OpenLLM-France/wikimedia huggingface dataset:
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume XI/Sulpitius Severus/Sacred History/Book II/Chapter 46

Chapter XLVI.
There follow the times of our own day, both difficult and dangerous. In these the churches have been defiled with no ordinary evil, and all things thrown into confusion. For then, for the first time, the infamous heresy of the Gnostics was detected in Spain—a deadly superstition which concealed itself under mystic rites. The birthplace of that mischief was the East, and specially Egypt, but from what beginnings it there sprang up and increased is not easy to explain. Marcus was the first to introduce it into Spain, having set out from Egypt, his birthplace being Memphis. His pupils were a certain Agape, a woman of no mean origin, and a rhetorician named Helpidius. By these again Priscillian was instructed, a man of noble birth, of great riches, bold, restless, eloquent, learned through much reading, very ready at debate and discussion—in fact, altogether a happy man, if he had not ruined an excellent intellect by wicked studies. Undoubtedly, there were to be seen in him many admirable qualities both of mind and body. He was able to spend much time in watchfulness, and to endure both hunger and thirst; he had little desire for amassing wealth, and he was most economical in the use of it. But at the same time he was a very vain man, and was much more puffed up than he ought to have been with the knowledge of mere earthly things: moreover, it was believed that he had practised magical arts from his boyhood. He, after having himself adopted the pernicious system referred to, drew into its acceptance many persons of noble rank and multitudes of the common people by the arts of persuasion and flattery which he possessed. Besides this, women who were fond of novelties and of unstable faith, as well as of a prurient curiosity in all things, flocked to him in crowds. It increased this tendency that he exhibited, a kind of humility in his countenance and manner, and thus excited in all a greater honor and respect for himself. And now by degrees the wasting disorder of that heresy had pervaded the most of Spain, and even some of the bishops came under its depraving influence. Among these, Instantius and Salvianus had taken up the cause of Priscillian, not only by expressing their concurrence in his views, but even by binding themselves to him with a kind of oath. This went on until Hyginus, bishop of Cordova, who dwelt in the vicinity, found out how matters stood, and reported the whole to Ydacius, priest of Emerita. But he, by harassing Instantius and his confederates without measure, and beyond what the occasion called for, applied, as it were, a torch to the growing conflagration, so that he rather exasperated than suppressed these evil men.

## Footnotes

* ↑ “superstitio exitiabilis”: the very words which Tacitus employs, when speaking of Christianity itself (Annal. xv. 44).
* ↑ “arcanis occultata secretis”: it is impossible to say what is the exact meaning of these words.
* ↑ “profanarum rerum.”
* ↑ “perfidiæ istius.”
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume XI/Sulpitius Severus/Sacred History/Book II/Chapter 48

Chapter XLVIII.
And then Instantius, Salvianus, and Priscillian set out for Rome, in order that before Damasus who was at that time the bishop of the city, they might clear themselves of the charges brought against them. Well, their journey led them through the heart of Aquitania, and being there received with great pomp by such as knew no better, they spread the seeds of their heresy. Above all, they perverted by their evil teachings the people of Elusa, who were then of a good and religious disposition. They were driven forth from Bordeaux by Delfinus, yet lingering for a little while in the territory of Euchrotia, they infected some with their errors. They then pursued the journey on which they had entered, attended by a base and shameful company, among whom were their wives and even strange women. In the number of these was Euchrotia and her daughter Procula, of the latter of whom there was a common report that, when pregnant through adultery with Priscillian, she procured abortion by the use of certain plants. When they reached Rome with the wish of clearing themselves before Damasus, they were not even admitted to his presence. Returning to Milan, they found that Ambrose was equally opposed to them. Then they changed their plans, with the view that, as they had not got the better of the two bishops, who were at that time possessed of the highest authority, they might, by bribery and flattery, obtain what they desired from the emperor. Accordingly, having won over Macedonius, who was the master of public services, they procured a rescript, by which, those decrees which had formerly been made being trampled under foot, they were ordered to be restored to their churches. Relying upon this, Instantius and Priscillian made their wayback to Spain (for Salvianus had died in the city); and they then, without any struggle, recovered the churches over which they had ruled.

## Footnotes

* ↑ Some read Euchrocia, and so afterwards.
* ↑ “magistro officiorum.”
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume XI/Sulpitius Severus/Sacred History/Book II/Chapter 4

Chapter IV.
But in Judæa, over which, as we have related above, Godolia was set after the destruction of Jerusalem, the Jews taking it very ill that a ruler not of the royal race had been assigned them by the mere will of the conqueror, with a certain Ismael as their leader and instigator of the execrable conspiracy, cut off Godolia by means of treachery while he was at a banquet. Those, however, who had no part in the plot, wishing to take steps for avenging the deed, hastily take up arms against Ismael. But when he learned that destruction threatened him, leaving the army which he had collected, and with not more than eight companions he fled to the Ammonites. Fear, therefore, fell upon the whole people, lest the king of Babylon should avenge the guilt of a few by the destruction of all; for, in addition to Godolia, they had slain many of the Chaldæans along with him. They, therefore, form a plan of fleeing into Egypt, but they first go in a body to Jeremia, requesting of him divine counsel. He then exhorted them all in the words of God to remain in their native country, telling them that if they did so, they would be protected by the power of God, and that no danger would accrue from the Babylonians, but that, if they went into Egypt, they would all perish there by sword, and famine, and different kinds of death. The rabble, however, with the usual evil tendency they show, being unaccustomed to yield to useful advice and the divine power, did go into Egypt. The sacred Scriptures are silent as to their future fate; and I have not been able to discover anything regarding it.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume XI/Sulpitius Severus/Sacred History/Book II/Chapter 41

Chapter XLI.
Accordingly, the emperor orders a Synod to assemble at Ariminum, a city of Italy, and instructs Taurus the prefect, not to let them separate, after they were once assembled, until they should agree as to one faith, at the same time promising him the consulship, if he carried the affair to a successful termination. Imperial officers, therefore, being sent through Illyria, Italy, Africa, and the two Gauls, four hundred and rather more Western bishops were summoned or compelled to assemble at Ariminum; and for all of these the emperor had ordered provisions and lodgings to be provided. But that appeared unseemly to the men of our part of the world, that is, to the Aquitanians, the Gauls, and Britons, so that refusing the public supplies, they preferred to live at their own expense. Three only of those from Britain, through want of means of their own, made use of the public bounty, after having refused contributions offered by the rest; for they thought it more dutiful to burden the public treasury than individuals. I have heard that Gavidius, our bishop, was accustomed to refer to this conduct in a censuring sort of way, but I would be inclined to judge far otherwise; and I hold it matter of admiration that the bishops had nothing of their own, while they did not accept assistance from others rather than from the public treasury, so that they burdened nobody. In both points, they thus furnished us with noble example. Nothing worthy of mention is recorded of the others; but I return to the subject in hand. After all the bishops had been collected together, as we have said, a separation of parties took place. Our friends take possession of the church, while the Arians select, as a place for prayer, a temple which was then intentionally standing empty. But these did not amount to more than eighty persons: the rest belonged to our party. Well, after frequent meetings had been held, nothing was really
accomplished, our friends continuing in the faith, and the others not abandoning their unfaithfulness. At length it was resolved to send ten deputies to the emperor, that he might learn what was the faith or opinion of the parties, and might know that there could be no peace with heretics. The Arians do the same thing, and send a like number of deputies, who should contend with our friends in the presence of the emperor. But on the part of our people, young men of but little learning and little prudence had been selected; while, on the side of the Arians, old men were sent, skillful and abounding in talent, thoroughly imbued, too, with their old unfaithful doctrines; and these easily got the upper hand with the prince. But our friends had been specially charged not to enter into any kind of communion with the Arians, and to reserve every point, in its entirety, for discussion in a Synod.

## Footnotes

* ↑ “magistris officialibus”: Halm reads “magistri.”
* ↑ “annonas et cellaria.”
* ↑ Of course, the Catholics, or orthodox.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume XI/Sulpitius Severus/Sacred History/Book II/Chapter 42

Chapter XLII.
In the meantime in the East, after the example of the West, the emperor ordered almost all the bishops to assemble at Seleucia, a town of Isauria. At that time, Hilarius, who was now spending the fourth year of his exile in Phrygia, is compelled to be present among the other bishops, the means of a public conveyance being furnished to him by the lieutenant and governor. As, however, the emperor had given no special orders regarding him, the judges, simply following the general order by which they were commanded to gather all bishops to the council, sent him also among the rest who were willing to go. This was done, as I imagine, by the special ordination of God, in order that a man who was most deeply instructed in divine things, might be present when a discussion was to be carried on respecting the faith. He, on arriving at Seleucia, was received with great favor, and drew the minds and affections of all towards himself. His first inquiry was as to the real faith of the Gauls, because at that time the Arians had spread evil reports regarding us, and we were held suspected by the Easterns as having embraced the belief of Sabellius, to the effect that the unity of the one God was simply distinguished by a threefold name. But after he had set forth his faith in harmony with those conclusions which had been reached by the fathers at Nicæa, he bore his testimony in favor of the Westerns. Thus the minds of all having been satisfied, he was admitted to communion, and being also received into alliance, was added to the council. They then proceeded to actual work, and the originators of the wicked heresy being discovered, were separated from the body of the Church. In that number were Georgius of Alexandria, Acacius, Eudoxius, Vranius, Leontius, Theodosius, Evagrius, Theodulus. But when the Synod was over, an embassy was appointed to go to the emperor and make him acquainted with what had been done. Those who had been condemned also went to the prince, relying upon the power of their confederates, and a common cause with the monarch.

## Footnotes

* ↑ “per vicarium ac præsidem”: as Vorstius remarks, these were the two magistrates of Phrygia.
* ↑ “trionymam solitarii Dei unionem”: Hornius here remarks that “Sabellius believed that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit were the same, and differed among themselves only in name.”
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume XI/Sulpitius Severus/Sacred History/Book II/Chapter 47

Chapter XLVII.
So, then, after many controversies among them, which are not worthy of mention, a Synod was assembled at Saragossa, at which even the Aquitanian bishops were present. But the heretics did not venture to submit themselves to the judgment of the council; sentence, however, was passed against them in their absence, and Instantius and Salvianus, bishops, with Helpidius and Priscillian, laymen, were condemned. It was also added that if any one should admit the
condemned persons to communion, he should understand that the same sentence would be pronounced against himself. And the duty was entrusted to Ithacius, bishop of Sossuba, of seeing that the decree of the bishops was brought to the knowledge of all, and that Hyginus especially should be excluded from communion, who, though he had been the first to commence open proceedings against the heretics, had afterwards fallen away shamefully and admitted them to communion. In the meantime, Instantius and Salvianus, having been condemned by the judgment of the priests, appoint as bishop in the town of Arles, Priscillian, a layman indeed, but the leader in all these troubles, and who had been condemned along with themselves in the Synod at Saragossa. This they did with the view of adding to their strength, doubtless imagining that, if they armed with sacerdotal authority a man of bold and subtle character, they would find themselves in a safer position. But then Ydacius and Ithacius pressed forward their measures more ardently, in the belief that the mischief might be suppressed at its beginning. With unwise counsels, however, they applied to secular judges, that by their decrees and prosecutions the heretics might be expelled from the cities. Accordingly, after many disgraceful squabbles, a rescript was, on the entreaty of Ydacius, obtained from Gratianus, who was then emperor, in virtue of which all heretics were enjoined not only to leave churches or cities, but to be driven forth beyond all the territory under his jurisdiction. When this edict became known, the Gnostics, distrusting their own affairs, did not venture to oppose the judgment, but those of them who bore the name of bishops gave way of their own accord, while fear scattered the rest.

## Footnotes

* ↑ The text has merely “extra omnes terras.”
# Once Upon a Time

* Search for titles containing or beginning with: "Once Upon a Time."
* sister projects: Wikipedia article, Wikidata item.
This is a disambiguation page. It lists works that share the same title. If an article link referred you here, please consider editing it to point directly to the intended page.
* "Once Upon a Time" (1860, "Only look at Gaffer Grey"), a poem by Eliza Cook
* "Once Upon a Time" (1875, "Oh time of fairy fancies, of youth and its romances"), a poem by J. I. L.
* "Once Upon a Time" (1926, "Once upon a time, dear father of mine"), a poem by Anna Shattuck Palmer
# On —— 'Think not of it, sweet one, so'

* "On ****", in The Poetical Works of John Keats (1884)
* "On —— 'Think not of it, sweet one, so'", in The complete poetical works and letters of John Keats (1899), edited by Horace Elisha Scudder
# Oncale v. Sundowner Offshore Services, Inc./Concurrence Thomas

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
* Concurring Opinion Thomas
Justice Thomas, concurring.
I concur because the Court stresses that in every sexual harassment case, the plaintiff must plead and ultimately prove Title VII’s statutory requirement that there be discrimination "because of...sex."
# Once a Clown, Always a Clown

Copyright Strauss-Peyton Studio. Collection of Albert Davis, Brooklyn, N. Y.
DeWolf Hopper To-day
Once a Clown, Always a Clown: Reminiscences of DeWolf Hopper
WRITTEN IN COLLABORATION WITH
WESLEY WINANS STOUT
WITH ILLUSTRATIONS
LITTLE, BROWN, AND COMPANY
BOSTON • • 1927
Copyright, 1925, 1926, 1927,
By De Wolf Hopper
All rights reserved
Published January, 1927
Printed in the United States of America
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The authors wish to express their gratitude to Terry Ramsaye and their indebtedness to him for some of the facts and information about various personalities in motion pictures, included in the chapter "Came Dawn at Hollywood."
CONTENTS
* IMyself When Young3
* IILabeled Comic43
* IIICasey at the Bat72
* IVHow Not to Act98
* VCame Dawn at Hollywood135
* VIWolfie Loves the Lambs175
ILLUSTRATIONS
* De Wolf Hopper To-dayFrontispiece
* Edna Wallace and DeWolf Hopper in "Panjandrum"8
* Hopper and Marshall P. Wilder in Their Own Version of the Balcony Scene from "Romeo and Juliet"32
* Harry Davenport36
* Annie Russell36
* Digby Bell and Mr. Hopper as Young Men54
* Marguerite Clark and DeWolf Hopper in "The Pied Piper"58
* Delia Fox in "The Little Trooper"68
* The Actors' Team that Played the New York Press Club in 188982
* Sarah Bernhardt at the Time of Her First American Appearance in "Camille"100
* Olga Nethersole104
* Maude Adams and Henry Miller in Their Frohman Stock Company Days108
* Mrs. Drew, Mother of John Drew and Grandmother of the Barrymores, as Mrs. Malaprop120
* Douglas Fairbanks in "Frenzied Finance", 1905136
* Mary Pickford in Earlier Days136
* Chester Withey, Fay Tincher and DeWolf Hopper in "Sunshine Dad", 1915142
* Harry Montague178
* Maurice Barrymore218
This work is in the public domain in the United States because it was published before January 1, 1929.
The longest-living author of this work died in 1971, so this work is in the public domain in countries and areas where the copyright term is the author's life plus 52 years or less. This work may be in the public domain in countries and areas with longer native copyright terms that apply the rule of the shorter term to foreign works.
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Once I saw a Little Bird

* "O" in The Alphabet of Old Friends (1874)
* "Once I saw a little bird" in A Book of Nursery Rhymes (1901)
* "The Little Bird" in The Real Mother Goose (1916)
# On the Vital Principle/Book 2/Prelude to Chapter 9

Modern science confirms Aristotle's judgment concerning the nature of odour, for it is said "to be a curious and interesting problem, requiring much more investigation than it has hitherto received;" and, according to Cuvier, "of all the substances which act upon our senses, those which produce the sensation of smell are the least known, although their impression has the liveliest and deepest influence upon our economy." But the reason assigned in the text for this relative imperfection of our smell is indefinite and questionable; for "although man's nostrils are less complicated than those of any animals save the quadrumana, he is the only creature whose smell is fine enough to be affected by unpleasant odours" It may be doubted, besides, whether any sensation can be, as is implied in the text, so pure as to be freed from all mental or corporeal association; but when man's smell is ​compared with that of birds and beasts of prey, it may be granted that, within a certain range of impressions, it is relatively duller and coarser than with them. It is, however, assumed, that sight and smell, when perfect, have the faculty of perceiving colours, and odours purely, unassociated, that is, with any impression grateful or otherwise; and thus, as man's smell was held to be imperfect, he was supposed to be sensible of odours as creatures with hard, that is, compound eyes are of colours. For such creatures (crustacea, insects and others), having their eyes uncovered, being without lids that is, see objects which are at a distance "indistinctly, and as if they were looking through congenitally attached eye-lids."
* ↑ Règne Animal, T. I. 73.
* ↑ Hist. An. I. 15. 16.
# On the Vital Principle/Book 2/Prelude to Chapter 8

This chapter is upon sound and hearing; and as these subjects had been but desultorily alluded to in the other works, they are treated of at some length on this occasion. It opens with the distinction of bodies into sonorous and insonorous, and after tracing the analogy between the acute and grave, and the sharp and blunt (of touch), it passes by a rapid transition to the voice, which is dwelt upon at some length. The term ἐνέργεια, which had been used in place of ἐντελεχεία, to express the active as opposed to the potential or negative state of the diaphaneity, is again employed here to signify the analogous and contrasting quality of sound. The distinction between the terms is not very apparent now, although this may not have been the case then; for the ἐνέργεια may have conveyed the idea of action in the transition from potentiality, and so have been more expressive of actual, as opposed to virtual light or sound. Thus, if sound be a quality or condition, it ​may be active, and it may be only virtual or faint; but although to us inaudible, it is not to be supposed that silence any more than darkness is ever absolute; so that the text has limited the range of sound too absolutely by the activity of the sense. Aristotle assigned, as has been said, a high privilege to this sense, because through it instruction is orally conveyed, and thus the blind from birth are more intelligent (φρονιμώτεροι), he observes, than "the deaf and dumb;" but the argument would have been more correct had the second term been omitted, as individuals are of necessity dumb when hearing is quite shut out. The phraseology, however, is still sanctioned in common parlance.
# On the Vital Principle/Book 2/Prelude to Chapter 7

The treatise commences the examination of the senses with the Sight, and closes with the Touch, which is somewhat contrary to Aristotle’s estimate of their relative importance; for he has shewn that the Touch is the first, as it is the most universal of all the senses, as well as essential to animal existence. Thus, this sense is to sentient creatures what nutrition is to other beings; for as without Touch there can be no animal, so without nutrition there can be no life. Descartes, more in accordance with Aristotle’s teaching, begins with the Touch, and then proceeds to the Taste, Smell, Hearing and Sight; and so Grant makes “all the other senses to be but modifications of the Touch.” Cuvier, however, reverses this it may be general order, and treats of the special senses before the Touch. It may be well to observe, that the senses as well as their modes of excitation, had been ​treated of in a distinct work, which may be regarded as supplementary to the present treatise; and this will explain why the eye and vision are here very briefly alluded to, while particular attention has there been given to the ear and hearing.
* ↑ Outlines of Comp. Anat. s. vi.
* ↑ De Sensu et Sens. i. 10.