OpenLLM-France/wikimedia huggingface dataset:
# Appletons' Cyclopædia of American Biography/Frick, Charles

Edition of 1900.
​FRICK, Charles, physician, b. in Baltimore, Md., 8 Aug., 1823; d. there, 25 March, 1860. He studied at Baltimore college, and became a civil engineer, but in 1843 he began the study of medicine, and was graduated at the University of Maryland in 1845. He early gave his attention to auscultation, which was first introduced into Baltimore by his brother-in-law. In 1847, with three others, he organized the Maryland medical institute, a preparatory school of medicine, and took in it the department of practical medicine. In 1849-'56 Dr. Frick was attending physician to the Maryland penitentiary. In 1855-'6 he took a conspicuous part in the Baltimore pathological society, and in the latter year was selected to fill the chair of materia medica in the Maryland college of pharmacy, which he had aided in organizing. In 1858, after his return from an extended European tour, he accepted the professorship of materia medica and therapeutics in the University of Maryland, and at the same time took charge of the medical department of the Baltimore infirmary as visiting physician. He published “Renal Diseases” (1850), and contributed papers to the “Journal of Medical Science” and other scientific periodicals.
# Appletons' Cyclopædia of American Biography/Frick, Henry Clay

Edition of 1900. Supplement.
FRICK, Henry Clay, manufacturer, b. in West Overton, Pa., 19 Dec., 1849. After an English education, he began his business life as a clerk for his grandfather, who was a merchant and distiller in Fayette county. Later he embarked in the coke trade, which increased until the business was than all the other houses in the United States combined. He is president of the H. C. Frick coke company, also of the Carnegie steel company of Pittsburg. He first came into public notice by his extremely able and vigorous management during the famous strike at the Homestead works in 1892, when he was several times wounded, being both shot and stabbed by the rioters. In the summer of 1899 he went abroad and visited his former partner, Andrew Carnegie, at Skibo castle, in the north of Scotland.
# Appletons' Cyclopædia of American Biography/Frink, John

Edition of 1900.
​FRINK, John, physician, b. in Rutland, Mass., 7 Sept., 1731; d. there in 1807. He studied medicine with Dr. Goffe, of Marlborough, Mass., and was one of the founders of the Massachusetts medical society. He was a member of the convention that formed the constitution of Massachusetts, and the first president of the Worcester county medical society. He was a justice of the peace when that was considered a mark of distinction, and as a physician and a citizen was highly esteemed.
# Appletons' Cyclopædia of American Biography/Brooks, Eleazer

Edition of 1900.
​BROOKS, Eleazer, soldier, b. in Concord, Mass., 10 Sept., 1727; d. in Lincoln, Mass., 9 Nov., 1806. Without schooling he acquired a valuable fund of knowledge, his practice being to read the best books, and then talk about them to intelligent men. He became captain of militia in 1773, and took a prominent part in the war for independence, rising to the rank of brigadier-general. At the battle of White Plains he commanded a regiment and distinguished himself by his bravery. Entering the general court in 1774, he had a public career of thirty-seven years, becoming successively a representative, a member of the senate, and a councillor. In 1801 he withdrew from public life.
# Appletons' Cyclopædia of American Biography/Brown, Ethan Allen

Edition of 1900.
​BROWN, Ethan Allen, jurist and statesman, b. in Darien, Conn., 4 July, 1776; d. in Indianapolis, Ind., 24 Feb., 1852. He was educated by an Irish scholar, and acquired a critical knowledge of languages. He read law in the office of Alexander Hamilton, was admitted to the bar in 1802, and
removed to the west with his cousin, Capt. John Brown, in 1804. He settled at Cincinnati, and soon acquired an extensive practice. He was a judge of the supreme court of Ohio from 10 Feb., 1810, till 1818; governor of the state from that time until 1822. Resigning the governorship to accept a seat in the U.S. senate, he was a member of that body until 1825, acting with the democrats. From 1825 till 1830 he was canal commissioner for the state of Ohio. President Jackson appointed him minister to Brazil in 1830, and he served until 1834. He was commissioner of the land-office from 24 July, 1835, till 31 Oct., 1836, when he removed to Rising Sun, Ind. In 1842 he was a member of the Indiana state assembly.
# Appletons' Cyclopædia of American Biography/Brown, David (preacher)

Edition of 1900.
​BROWN, David, Cherokee preacher, b. about 1806; d. in Creek Path, Miss., 14 Sept., 1829. He was educated, with his sister Catharine, at the school of Rev. Cyrus Kingsbury, in what was then the Cherokee territory, in northern Alabama and Mississippi, and engaged with her in educating and Christianizing their native tribe. He was a preacher and interpreter, and also acted as secretary of the Indian government. In November, 1819, he assisted John Arch in the preparation of a Cherokee spelling-book, which was printed. Through his agency a mission was established at Creek Path town in 1820. David Brown united with the church at this time, and in the spring of the same year went to Cornwall, Conn., to attend school. After two years there he spent a year at Andover, fitting himself for the ministry. Returning to his birth-place, he began his missionary work, and made many converts to Christianity among the Cherokees. According to a letter ​written by him in 1825, the Christian religion was generally adopted by the tribe, and an advanced standard of prosperous civilization had been attained by them. He died before the Cherokees were dispossessed by the United States in defiance of treaty obligations. — His sister, Catharine, teacher, b. near Wills Valley, Ala., about 1800; d. 18 July, 1823, was a Cherokee Indian, but not full-blooded, her parents being half-breeds. They were prosperous and influential members of the then wealthy and largely civilized Cherokee nation of Alabama and Tennessee. Through the agency of the Moravians, a school was established in Tennessee, a hundred miles from Wills Valley, and to this Catharine went with her brother David when she was seventeen years old. She had some slight acquaintance with English, and could read words of one syllable. In three months she had learned to read and write. She united with the church 29 March, 1818, and in June, 1820, began to teach at Creek Path, near her home. She was one of the most promising of the early Indian converts to Protestantism, and her death terminated a career that bade fair to be exceedingly useful to her tribe. Her amiable disposition, bright intellect, and remarkable personal beauty gave her unusual power and influence among her people. A history of her life, prepared by Rufus Anderson, was published in New York in 1825.
# Appletons' Cyclopædia of American Biography/Brown, David (hermit)

Edition of 1891. This article is omitted from the 1900 edition.
BROWN, David, “the hermit of Newfane, Vt.,” d. there, 31 Jan., 1873. He was a noted book-collector, and left one of the largest and most costly libraries in the state.
# Appletons' Cyclopædia of American Biography/Brown, James

Edition of 1900.
​BROWN, James, publisher, b. in Acton, Mass., 19 May, 1800; d. 10 March, 1855. His entrance into active life was as a servant in the family of Prof. Hedge, of Cambridge, by whom he was instructed in the classics and in mathematics. He was next employed by William Hillard as a shopboy, and in due course of time became a member of the publishing firm of Hillard, Gray & Co. That firm being dissolved in consequence of the death of one of the partners, he joined that of Charles C. Little & Co., afterward Little & Brown, and remained in connection with it until his death. The specialty of the firm to which Mr. Brown belonged was the publication of law-books and the importation of foreign editions in the general trade. In each of those departments his literary knowledge and refined taste were notable, and materially aided in improving the style of book-making in the United States. A life of Mr. Brown, by George S. Hillard, was published in Boston in 1855.
# Ante-Nicene Fathers/Volume IX/Origen on John/Origen's Commentary on the Gospel of John/Book VI/Chapter 4

4. John Denies that He is Elijah or “The” Prophet. Yet He Was “A” Prophet.
Now let us consider John’s second testimony.  Jews from Jerusalem, kindred to John the Baptist, since he also belonged to a priestly race, send priests and levites to ask John who he is. In saying, “I am not the Christ,” he made a confession of the truth. The words are not, as one might suppose, a negation; for it is no negation to say, in the honour of Christ, that one is not Christ. The priests and levites sent from Jerusalem, having there heard in the first place that he is not the expected Messiah, put a question about the second great personage whom they expected, namely, Elijah, whether John were he, and he says he is not Elijah, and by his “I am not” makes a second confession of the truth. And, as many prophets had appeared in Israel, and one in particular was looked for according to the prophecy of Moses, who said, “A prophet shall the Lord your God raise up to you of your brethren, like unto me, him shall ye hear; and it shall come to pass that every soul that shall not hear that prophet shall be destroyed from among the people,” they, therefore, ask a third question, not whether he is a prophet, but whether he is the prophet. Now, they did not apply this name to the Christ, but supposed the prophet to be a second figure beside the Christ. But John, on the contrary, who knew that He whose forerunner he was was both the Christ and the prophet thus foretold, answered “No;” whereas, if they had asked if he was a prophet, he would have answered “Yes;” for he was not unconscious that he was a prophet. In all these answers John’s second testimony to Christ was not yet completed; he had still to give his questioners the answer they were to take back to those who sent them, and to declare himself in the terms of the prophecy of Isaiah, which says, “The voice of one crying in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the Lord.”

## Footnotes

* ↑ John i. 19–21.
* ↑ Deut. xviii. 15.
* ↑ John i. 25.
# Ante-Nicene Fathers/Volume IX/Origen on John/Origen's Commentary on the Gospel of John/Book VI/Chapter 35

35. Jesus is a Lamb in Respect of His Human Nature.
If we enquire further into the significance of Jesus being pointed out by John, when he says, “This is the Lamb of God which taketh away the sin of the world,” we may take our stand at the dispensation of the bodily advent of the Son of God in human life, and in that case we shall conceive the lamb to be no other than the man. For the man “was led like a sheep to the slaughter, and as a lamb, dumb before his shearers,” saying, “I was as like a gentle lamb led to the slaughter.” Hence, too, in the Apocalypse a lamb is seen, standing as if slain. This slain lamb has been made, according to certain hidden reasons, a purification of the whole world, for which, according to the Father’s love to man, He submitted to death, purchasing us back by His own blood from him who had got us into his power, sold under sin. And He who led this lamb to the slaughter was God in man, the great High-Priest, as he shows by the words: “No one taketh My life away from Me, but I lay it down of Myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again.”

## Footnotes

* ↑ Isa. liii. 7.
* ↑ Jer. xi. 19.
* ↑ v. 6.
* ↑ John x. 18.
# Ante-Nicene Fathers/Volume IX/Origen on John/Origen's Commentary on the Gospel of John/Book VI/Chapter 32

32. John Calls Jesus a “Lamb.” Why Does He Name This Animal Specially? Of the Typology of the Sacrifices, Generally.
“And he sayeth, Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world.” There were five animals which were brought to the altar, three that walk and two that fly; and it seems to be worth asking why John calls the Saviour a lamb and not any of these other creatures, and why, when each of the animals that walk is offered of three kinds he used for the sheep-kind the term “lamb.” The five animals are as follows: the bullock, the sheep, the goat, the turtle-dove, the pigeon. And of the walking animals these are the three kinds—bullock, ox, calf; ram, sheep, lamb; he-goat, goat, kid. Of the flying animals, of pigeons we only hear of two young ones; of turtle doves only of a pair. He, then, who would accurately understand the spiritual rationale of the sacrifices must enquire of what heavenly things these were the pattern and the shadow, and also for what end the sacrifice of each victim is prescribed, and he must specially collect the points connected with the lamb. Now that the principle of the sacrifice must be apprehended with reference to certain heavenly mysteries, appears from the words of the Apostle, who somewhere says, “Who serve a pattern and shadow of heavenly things,” and again, “It was necessary that the patterns of the things in the heavens should be purified with these, but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these.” Now to find out all the particulars of these and to state in its relation to them that sacrifice of the spiritual law which took place in Jesus Christ (a truth greater than human nature can comprehend)—to do this belongs to no other than the perfect man, who, by reason of use, has his senses exercised to discern good and evil, and who is able to say, from a truth-loving disposition, “We speak wisdom among them that are perfect.” Of these things truly and things like these, we can say, “Which none of the rulers of this world knew.”

## Footnotes

* ↑ John i. 29.
* ↑ Heb. viii. 5; ix. 23.
* ↑ Heb. v. 14.
* ↑ 1 Cor. ii. 6.
* ↑ Exod. xxix. 38–44.
# Ante-Nicene Fathers/Volume IX/Origen on John/Origen's Commentary on the Gospel of John/Book VI/Chapter 5

5. There Were Two Embassies to John the Baptist; The Different Characters of These.
Here the enquiry suggests itself whether the second testimony is concluded, and whether there is a third, addressed to those who were sent from the Pharisees. They wished to know why he baptized, if he was neither the Christ, nor Elijah, nor the prophet; and he said: “I baptize with water; but there standeth one among you whom you know not, He that cometh after me, the latchet of whose shoe I am not worthy to unloose.” Is this a third testimony, or is this which they were to report to the Pharisees a part of the second? As far as the words allow me to conjecture I should say that the word to the emissaries of the Pharisees was a third testimony. It is to be observed, however, that the first testimony asserts the divinity of the Saviour, while the second disposes of the suspicion of those who were in doubt whether John could be the Christ, and the third declares one who was already present with men although they saw Him not, and whose coming was no longer in the future. Before going on to the subsequent testimonies in which he points out Christ and witnesses to Him, let us look at the second and third, word for word, and let us, in the first place, observe that there are two embassies to the Baptist, one “from Jerusalem” from the Jews, who send priests and levites, to ask him, “Who art thou?” the second sent by the Pharisees, who were in doubt about the answer which had been made to the priests and levites.  Observe how what is said by the first envoys is in keeping with the character of priests and levites, and shows gentleness and a willingness to learn. “Who art thou?” they say, and “What then? art thou Elijah?” and “Art thou that prophet?” and then, “Who art thou, that we may give an answer to them that sent us? What sayest thou of thyself?” There is nothing harsh or arrogant in the enquiries of these men; everything agrees well with the character of true and careful servants of God; and they raise no difficulties about the replies made to them. Those, on the contrary, who are sent from the Pharisees assail the Baptist, as it were, with arrogant and unsympathetic words: “Why then baptizest thou if thou be not the Christ nor Elijah nor the prophet?” This mission is sent scarcely for the sake of information, as in the former case of the priests and levites, but rather to debar the Baptist from baptizing, as if it were thought that no one was entitled to baptize but Christ and Elijah and the prophet. The student who desires to understand the Scripture must always proceed in this careful way; he must ask with regard to each speech, who is the speaker and on what occasion it was spoken. Thus only can we discern how speech harmonizes with the character of the speaker, as it does all through the sacred books.

## Footnotes

* ↑ John i. 25 sqq.
* ↑ Ver. 24.
# Ante-Nicene Fathers/Volume IX/Origen on John/Origen's Commentary on the Gospel of John/Book VI/Chapter 31

31. Of the Conversation Between John and Jesus at the Baptism, Recorded by Matthew Only.
John the disciple does not tell us where the Saviour comes from to John the Baptist, but we learn this from Matthew, who writes: “Then cometh Jesus from Galilee to Jordan to John, to be baptized of him.” And Mark adds the place in Galilee; he says, “And it came to pass in those days, that Jesus came from Nazareth in Galilee and was baptized by John in Jordan.” Luke does not mention the place Jesus came from, but on the other hand he tells us what we do not learn from the others, that immediately after the baptism, as He was coming up, heaven was opened to Him, and the Holy Spirit descended on Him in bodily form like a dove. Again, it is Matthew alone who tells us of John’s preventing the Lord, saying to the Saviour, “I have need to be baptized of Thee, and comest Thou to me?” None of the others added this after Matthew, so that they might not be saying just the same as he. And what the Lord rejoined, “Suffer it now, for thus it becometh us to fulfil all righteousness,” this also Matthew alone recorded.

## Footnotes

* ↑ iii. 13.
* ↑ i. 9.
# Ante-Nicene Fathers/Volume IX/Origen on John/Origen's Commentary on the Gospel of John/Book VI/Chapter 33

33. A Lamb Was Offered at the Morning and Evening Sacrifice. Significance of This.
Now we find the lamb offered in the continual (daily) sacrifice. Thus it is written, “This is that which thou shalt offer upon the altar; two lambs of the first year day by day continually, for a continual sacrifice. The one lamb thou shalt offer in the morning, and the other lamb thou shalt offer at even, and a tenth part of fine flour mingled with beaten oil, the fourth part of a hin; and for a drink-offering the fourth part of a bin of wine to the first lamb. And the other lamb thou shalt offer in the evening, according to the first sacrifice and according to its drink-offering. Thou shalt offer a sweet savour, an offering to the Lord, a continual burnt offering throughout your generations at the door of tent of witness before the Lord, where I will make myself known to thee, to speak unto thee. And I will appoint thee for the children of Israel, and I will be sanctified in my glory, and with sanctification I will sanctify the tent of witness.” But what other continual sacrifice can there be to the man of reason in the world of mind, but the Word growing to maturity, the Word who is symbolically called a lamb and who is offered as soon as the soul receives illumination. This would be the continual sacrifice of the morning, and it is offered again when the sojourn of the mind with divine things comes to an end. For it cannot maintain for ever its intercourse with higher things, seeing that the soul is appointed to be yoked together with the body which is of earth and heavy.

## Footnotes

* ↑ Exod. xxix. 38–44.
# Ante-Nicene Fathers/Volume IX/Origen on John/Origen's Commentary on the Gospel of John/Book VI/Chapter 34

34. The Morning and Evening Sacrifices of the Saint in His Life of Thought.
But if any one asks what the saint is to do in the time between morning and evening, let him follow what takes place in the cultus and infer from it the principle he asks for. In that case the priests begin their offerings with the continual sacrifice, and before they come to the continuous one of the evening they offer the other sacrifices which the law prescribes, as, for example, that for transgression, or that for involuntary offences, or that connected with a prayer for salvation, or that of jealousy, or that of the Sabbath, or of the new moon, and so on, which it would take too long to mention. So we, beginning our oblation with the discourse of that type which is Christ, can go on to discourse about many other most useful things. And drawing to a close still in the things of Christ, we come, as it were, to evening and night, when we arrive at the bodily features of His manifestation.
# Ante-Nicene Fathers/Volume VIII/Pseudo-Clementine Literature/The Clementine Homilies/Homily XII/Chapter 17

Chapter XVII.—The Fruitless Search.
“But when the day dawned, I shouted aloud, and howled miserably, and looked around, seeking for the dead bodies of my hapless children. Therefore the inhabitants took pity on me, and seeing me naked, they first clothed me and then sounded the deep, seeking for my children. And when they found nothing of what they sought, some of the hospitable women came to me to comfort me, and every one told her own misfortunes, that I might obtain comfort from the occurrences of similar misfortunes. But this only grieved me the more for I said that I was not so wicked that I could take comfort from the misfortunes of others. And so, when many of them asked me to accept their hospitality, a certain poor woman with much urgency constrained me to come into her cottage, saying to me, ‘Take courage, woman, for my husband, who was a sailor, also died at sea, while he was still in the bloom of his youth; and ever since, though many have asked me in marriage, I have preferred living as a widow, regretting the loss of my husband. But we shall have in common whatever we can both earn with our hands.’
# Ante-Nicene Fathers/Volume VIII/Pseudo-Clementine Literature/The Clementine Homilies/Homily XII/Chapter 18

Chapter XVIII.—Trouble Upon Trouble.
“And not to lengthen out unnecessary details, I went to live with her, on account of her love to her husband. And not long after, my hands were debilitated by my gnawing of them; and the woman who had taken me in, being wholly seized by some malady, is confined in the house. Since then the former compassion of the women has declined, and I and the woman of the house are both of us helpless. For a long time I have sat here, as you see, begging; and whatever I get I convey to my fellow-sufferer for our support. Let this suffice about my affairs. For the rest, what hinders your fulfilling of your promise to give me the drug, that I may give it to her also, who desires to die; and thus I also, as you said, shall be able to escape from life?”