 832 he was made bishop of Mans, where he remained quietly until the death of Louis, when he was driven thence by Lothaire, and not restored until the year 841, when Charles II. defeated that sovereign. Aldric afterwards employed his time in restoring ecclesiastical discipline, and in improving the morals of his diocese by his example. He died of the palsy Jan. 7, 856. He compiled a “Collection of Canons” for the use of his clergy, taken from the councils and decretals of the popes; but his most valuable work, his “Capitularies,” is lost. What remains of his writings was published by Baluze, and his life was written by Bollandus.

, 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.

, bishop of Carlisle in the reigns of Henry VIII. Edward VI. and queen Mary, was born at Burnham in Buckinghamshire; was educated at Eton, and elected a scholar of King’s college, Cambridge in 1507, where he took the degree of M. A. afterwards became proctor of the university, schoolmaster of Eton, fellow of the college, and at length provost. In 1529 he retired to Oxford, where he was incorporated B. D. About the same time he was made archdeacon of Colchester. In 1534 he was installed canon of Windsor, and the same year he was appointed register of the most noble order of the garter. July 18, 1537, he was consecrated bishop of Carlisle. He wrote several pieces, particularly 1. “Epistola ad Gulielmum Hormannum.” 2. “Epigrammata varia.” 3. “Several Resolutions concerning the Sacraments.” 4. “Answers to certain Queries concerning the Abuses of the Mass.” He wrote also resolutions of seme questions relating to bishops and priests, and other matters tending to the reformation of the church begun by king Henry VIII. Leland was his familiar acquaintance, and gives him a 'high character for parts and learning. The prelate died March 25, 1555, at Horncastle, in Lincolnshire, which was a house belonging to the bishops of Carlisle.

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.

, one of the most laborious naturalists of the sixteenth century, and professor at Bologna, was born in 1527, of a noble family in that city, which still exists. He employed the greater part of his long life, and all his fortune, in travelling into the most distant countries, and collecting every thing curious in their natural productions. Minerals, metals, plants, and animals, were the objects of his curious researches; but he applied himself chiefly to birds, and was at great expence in having figures of them drawn from the life. Aubert le Mire says, that he gave a certain painter, famous in that art, a yearly salary of 200 crowns, for 30 years and upwards; and that he employed at his own expence Lorenzo Bennini and Cornelius Swintus, as well as the famous engraver Christopher Coriolanus. These expences ruined his fortune, and at length reduced him to the utmost necessity; and it is said that he died blind in an hospital at Bologna, May 4, 1605. Mr. Bayle observes, that antiquity does not furnish us with an instance of a design so extensive and so laborious as that of Aldrovandus, with regard to natural history; that Pliny indeed has treated of more subjects, but only touches them lightly, whereas Aldrovandus has collected all he could find.

His compilation, or, what at least was compiled upon his plan, consists of several volumes in folio, some of which were printed after his death. He himself published his Ornithology, or History of Birds, in three folio volumes, in 1599; and his seven books of Insects, which make another volume of the same size. The volume of Serpents, three of Quadrupeds, one of Fishes, that of exsanguineous Animals, the history of Monsters, with the Supplement to that of Animals, the treatise on Metals, and the Dendrology, or History of Trees, were published at several times after his death, by the care of different persons.

The volume “of Serpents” was put in order, and sent to the press by Bartholomseus Ambrosinus; that “of Quadrupeds which divide the Hoof” was first digested by John Cornelius Uterverius, and afterwards by Thomas Dempster, and published by Marcus Antouius Bernia and Jerome Tamburini; that of “Quadrupeds which do not divide the Hoof,” and that “of Fishes,” were digested by Uterverius, and published by Tamburini; that “of Quadrupeds with Toes or Claws,” was compiled by Ambrosinus; the “History of Monsters,” and the Supplements, were collected by the same author, and published at the charge of Marcus Antonius Bernia; the “Dendrology” is the work of Ovidius Montalbanus. “Aldrovandus,” says l'abbé Gallois, “is not the author of several books published under his name; but it has happened to the collection of natural history, of Which those books are part, as it does to those great rivers which retain during their whole course the name they bore at their first rise, though in the end the greatest part of the water which they carry into the sea does not belong to them, but to other rivers which they receive: for as the first six volumes of this great work were by Aldrovandus, although the others were composed since his death by different authors, they have still been attributed to him, either because they were a continuance of his design, or because the writers of them used his memoirs, or because his method was followed, or perhaps that these last volumes might be the better received under so celebrated a name.” All the above-mentioned volumes were reprinted at Francfort, but it is difficult to procure them all of the same edition. Those on the minerals are more scarce than the others, and the volume which contains the monsters should have also the supplement to the history of animals, which is wanting in most copies. Aldrovandus has been considered by modern naturalists as an enormous compiler without taste or genius, and much of his plan and materials is borrowed from Gessner. Buffon says, with justice, that his works might be reduced to a tenth part, if all that is useless and superfluous were expunged. When, adds that eminent naturalist, Aldrovandi treats of the natural history of the cock or the ox, he gives you all that has been said of cocks and oxen; all that the ancients have thought, all that can be imagined of their virtues, their character, their courage, and their employments; all the stories which good women have told, all the miracles performed by them in certain religions, all the subjects of superstition which they have furnished, all the comparisons which the poets have given, all the attributes which certain nations have discovered in them, all the hieroglyphics in which they have been represented, all the armorial bearings in which they are seen; in a word, every history and every fable that has been related of cocks and oxen. Buffon, however, allows that if he is redundant, he is exact in important points; and in his works are unquestionably many curious accounts not easily to be found elsewhere.

, a Roman cardinal, and one of the most determined enemies to the reformation, was the son of Francis Aleander, a physician at Motta in the duchy of Concordia, and descended from the ancient counts of Laodno. He was born in 1480, and at thirteen years of age went to Venice for education, which was interrupted by a dangerous illness; but on his recovery, he went for some time to the academy at Pordenoue, and afterwards again to Venice. Returning to his native place, Motta, he had the courage to attack and prove the ignorance of the public teacher of that place, and was elected in his room. Such was his growing reputation afterwards, both at Venice and Padua, that Alexander VI. determined to invite him to Rome, and appoint him secretary to his son Caesar Borgia, butanother illness obliged Aleander to return to Venice, after he had set out; and the pope dying soon afterwards, he returned to his studies, and in his twenty-fourth year was reputed one of the most learned men of his age. He knew Latin, Greek, and some of the oriental languages intimately. About this time Aldus Manutius dedicated to him Homer’s Iliad, as to a man whose acquirements were superior to those of any person with whom he was acquainted. At Venice, Aleander formed an intimacy with Erasmus, and assisted him in the new edition of his Adagia, which was printed at the Aldine press in 1508, and is the most correct. Erasmus for some time kept up this intimacy, but took a different part in the progress of the reformation; and although he speaks respectt'uJly of Aleander’s learning, frequently alludes to his want of veracity and principle, accusations of which Luther has borne the blame almost exclusively in all the popish accounts of ALeander.

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.

Aleander’s memory is now to be respected only as a man of learning. He wrote a considerable number of works, the greater part of which have not been published. Those which have, are but insignificant: 1. “Lexicon GraecoLatinum,” Paris, 1512, fol.; a work compiled by six of his scholars, and revised, corrected, and enriched by notes from his pen. 2. “Tabulae sane utiles Graecarum musarum adyta compendio ingredi volentibus,” Argent. 1515, 4to, often reprinted. It is, however, only an abridgement of Chrysoloras’s Greek grammar. “De Concilio habendo,” a work of which he wrote only four books, and which was consulted as authority in the proceedings of the council of Trent, remains among his unpublished writings; and in the Vatican there is another manuscript, which Mazzuchelli considers as his best. It contains letters and papers respecting his offices of nuncio and legate, and his transactions against the heresies, as they are called, of Luther; and their importance appears by the use which cardinal Pallavicino made of them in his history of the council of Trent. Aleander ranks likewise among Latin poets from his verses “Ad Julium et Neasram,” published in Toscanus’s collection, entitled “Carmina illustrium poetarum Italorum.” The reason given by his admirers for the few works published by him, is his frequent and active employments in the church, and his being more familiar with extempore eloquence than with composition.

, called the younger, to distinguish him from his grand-uncle the cardinal, was born, according to La Motte, in 1574, in the principality of Friuli, and studied at Padua, where he became so distinguished in early life, that Baillet has classed him among his “Enfants celebres par leurs etudes.” He afterwards studied law with equal reputation, and in his twenty-sixth year published his commentaries on the institutions of Caius. When he went to Rome, he was employed as secretary under cardinal Octavio Bandini, and discharged this office with great honour for almost 20 years. He was one of the first members of the Academy of Humourists, wrote a learned treatise in Italian on the device of the society, ftnd displayed his genius on many different subjects.

Many high encomiums have been passed on him by his contemporaries, most of which, or the substance of them, may be seen in Fontanini. His principal works are: 1. “Psalmi pœnitentiales, versibus elegiacis expressi,” Tarvisii, 1593, 4to. 2. “Caii, veteris jurisconsulti, institutionum fragmenta cum commentario,” Venice, 1600, 4to. 3. “Explicatio antiques tabula marmorese, solis effi gie, symbolique exculptae, explicatio sigillorum zonae ve terem statuam marmoream cingentis,” Rome, 1616, 4to; reprinted several times, and inserted in Graevius’s Thesaurus. 4. “Carmina varia,” printed with those of the three Amalthei, to whom he was nephew by the mother’s side, and whose works he published, Venice, 1627, 8vo. 5. “La Lagrime di penitenza, ad imitazione de sette Salmi penitenziali,” Rome, 1623, 8vo. In his dedication he informs us that he wrote this volume when in his sixteenth year; and some Italian critics have praised the poetry and style. 6. “Difesa dell' Adone, poema del Cavalier Marino,” part first, Venice, 1629; part second, 1630, 12mo. Some other works of less note are enumerated by Niceron, and by Mazzuchelli, and he left a great many manuscripts in the Barberini library, which Fontanini once undertook to publish.

, 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.

, a miscellaneous French writer of considerable note, was born at Grenoble in 1643, of Protestant parents, whose religion he abjured, and after tudying medicine, was admitted doctor at Aix. Having, however, failed in this profession, he came to Paris. Pelisson and father Bouhours were his friends here, but he offended the latter by obtaining from the abbe de la Chambre, a manuscript of Vaugelas, which he published under the title of “Nouvelles remarques de M. de Vuugelas sur la langue Franchise, ouvrage posthume, avec des observations de M. H.” Paris, 1690, 12mo. Bouhours attacked the authenticity of this work, and Alemand promised to answer him, which we do not find that he performed. His other publications were, 1. “Nouvelles Observations, ou Guerre civile des Frangais sur la langue,” 1688, 12mo, a kind of attempt towards a verbal and critical dictionary, which was to have been comprised in two vols. fol. but the French academy prevented its being published, for the same reason, says Moreri, that they prevented that of Furetiere, namely, that the academicians intended to pubHsh a work of the kind themselves. 2. “Histoire monastique d'lrelande,” 1690, 12mo; which was afterwards enlarged by captain Stevens into the “Monasticon Hibernicum.” 3. “Journal historique de l‘Europe pour l’annee 1694,” Strasburgh (i. e. Paris), 1695, 12mo, concerning which the reader may consult the Memoirs of the abbe d'Artigny, vol. I. p. 282. He also published a translation of Sanctorius’s Statical medicine. He died at Grenoble in 1728.

, was born in the environs of Seville in Spain, about the middle of the sixteenth century, and for twenty years of his life had a place at court. Although we know little of his history or character, he deserves this short notice, as the author of a very popular novel, or romance, entitled “Guzman d'Alfarache,” which was reprinted in Spain above thirty times, and has been translated into Italian, German, English, and into French by Bremont and Le Sage. Le Sage abridged it considerably, and Scarron was much indebted to it. The English is a large folio, literally translated, and too tedious, and with too frequent interruptions of moral discussion, to be much relished in the present day. In 1609 Aleman was at Mexico, but on what errand is not known. About this time, however, he produced his “Ortografia Castellan,” 4to, a very scarce work, and of some reputation; and in 1604 he published a life of St. Antony of Padua in Spanish, with encomiastic Latin verses, which are not inelegant. This was reprinted at Valencia in 1608, 8vo. The first edition of his Guzman appeared in 1599, 4to, Madrid.

, 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.

, an eminent French philosopher, was born at Paris, Nov. 17, 1717. He derived the name of John le Rond from that of the church near which, after his birth, he was exposed as a foundling; being the illicit son of Destouches-Canon and Madame de Tencin. His father, informed of this circumstance, listened to the voice of nature and duty, took measures for the proper education of his child, and for his future subsistence in a state of ease and independence.

He received his first education in the college of the Four Nations, among the Jansenists, where he gave early marks of capacity and genius. In the first year of his philosophical studies, he composed a commentary on the epistle of St. Paul to the Romans. The Jansenists considered this production as an omen that portended to the society of Port-Royal a restoration to some part of their ancient splendour, and hoped to find one day in M. d'Alembert a second Paschal. To render this resemblance more complete, they engaged their rising pupil in the study of mathematics; but they soon perceived that his growing attachment to this science was likely to disappoint the hopes they had formed with respect to his future destination; they, therefore, endeavoured to divert him from pursuing it, but their endeavours were fruitless.

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.”

As M. d'Alembert’s fortune did not far exceed the demands of necessity, his friends advised him to think of a profession that might enable him to augment it. He accordingly turned his views to the law, and was admitted an advocate in 1738, but soon abandoned this plan, and applied to the study of medicine, which he continued only for about a year. Geometry was always drawing him back to his former pursuits; and after many ineffectual efforts to resist its attractions, he renounced all views of a lucrative profession, and gave himself over entirely to mathematics.

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.

While the studies of M. d‘Alembert were confined to geometry, he was little known or celebrated in his native country. His connections were limited to a small society of select friends: he had never seen any man in high office except Messrs. d’Argenson. Satisfied with an income which furnished him with the necessaries of life, he did not aspire after opulence or honours; but his reputation at length made its way to the throne, and rendered him the object of royal attention and beneficence. He received also a pension from government, which he owed to the friendship of count d'Argenson.

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.

Some time after this, d‘Alembert published his Philosophical, Historical, and Philological Miscellanies: these were followed by the Memoirs of Christina queen of Sweden; in which M. d’Alembert brought forward those abstract and impracticable notions respecting the natural rights of mankind which desolated his country; and was bold. enough to assert them as unanswerable propositions. His Essay on the Intercourse of Men of Letters with Persons high in rank and office, was intended, and too well calculated, to excite popular contempt for the privileged orders, of, in the language of Condorcet, to “expose to the eyes of the public the ignominy of those servile chains, which they feared to shake off, or were proud to wear.” A lady of the court, hearing one day the author accused of having exaggerated the despotism of the great, and the submission they require, answered slyly, “If he had consulted me, I would have told him still more of the matter.”

In 1759, he published his Elements of Philosophy; a work extolled as remarkable for its precision and perspicuity; in which, however, are some tenets relative both to metaphysics and moral science, of the most pernicious kind. The resentment that was kindled (and the disputes that followed it) by the article Geneva, inserted in the Encyclopédie, are well known. M. d‘Alembert did not leave this field of controversy with flying colours. Voltaire was an auxiliary in the contest; but as, in point of candour and decency, he had no reputation to lose; and as he weakened the blows of his enemies, by throwing both them and the spectators into fits of laughter, the issue of the war gave him little uneasiness. It fell more heavily on d’Alembert; and exposed him, even at home, to contradiction and opposition, which it required all the wit and talents of his associates to resist with effect. In those days, however, of philosophical infatuation, even kings were blindly led to assist in undermining their thrones. And on this occasion, Frederic, usually stiled the great Frederic, king of Prussia, offered him an honourable asylum at his court, and the place of president of his academy; and was not offended at his refusal of these distinctions, but cultivated an intimate friendship with him during the rest of his life. He had refused, some time before this, a proposal made by the empress of Russia to intrust him with the education of the grand duke; a proposal accompanied with very tiattering offers.

In the year 1765, he published his dissertation on the Destruction of the Jesuits. This is said to be an impartial piece, although it had not the good fortune to please either party, a circumstance which seems to mark an indecision of argument or of system. It was, however, but very feebly answered.

He published also Elements of Music; and rendered, at length, the system of Rameau intelligible; but he did not think the mathematical theory of the sonorous body sufficient to account for the rules of that art. He was always fond of music; which, on the one hand, is connected with the most subtle and learned researches of rational mechanics; while, on the other, its power over the senses and the soul exhibits to philosophers phenomena no less singular, and still more inexplicable.

In the year 1772, he was chosen secretary to the French academy. He formed, soon after this preferment, the design of writing the lives of all the deceased academicians, from 1700 to 1772; and in the space of three years he executed this design, by composing 70 eulogies.

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.

The following list contains d'Alembert’s principal works, with their respective dates. 1. “Traite” de Dynamique, Paris, 1743, 4to; second edition in 1758. 2. “Traite de l'Equilibre et du Mouvement des Fluides,” Paris, 1744; second edition in 1770. 3. “Reflexions sur la Cause generate des Vents;” which gained the prize at Berlin, 1746; and was printed at Paris in 1747, 4to. 4. “Recherches sur la Precession des Equinoxes, et sur la Nutation de l'Axe de la Terre dans le Systeme Newtonien,” Paris, 1749, 4to. 5. “Essais d'une nouvelle theorie du Mouvement des Fluides,” Paris, 1752, 4to. 6. “Recherches sur differens Points importans du Systeme du Monde,” Paris, 1754 and 1756, 3 vols. 4to. 7. “Elemens de Philosophic,” 1759. 8. “Opuscules Mathematiques, ou Memoires sur difterens Sujets de Geometric, de Jtfechaniques, d‘Optiques, d’ Astronomic,” Paris, 9 vols. 4to, 1761 to 1773. 9. “Elemens de Musique, theorique et pratique, suivant les Principes de M. Rameau, eclaires, developpes, et simplifies,” a Lyon, 1 vol. 8vo. 10. “De la Destruction des Jesuites,” 1765.

, 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 learned French Jesuit, was born ia 1656, at St. Guy, in the Luxemburgh, studied at Cologn, and in 1676 entered the order of St. Ignatius. He was professor of philosophy, theology, and the belles lettres, at Cologn, until the year 1691. He was afterwards, in 1701, invited to the university of Treves, where he gave his course of lectures on theology, and was appointed, in 1703, regent of the gymnastic school, and about the same time he was employed in the organization and direction of the gymnastic academies of Munster, Aachen, Treves, and Juliers. He died in 1727, at Dueren, in the duchy of Juliers. His principal works are: 1. “Tractatus de artibus humanis,” Treves, 1717, 4to. 2. “Philosophise tripartite, pars 1. sive logica,” Cologne, 1710; “pars 2. sive physica,” 1715; “pars 3. seu anima et metaphysica,” 1724. 3. “Gradus ad Parnassum,” a book well known in all schools in Europe, and of which there have been a great number of editions. 4. Some Latin tragedies, as Joseph, Tobias, &c.

, 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.

, born at Rome, died in 1600, was not less skilful in the exercise of the pencil than that of the graver. Of all his productions the most curious is the St. Christopher, which he painted in fresco in the great church of Seville, in Spain. The calf of each leg in this colossal figure is an ell in thickness; but the whole has a majestic appearance. Simple and modest in his character, this artist was always the first to do justice to his competitors for fame, and particularly to Louis de Vargas, whose Adam and Eve he generously preferred to his own St. Christopher, although the latter, from its grandeur of character and effect, was at that time very much admired. He had been a pupil of Michael Angelo, and was thought to have caught much of the sublime manner of that illustrious artist. He returned to Rome some time before his death, assigning as a reason that his talents could not be wanted in a country (Spain) that had produced such an artist as Louis de Vargas.

, the most celebrated architect of his time, was born at Perusia in 1500, and died in 1572. His reputation was spread over almost all Europe. He furnished France, Spain, and Germany, with plans, not only for palaces and churches, but also for public fountains and baths, in which he displayed the fertility of his genius. The plan that brought him the most honour was that of the monastery and the church of the Escurial, which was adopted in preference to all that had been presented by the most able architects of Europe. Several cities and towns of Italy are also decorated by edifices of his construction; but there is not one where so many of them are seeu as at Genoa; the cupola of the cathedral and the Grimaldi and Pallavicini palaces are by him; and it is doubtless on account of the number of these magnificent monuments, that that city has merited the name of Genoa the superb. It is said, that Alessi was likewise verv learned, and had a capacity for managing concerns of the utmost importance. Some of his works were engraven at Antwerp in 1663, from drawings made by Rubens.

, king of Macedon, whose life has been written by Curtius, and Arian, Plutarch, and Diodorus, was one of the most renowned monarchs of ancient times, and his life has formed a conspicuous article in all works of the biographical kind, although much of it belongs to history. His extraction was illustrious, though perhaps fabulous; his father Philip having been descended from Hercules, and his mother Olympias from Achilles. He was born at Pella the first year of the 106th olympiad, the 398th from the building of Rome, and the 356th before the oirth of Christ. On the night of his birth, the temple of Diana at Ephesus was set on fire, and burnt t9 the ground: which latter circumstance, said Timaeus, an historian, “was not to be wondered at, since the goddess was so engaged at Olympias’s labour, that she could not be present at Ephesus to extinguish the flames.” This Cicero praises as an acute and elegant saying; but Plutarch and Longinus condemn it, with better reason, as quaint and frigid.

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.

Alexander, now twenty years of age, succeeded his father as king of Macedon: he was also chosen, in room of his father, generalissimo in the projected expedition against the Persians; but the Greeks, agreeably to their usual Jickleness, deserted from him, taking the advantage of his absence in Thrace and lllyricum, where he began his military enterprises. He hastened immediately to Greece, and the Athenians and other states returned to him once; but the Thebans resisting, he directed his arms against them, slew a prodigious number of them, and destroyed their city; sparing nothing but the descendants and the house of Pindar, out of respect to the memory of that poet. This happened in the second year of tue third olympiad. It was about this time that he went to consult the oracle at Delphi; when, the priestess pretending that it was not, on some account, lawful for her to enter the temple, he being impatient, hauled her along, and occasioned her to cry out, “Ah, my son, there is no resisting thee” upon which, Alexander, seizing the words as ominous, replied, “I desire nothing farther: this oracle suffices.” It was also probably at tnis time that the remarkable interview passed between our hero and Diogenes the cynic. Alexander had the curiosity to visit this philosopher in his tub, and complimented him with asking “if he Could do any thing to serve nim” “Nothing,” said the cynic, “but to stand from betwixt me and the sun.” The attendants were expecting what resentment would be shewn to this rude behaviour; when Alexander surprised them by saying, “Positively, if I was not Alexander, I would he Diogenes.” Having settled the affairs of Greece, and left Antipater as nis viceroy in Macedonia, he passed the Hellespont, in uie taird year of his reign, with an army of no more than 30,000 foot and 4,500 horse; and with these brave and veteran forces he overturned the Persian empire. His first battle was at the Granicus, a river of Phrygia, in which the Persians were routed. His second was at Issus, a city of Cilicia, where he was also victorious in an eminent degree; for the camp of Darius, with his mother, wife, and children, fell into his hands; and the humane and generous treatment which he shewed them is justly reckoned the noblest and most amiable passage of his life. While he was in this country, he caught a violent fever by battling, when hot, in the cold waters of the river Cydnus; and this fever was made more violent from his impatience at being detained by it. The army was under the utmost consternation; and no physician durst undertake the cure. At length one Philip of Acarnania desired time to prepare a potion, which he was sure would cure him; and while the potion was preparing, Alexander received a letter from his most intimate confident Parmenio, informing him, that his physician was a traitor, and employed by Darius to poison him, at the price of a thousand talents and his sister in marriage. The same fortitude, however, which accompanied him upon all occasions, did not forsake him here. He carefully concealed from his physician every symptom of apprehension; but, after receiving the cup into his hands, delivered the letter to the Acarnanian, and with eyes fixed upon him, drank it off. The medicine at first acted so powerfully, as to deprive him of his senses, and then, without doubt, all concluded him poisoned: however, he soon recovered, and, by a cure so speedy that it might almost be deemed miraculous, was restored to his army in perfect health.

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.”

His object now was to overtake and attack Darius in another battle; and this battle was fought at Arbela, when victoiy granting every thing to Alexander, put an end to the Persian empire. Darius had offered his daughter in marriage, and part of his dominions to Alexander, and Parmenio advised him to accept the terms “I would,” says he, “if I were Alexander;” “and so would I,” replied the conqueror, “if I were Parmenio.” The same Parmenio, counselling the prince to take the advantage of the night in attacking Darius, “No,” said Alexander, “I would not steal a victory.” Darius owed his escape from Arbela to the swiftness of his hofse; and while he was collecting forces to renew the war, was insidiously slain by Bessus, governor of the Bactrians. Alexander wept at the fate of Darius; and afterwards procuring Bessus to be given up to him, punished the inhuman governor according to his deserts. From Arbela Alexander pursued his conquests eastward; and everything fell into his hands, even to the Indies. Here he had some trouble with king Porus, whom however he subdued and took. Porus was a man of spirit, and his spirit was not destroyed even by his defeat; for, when Alexander asked him, “how he would be treated,” he answered very intrepidly, “like a king;” which, it is said, so pleased the conqueror, that he ordered the greatest attention to be paid him, and afterwards restored him to his kingdom. Having ranged over all the east, and made even the Indies provinces of his empire, he returned to Babylon; where he died in the 33d year of his age; some say by poison, others by drinking.

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.

, of the first century, may be slightly noticed here, as sometimes confounded with Alexander Aphrodiseus. He was one of Nero’s preceptors, but gained very little credit in this capacity, as he was suspected of having contributed to the corruption of his royal pupil. He wrote a “commentary on Aristotle’s Meteorology” in the manner of the ancient peripatetics.

, 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.

, one of the most celebrated followers of Aristotle, flourished about the year 200. He was so called from Aphrodisea, a town in Caria, where he was born. He penetrated, with such success, into the meaning of the most profound speculations of his master, that he was not only respected by his contemporaries as an excellent preceptor, but was followed by subsequent Aristotelians among the Greeks, Latins, and Arabians, as the best interpreter of Aristotle. On account of the number and value of his commentaries, he was called, by way of distinction, “The Commentator.” Under the emperor Septimus Severus he was appointed public professor of the Aristotelian philosopln r, but whether at Athens or Alexandria is uncertain. In his works he supports the doctrine of Divine Providence; upon this head he leaned towards Platonism, but on most other subjects adhered strictly to Aristotle. In his book concerning the soul, he maintains that it is not a distinct substance by itself, but the form of an organized body.

Of his works there are extant, 1. “De Fato, deque eo quod in nostra potestate est,” a short treatise dedicated to the emperor Caracalla, and first printed in Greek at th Aldine press, 1533, fol. at the end of the works of Themistius. Grotius translated it into Latin in his “Veterum philosophorum sententiae de Fato,” Paris, 1648, 4to; and there is a London edition, Gr. and Lat. 1688, 12mo. 2. “Commentarius in primum librum priorura analyticoruna Aristotelis,” Gr. Venice, 1489, and Ald. 1520, fol. Florence, 1521, 4to, and translated into Latin by Jos. Bern. Felicianus, Venice, 1542, 1546, and 1560, fol. 3. “Commentarius in VIII Topicorum libros,” Venice, 1513, translated into Latin by Gul. Dorotheas, Venice, 1526 and 1441, and Paris, 1542, fol. and by Rasarius, Venice, 1563 and 1573, fol. 4. “Commentarii in Elenchos sophisticos, Gr. Venice, Aldus, 1520, fol.; at Florence, with the” Commentarius in primum librum, &c.“1521, 4to; and translated into Latin by Rasarius, Venice, 1557, fol. 5.” In Libros XII Metaphysicorum ex versione Jos. Genesii Sepulvedae,“Rome, 1527, Paris, 1536, Venice, 1544 and 1561, fol. The Greek text has never been printed, although there are manuscript copies in the imperial library at Paris, and in other libraries. 6.” In librum de sensu et iis quae sub sensum-cadunt,“Gr. at the end of Simplicius’s commentary on the books respecting the soul, Venice, 1527, fol., and in the Latin of Lucilius Philothscus, Venice, 1544, 1549, 1554, 1559, 1573, fol. 7.” In Aristotelis Meteorologica,“Gr. Venice, 1527, fol. translated into Latin by Alex. Picolomini, 1540, 1548, 1575, fol. (See Alexander Ægeus). 8.” De Mistione,“Gr. with the preceding. 9.” De anima, libri duo,“Gr. at the end of Themistius in the first article, and translated into Latin by Jerome Donate, Venice, 1502, 1514, fol. 10.” Physica scholia, dubitationes et solutiones, libri duo,“Gr. Venice”, 1536, fol. and in Latin by Bagolinus, Venice, 1541, 1549, 1555, 1559, fol. 11. “Problematum medicorum et physicorum libri duo.” The best Greek edition of this is in isylburgius’s works of Aristotle; but some think that these problems are by Alexander Trallianus. 12. “Libellus de Febribus, Latine, Georgio Valla interprete,” in a collection of various works translated by Valla, Venice, 1488. It is also thought that this is by Alexander Trallianus. It has not been printed in Greek. There are other works aacribed to our Alexander, some in Arabic and some in Greek: in the imperial library at Paris is one “De nutritione et augmento,” which is not given in the usual lists of his works. All the above are very rare, especially the Greek editions, and the multiplicity of these editions shows in what high esteem the author was held in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, and how useful his writings were corn sidered by the students of Aristotle.

, 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.

His first production of this kind, the tragedy of “Darius,” was printed at Edinburgh in 1603, 4to, and reprinted in 1604 with the tragedy of “Croesus,” and a. “Parsenesis to the Prince,” another piece in which he recommends the choice of patriotic, disinterested, and public-spirited counsellors. The prince intended to be thus instructed was Henry; but it is said to have been afterwards inscribed to Charles I. The dedication occurs in the folio edition of 1637 “To Prince Charles,” which, if a republication, may mean Charles I. but, if it then appeared for the first time, Charles II. Some of our author’s biographers have asserted that prince Henry died before the publication, which was the reason of its being inscribed to prince Charles, but Henry died in 1612, eight years after the appearance of the Paraenesis, and to a prince of his virtues it must have been highly acceptable. In this same volume Mr. Alexander published his “Aurora,” containing “the first fancies of his youth;” and in 1607, he reprinted “Croesus” and “Darius,” with the “Alexandraean Tragedy” and “Julius Caesar.” In 1612, he printed an “Elegy on the death of Prince Henry,” a poem of which no copy is known to exist except one in the university library of Edinburgh.

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.”