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

Edition of 1900. No confirmation of this person's existence outside of Appletons' and derived sources has as yet been located, but there is also no verifiable source which states the person is one of Appletons' fictitious entries. Use this information with extra caution.
​STRUENSEE, Karl (stroo'-en-zay), German navigator, b. in Bremen about 1595; d. in Amsterdam about 1650. He was the son of a pilot, entered the service of the Dutch East India company, and acquired the reputation of a successful navigator. The discovery of the Strait of Lemaire, which allowed the Dutch to reach the Pacific ocean in a few days, greatly annoyed the Spanish authorities, and they intended to fortify the strait, which they claimed to be a Spanish possession. The states-general of Holland, with the intention of anticipating Spain, ordered Struensee with a fleet to choose a favorable point for constructing a fortress. Sailing from the Texel in 1643, Struensee entered the Strait of Lemaire in December, and stopping at Mauritius bay, he made a survey of the small Stathouder islands, which he found the most convenient for building a fort to command the strait. He afterward sailed around Staten-land. taking exact astronomical observations at different points of the coast, and on his return to the Strait of Lemaire made numerous soundings. After his arrival in Amsterdam he presented his report to the states-general, but the project of fortifying the strait was afterward abandoned as impracticable. A narrative of his journey was written by his clerk under the title “Beschryving der Reis, ondernomen onder gezag en voor kosten van de Edele Heeren der Staten generaal, naar de Zëeengte van Le Maire en de Zuidzee door Karl Struensee van Bremen” (Amsterdam, 1645; French version, 1647; Latin, 1648).
# Appletons' Cyclopædia of American Biography/Strakosch, Maurice

Edition of 1900. The 1891 edition also includes Louis M. Gottschalk and Marie Roze among the artists the brothers managed.
​STRAKOSCH, Maurice, musician, b. in Butschowitz, Moravia, 15 Jan., 1825; d. in Paris, France, 9 Oct., 1887. His father removed to Germany in 1828, and young Strakosch there began the study of music. He soon gained a reputation as an excellent pianist, and was well received in all the European countries in which he travelled. In 1848 he came to the United States, and soon devoted himself entirely to managing operatic troupes, organizing his first company in 1855. In 1852 he married Amalia Patti, a sister of Adelina. His compositions for the piano were at one time very popular, and among them the music of one of Bayard Taylor's songs. He wrote a small volume of “Souvenirs” in French not long before his death. — His brother, Max, b. in Brunn, Moravia, 27 Sept., 1835; d. in New York city, 17 March, 1892, was associated with him in most of his enterprises, and some of the most famous artists travelled under their management, including Parepa-Rosa, Carlotta and Adelina Patti, Karl Formes, Pasquale Brignoli, Italo Campanini, Pauline Lucca, Therese Titjens, Christine Nilsson, and Marietta Alboni.
# Appletons' Cyclopædia of American Biography/Strong, Titus

Edition of 1900.
​STRONG, Titus, clergyman, b. in Brighton, Mass., 26 Jan., 1787; d. in Greenfield, Mass., in June, 1855. At the age of fourteen he went into a printing-office in Northampton, Mass., to learn the trade, and continued there for four years. Next he began the study of law, but gave it up by reason of failing health. He taught in various places, and began to study theology in 1807. Although of a Congregationalist family, he sought for orders in the Protestant Episcopal church in 1812. He was ordained deacon in Dedham, Mass., 24 March, 1814, by Bishop Griswold, and priest in St. James's church, Greenfield, 7 April, 1814, by the same bishop. He became rector of the church in Greenfield, and held that post during the rest of his life. Trinity gave him the degree of D. D. in 1839. Dr. Strong aided in the growth of the Episcopal church in Massachusetts, Vermont, and New Hampshire. He published “Tears of Columbia, a Political Poem” (1812); “A Candid Examination of the Episcopal Church” (1818); “Young Scholar's Manual” (1821); “The Deerfield Captive, a Tale for Children” (1831); and “A Sermon on the Death of Rev. Dr. William Croswell ” (Boston, 1851). He also published occasional sermons and addresses, and contributed freely to journals and magazines on religious and other topics.
# Appletons' Cyclopædia of American Biography/Straus, Oscar Solomon

Edition of 1900.
​STRAUS, Oscar Solomon, merchant, b. in Otterberg, Rhenish Bavaria, 23 Dec., 1850. He emigrated with his parents to the United States, and settled in Talbotton, Ga. At the close of the civil war he removed to New York, where he was ​graduated at Columbia college in 1871 and at its law-school in 1873. He practised law until 1881, and then entered mercantile life, retaining his interest in literature. In 1887 he was appointed by Cleveland U. S. minister to Turkey, and reappointed by McKinley in 1898. Mr. Straus is a close student of American history, on which he has lectured and written articles for periodicals, and he has published “The Origin of the Republican Form of Government in the United States of America” (New York, 1886) and “Roger Williams, the Pioneer of Religious Liberty” (1894).
# Appletons' Cyclopædia of American Biography/Strother, David Hunter

Edition of 1900.
STROTHER, David Hunter, author, b. in Martinsburg, Va. (now W. Va.), 16 Sept., 1816; d. in Charleston, W. Va., 8 March, 1888. In 1829 he went to Philadelphia to study drawing with Pietro Ancora, and seven years later became a pupil of Samuel F. B. Morse in New York. He went to the west in 1838, travelling through various states, and in 1840 visited Europe, remaining five years. On his return he settled in New York, where, under the direction of John G. Chapman, he acquired the art of drawing on wood for the engravers. In 1848 he returned to his native place, and four years later published, under the pen-name of “Porte Crayon,” the first of his series of papers in “Harper's Magazine.” They relate chiefly to Virginia and the south, and were illustrated by himself. Many of them were afterward published in book-form under the title of “The Blackwater Chronicle” (New York, 1853) and “Virginia Illustrated” (1857). At the opening of the war in 1861 he joined the National army as captain and assistant adjutant-general, became colonel of the 3d West Virginia cavalry, and resigned in September, 1864. In 1865 he received the brevet of brigadier-general of volunteers. After his return to his home at Berkeley Springs he continued for several years to furnish sketches to the magazines. He was a clever writer and an artist of considerable ability. His pencil was also occasionally employed in illustrating the works of others, notably John P. Kennedy's “Swallow Barn” and “Rob of the Bowl.” In 1879 he was appointed consul-general to Mexico, which post he held until 1885.
# Appletons' Cyclopædia of American Biography/Strawbridge, Robert

Edition of 1900.
​STRAWBRIDGE, Robert, pioneer, b. in Drummer's Nave, near Carrick-on-Shannon, County Leitrim, Ireland; d. in Maryland in 1781. He came to this country some time between 1760 and 1765, settled on Sam's creek, Frederick co., Md., and soon opened his house for religious services. Shortly afterward a Methodist society was formed, and a place of worship, known as the Log meeting-house, was erected. Mr. Strawbridge now travelled constantly through the state, forming new socities, and in order that he might go on these journeys his farm was cultivated for him by his neighbors. After residing on Sam's creek about sixteen years he removed to Long Green, Baltimore county, where the use of a farm had been given him for his life. He died while he was on one of his preaching tours. It is a matter of dispute whether he or Philip Embury founded the first Methodist society and built the first chapel in this country, but most authorities give Embury priority. A full discussion of the point may be found in Joseph B. Wakeley's “Lost Chapters Recovered from the Early History of American Methodism” (New York, 1858), and John Atkinson's “Centennial History of American Methodism” (1884).
# Appletons' Cyclopædia of American Biography/Straznicky, Edward R.

Edition of 1900.
​STRAZNICKY, Edward R. (strats-nik'-y), librarian, b. in Moravia, Austria, in 1820; d. in New York city, 9 Feb., 1876. He was educated at the University of Vienna, taking degrees in the departments of medicine and philosophy, and acquired by travel a familiar knowledge of modern languages. During the Hungarian rebellion he served as an officer in the revolutionary army. At the defeat of the Nationalists he went into exile, and his property was confiscated. After a brief residence in England, he came to the United States, and found mercantile employment in Philadelphia. In 1859 he became assistant librarian in Astor library, New York city, and in 1872 he was elected superintendent, which office he held till the time of his death. He was also secretary of the American geographical society.
# Appletons' Cyclopædia of American Biography/Stroud, George McDowell

Edition of 1900.
​STROUD, George McDowell, jurist, b. in Stroudsburg, Pa., 12 Oct., 1795; d. in Germantown, Pa., 29 June, 1875. He was graduated at Princeton in 1817, and admitted to the bar of Pennsylvania in 1819. For many years he was judge of the district court of Philadelphia. He was a contributor to law magazines and the author of a volume entitled “Sketch of the Laws relative to Slavery in the Several States ” (Philadelphia, 1827; enlarged ed., 1856).
# Ante-Nicene Fathers/Volume VI/Arnobius/Adversus Gentes/Book VII/Chapter LI

51. But suppose that the deity was present in that very stone, as you demand should be believed: and what mortal is there, although he may be credulous and very ready to listen to any fictions you please, who would consider that she either was a goddess at that time, or should be now so spoken of and named, who at one time desires these things, at another requires those, abandons and despises her worshippers, leaves the humbler provinces, and allies herself with more powerful and richer peoples, truly loves warfare, and wishes to be in the midst of battles, slaughter, death, and blood? If it is characteristic of the gods—if only they are true gods, and those who it is fitting should be named according to the meaning of this word and the power of divinity—to do nothing wickedly, nothing unjustly, to show themselves equally gracious to all men without any partiality, would any man believe that she was of divine origin, or showed kindness worthy of the gods, who, mixing herself up with the dissensions of men, destroyed the power of some, gave and showed favour to others, bereft some of their liberty, raised others to the height of power,—who, that one state might be pre-eminent, having been born to be the bane of the human race, subjugated the guiltless world?

## Footnotes

* ↑ 48 in Orelli.
* ↑ All edd., except Hild. and Oehler, begin a new sentence here, and change the construction, seemingly following the mistake of the 1st ed.
* ↑ “To do…to show;” so the edd., dropping -nt from the ms. facere-nt…præbere-nt.
* ↑ “To do…to show;” so the edd., dropping -nt from the ms. facere-nt…præbere-nt.
* ↑ Lit, “showed.” Ursinus and Heraldus supposed that some paragraphs are now wanting which were originally found here. It should be noticed that in the ms. the usual subscription is found denoting the end of a book. “The seventh book of Arnovius (sic) ends, the eighth (i.e., Octavius of Minucius Felix) begins,” so that the present arrangement is not due to the binder, nor clearly to the copyist who wrote these words. Nothing can be more certain than that we do not have these chapters as Arnobius intended to leave them; but there is not the slightest reason to suppose that he actually left them otherwise than they have come down to us. Remembering this, we may well suppose that we have only the first draught of them. If so, the difficulties vanish, for nothing would be more natural than that, when Arnobius was drawing near the close of his work, the ideas of the conclusion in which the discussion was to be fairly summed up should force themselves upon his attention, and that he should therefore turn aside at once to give them expression roughly, without seeking completeness and elaboration, and should then hastily resume his argument, of course with the intention of afterwards revising and re-arranging the whole. We may infer that the re-arrangement was never effected, as there are sufficient proofs that the revision was never accomplished, whatever may have been the reason.
# Ante-Nicene Fathers/Volume VI/Arnobius/Adversus Gentes/Book VII/Chapter V

5. We have next to examine the argument which we hear continually coming from the lips of the common people, and find embedded in popular conviction, that sacrifices are offered to the gods of heaven for this purpose, that they may lay aside their anger and passions, and may be restored to a calm and placid tranquillity, the indignation of their fiery spirits being assuaged. And if we remember the definition which we should always bear steadily in mind, that all agitating feelings are unknown to the gods, the consequence is, a belief that the gods are never angry; nay, rather, that no passion is further from them than that which, approaching most nearly to the spirit of wild beasts and savage creatures, agitates those who suffer it with tempestuous feelings, and brings them into danger of destruction. For whatever is harassed by any kind of disturbance, is, it is clear, capable of suffering, and frail; that which has been subjected to suffering and frailty must be mortal; but anger harasses and destroys those who are subject to it: therefore that should be called mortal which has been made subject to the emotions of anger. But yet we know that the gods should be never-dying, and should possess an immortal nature; and if this is clear and certain, anger has been separated far from them and from their state. On no ground, then, is it fitting to wish to appease that in the gods above which you see cannot suit their blessed state.

## Footnotes

* ↑ So the ms., LB., Oberthür, Orelli, Hild., and Oehler, reading consec-, for which the rest read consen-taneum est credere—“it is fitting to believe.”
* ↑ Lit., “motion of anything.”
* ↑ Cf. i. 18.
# Ante-Nicene Fathers/Volume VI/Arnobius/Adversus Gentes/Book VII/Chapter VI

6. But let us allow, as you wish, that the gods are accustomed to such disturbance, and that sacrifices are offered and sacred solemnities performed to calm it, when, then, is it fitting that these offices should be made use of, or at what time should they be given?—before they are angry and roused, or when they have been moved and displeased even? If we must meet them with sacrifices beforetheir anger is roused, lest they become enraged, you are bringing forward wild beasts to us, not gods, to which it is customary to toss food, upon which they may rage madly, and turn their desire to do harm, lest, having been roused, they should rage and burst the barriers of their dens. But if these sacrifices are offered to satisfy the gods when already fired and burning with rage, I do not inquire, I do not consider, whether that happy and sublime greatness of spirit which belongs to the deities is disturbed by the offences of little men, and wounded if a creature, blind and ever treading among clouds of ignorance, has committed any blunder,—said anything by which their dignity is impaired.

## Footnotes

* ↑ Lit., “set in indignations.”
* ↑ Lit., “if this satisfaction of sacrifices is offered to.”
* ↑ So the ms. and most edd., reading laeta, for which Ursinus suggested lauta—“splendid,” and Heraldus elata—“exalted.”
# Ante-Nicene Fathers/Volume VI/Arnobius/Adversus Gentes/Book VII/Chapter II

2. Who are the true gods? you say. To answer you in common and simple language, we do not know; for how can we know who those are whom we have never seen? We have been accustomed to hear from you that an infinite number are gods, and are reckoned among the deities; but if these exist anywhere, and are true gods, as Terentius believes, it follows as a consequence, that they correspond to their name; that is, that they are such as we all see that they should be, and that they are worthy to be called by this name; nay, more,—to make an end without many words,—that they are such as is the Lord of the universe, and the King omnipotent Himself, whom we have knowledge and understanding enough to speak of as the true God when we are led to mention His name. For one god differs from another in nothing as respects his divinity; nor can that which is one in kind be less or more in its parts while its own qualities remain unchanged. Now, as this is certain, it follows that they should never have been begotten, but should be immortal, seeking nothing from without, and not drawing any earthly pleasures from the resources of matter.

## Footnotes

* ↑ On this Heraldus [most ignorantly] remarks, that it shows conclusively how slight was the acquaintance with Christianity possessed by Arnobius, when he could not say who were the true gods. [The Edin. editor clears up the cases as follows:] This, however, is to forget that Arnobius is not declaring his own opinions here, but meeting his adversaries on their own ground. He knows who the true God is—the source and fountain of all being, and framer of the universe (ii. 2), and if there are any lesser powers called gods, what their relation to Him must be (iii. 2, 3); but he does not know any such gods himself, and is continually reminding the heathen that they know these gods just as little. (Cf. the very next sentence.)
* ↑ Lit., “as many as possible.”
* ↑ Lit., “in the series of.”
* ↑ Lit., “are.”
* ↑ i.e., M. Terentius Varro, mentioned in the last chapter.
* ↑ Lit., “in that in which he is a god.”
* ↑ Lit., “uniformity of quality being preserved.”
# Ante-Nicene Fathers/Volume VI/Arnobius/Adversus Gentes/Book VII/Chapter IV

4. If perchance it is not this, are victims not slain in sacrifice to the gods, and cast upon their flaming altars to give them some pleasure and delight? And can any man persuade himself that the gods become mild as they are exhilarated by pleasures, that they long for sensual enjoyment, and, like some base creatures, are affected by agreeable sensations, and charmed and tickled for the moment by a pleasantness which soon passes away? For that which is overcome by pleasure must be harassed by its opposite, sorrow; nor can that be free from the anxiety of grief, which trembles with joy, and is elated capriciously with gladness. But the gods should be free from both passions, if we would have them to be everlasting, and freed from the weakness of mortals. Moreover, every pleasure is, as it were, a kind of flattery of the body, and is addressed to the five well-known senses; but if the gods above feel it, they must partake also of those bodies through which there is a way to the senses, and a door by which to receive pleasures. Lastly, what pleasure is it to take delight in the slaughter of harmless creatures, to have the ears ringing often with their piteous bellowings, to see rivers of blood, the life fleeing away with the blood, and the secret parts having been laid open, not only the intestines to protrude with the excrements, but also the heart still bounding with the life left in it, and the trembling, palpitating veins in the viscera? We half-savage men, nay rather,—to say with more candour what it is truer and more candid to say,—we savages, whom unhappy necessity and bad habit have trained to take these as food, are sometimes moved with pity for them; we ourselves accuse and condemn ourselves when the thing is seen and looked into thoroughly, because, neglecting the law which is binding on men, we have broken through the bonds which naturally united us at the beginning. Will any one believe that the gods, who are kind, beneficent, gentle, are delighted and filled with joy by the slaughter of cattle, if ever they fall and expire pitiably before their altars? And there is no cause, then, for pleasure in sacrifices, as we see, nor is there a reason why they should be offered, since there is no pleasure afforded by them; and if perchance there is some, it has been shown that it cannot in any way belong to the gods.

## Footnotes

* ↑ The heathen opponent is supposed to give up his first reason, that the sacrifices provided food for the gods, and to advance this new suggestion, that they were intended for their gratification merely.
* ↑ Lit., “for the sake of.”
* ↑ Lit., “with the fleeting tickling of.”
* ↑ Lit., “with the levities of gladnesses.”
* ↑ i.e., pleasure.
* ↑ Naturalis initii consortia.
* ↑ So the ms. and first ed., according to Oehler, reading cred-e-t, the others -i-—“does.”
* ↑ Lit., “these.”
* ↑ Arnobius says that the sacrifices give no pleasure to any being, or at least, if that is not strictly true, that they give none to the gods. [See Elucidation VI., infra.]