OpenLLM-France/wikimedia huggingface dataset:
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series I/Volume III/Moral Treatises of St. Augustin/On the Good of Marriage/Section 32

32. Therefore the good of marriage throughout all nations and all men stands in the occasion of begetting, and faith of chastity: but, so far as pertains unto the People of God, also in the sanctity of the Sacrament, by reason of which it is unlawful for one who leaves her husband, even when she has been put away, to be married to another, so long as her husband lives, no not even for the sake of bearing children: and, whereas this is the alone cause, wherefore marriage takes place, not even where that very thing, wherefore it takes place, follows not, is the marriage bond loosed, save by the death of the husband or wife. In like manner as if there take place an ordination of clergy in order to form a congregation of people, although the congregation of people follow not, yet there remains in the ordained persons the Sacrament of Ordination; and if, for any fault, any be removed from his office, he will not be without the Sacrament of the Lord once for all set upon him, albeit continuing unto condemnation. Therefore that marriage takes place for the sake of begetting children, the Apostle is a witness thus, “I will,” says he, “that the younger women be married.” And, as though it were said to him, For what purpose? straightway he added, “to have children, to be mothers of families.” But unto the faith of chastity pertains that saying, “The wife hath not power of her own body, but the husband: likewise also the husband hath not power of his own body, but the wife.” But unto the sanctity of the Sacrament that saying, “The wife not to depart from her husband, but, in case she shall have departed, to remain unmarried, or to be reconciled to her husband: and let not the husband put away his wife.” All these are goods, on account of which marriage is a good; offspring, faith, sacrament. But now, at this time, not to seek offspring after the flesh, and by this means to maintain a certain perpetual freedom from every such work, and to be made subject after a spiritual manner unto one Husband Christ, is assuredly better and holier; provided, that is, men so use that freedom, as it is written, so as to have their thoughts of the things of the Lord, how to please the Lord; that is, that Continence at all times do take thought, that obedience fall not short in any matter: and this virtue, as the root-virtue, and (as it is wont to be called) the womb, and clearly universal, the holy fathers of old exercised in deed; but that Continence they possessed in habit of mind. Who assuredly, through that obedience, whereby they were just and holy, and ever prepared unto every good work, even if they were bidden to abstain from all sexual intercourse, would perform it. For how much more easily could they, at the bidding or exhortation of God, not use sexual intercourse, who, as an act of obedience, could slay the child, for the begetting of which alone they used the ministry of sexual intercourse?

## Footnotes

* ↑ 1 Cor. vii. 4
* ↑ 1 Cor. vii. 10, 11
* ↑ 1 Cor. vii. 32
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series I/Volume III/Moral Treatises of St. Augustin/On the Good of Marriage/Section 33

33. And, the case being thus, enough and more than enough answer has been made to the heretics, whether they be Manichees, or whosoever other that bring false charges against the Fathers of the Old Testament, on the subject of their having several wives, thinking this a proof whereby to convict them of incontinence: provided, that is, that they perceive, that that is no sin, which is committed neither against nature, in that they used those women not for wantonness, but for the begetting of children: nor against custom, forasmuch as such things were usually done at those times: nor against command, forasmuch as they were forbidden by no law. But such as used women unlawfully, either the divine sentence in those Scriptures convicts them, or the reading sets them forth for us to condemn and shun, not to approve or imitate.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series I/Volume III/Moral Treatises of St. Augustin/On the Good of Marriage/Section 6

6. Further, in the very case of the more immoderate requirement of the due of the flesh, which the Apostle enjoins not on them by way of command, but allows to them by way of leave, that they have intercourse also beside the cause of begetting children; although evil habits impel them to such intercourse, yet marriage guards them from adultery or fornication. For neither is that committed because of marriage, but is pardoned because of marriage. Therefore married persons owe one another not only the faith of their sexual intercourse itself, for the begetting of children, which is the first fellowship of the human kind in this mortal state; but also, in a way, a mutual service of sustaining one another’s weakness, in order to shun unlawful intercourse: so that, although perpetual continence be pleasing to one of them, he may not, save with consent of the other. For thus far also, “The wife hath not power of her own body, but the man: in like manner also the man hath not power of his own body, but the woman.” That that also, which, not for the begetting of children, but for weakness and incontinence, either he seeks of marriage, or she of her husband, they deny not the one or the other; lest by this they fall into damnable seductions, through temptation of Satan, by reason of incontinence either of both, or of whichever of them. For intercourse of marriage for the sake of begetting hath not fault; but for the satisfying of lust, but yet with husband or wife, by reason of the faith of the bed, it hath venial fault: but adultery or fornication hath deadly fault, and, through this, continence from all intercourse is indeed better even than the intercourse of marriage itself, which takes place for the sake of begetting. But because that Continence is of larger desert, but to pay the due of marriage is no crime, but to demand it beyond the necessity of begetting is a venial fault, but to commit fornication or adultery is a crime to be punished; charity of the married ought to beware, lest whilst it seek for itself occasion of larger honor, it do that for its partner which cause condemnation. “For whosoever putteth away his wife, except for the cause of fornication, maketh her to commit adultery.” To such a degree is that marriage compact entered upon a matter of a certain sacrament, that it is not made void even by separation itself, since, so long as her husband lives, even by whom she hath been left, she commits adultery, in case she be married to another: and he who hath left her, is the cause of this evil.

## Footnotes

* ↑ Excipiendæ
* ↑ 1 Cor. vii. 4
* ↑ Matt. v. 32
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series I/Volume III/Moral Treatises of St. Augustin/On the Good of Marriage/Section 7

7. But I marvel, if, as it is allowed to put away a wife who is an adulteress, so it be allowed, having put her away, to marry another. For holy Scripture causes a hard knot in this matter, in that the Apostle says, that, by commandment of the Lord, the wife ought not to depart from her husband, but, in case she shall have departed, to remain unmarried, or to be reconciled to her husband; whereas surely she ought not to depart and remain unmarried, save from an husband that is an adulterer, lest by withdrawing from him, who is not an adulterer, she cause him to commit adultery. But perhaps she may justly be reconciled to her husband, either he being to be borne with, if she cannot contain herself, or being now corrected. But I see not how the man can have permission to marry another, in case he have left an adulteress, when a woman has not to be married to another, in case she have left an adulterer. And, this being the case, so strong is that bond of fellowship in married persons, that, although it be tied for the sake of begetting children, not even for the sake of begetting children is it loosed. For it is in a man’s power to put away a wife that is barren, and marry one of whom to have children. And yet it is not allowed; and now indeed in our times, and after the usage of Rome, neither to marry in addition, so as to have more than one wife living: and, surely, in case of an adulteress or adulterer being left, it would be possible that more men should be born, if either the woman were married to another, or the man should marry another. And yet, if this be not lawful, as the Divine Rule seems to prescribe, who is there but it must make him attentive to learn, what is the meaning of this so great strength of the marriage bond? Which I by no means think could have been of so great avail, were it not that there were taken a certain sacrament of some greater matter from out this weak mortal state of men, so that, men deserting it, and seeking to dissolve it, it should remain unshaken for their punishment. Seeing that the compact of marriage is not done away by divorce intervening; so that they continue wedded persons one to another, even after separation; and commit adultery with those, with whom they shall be joined, even after their own divorce, either the woman with a man, or the man with a woman. And yet, save in the City of our God, in His Holy Mount, the case is not such with the wife. But, that the laws of the Gentiles are otherwise, who is there that knows not; where, by the interposition of divorce, without any offense of which man takes cognizance, both the woman is married to whom she will, and the man marries whom he will. And something like this custom, on account of the hardness of the Israelites, Moses seems to have allowed, concerning a bill of divorcement. In which matter there appears rather a rebuke, than an approval, of divorce.

## Footnotes

* ↑ 1 Cor. vii. 10, 11
* ↑ Ps. xlviii. 1
* ↑ Deut. xxiv. 1
* ↑ Matt. xix. 8
# Napoleon's instructions to Grouchy on the morning of 17 June 1815

The morning after the French victory over the Prussians at the Battle of Lingny, Napoleon Bonaparte gave Marshal Grouchy the following instructions.
Pursue the Prussians, complete their defeat by attacking them as soon as you come up with them, and never let them out of your sight. I am going to unite the remainder of this portion of the Army with Marshal Ney's Corps, to march against the English, and to fight them if they should hold their ground between this and the Forest of Soignies. You will communicate with me by the paved road which leads to Quatre Bras.
# Napoleon's letter to General Lapi

As translated and published in Chapman and Hall's 1884 book A Selection from the Letters and Despatches of the First Napoleon by Denis Arthur Bingham
       To GENERAL LAPI.
    PORTO FERRAJO, 26th February, 1815.
I am leaving the island of Elba.
I have been extremely satisfied with the conduct of the inhabitants. I confide to them the safety of this country, to which I attach a great importance.
I cannot give them a greater mark of confidence than in leaving my mother and my sister in their care, after the departure of the troops.
The members of the Junta, and all the inhabitants of the island, may count upon my affection and upon my special protection.
       NAPOLEON
# Napoleon's letter to Grouchy, morning of 17 June 1815

The morning after the French victory over the Prussians at the Battle of Lingny, Napoleon Bonaparte gave Marshal Grouchy verbal instructions on how he wanted Grouchy to harry the Prussians. However shortly after giving these verbal instructions to Grouchy, which were based on the theory that Blücher had fallen back on Namur, Napoleon received a report from Jean-Baptiste Berton, who commanded the brigade which was sent out in support of Pajol (commander of a cavalry division attached Grouchy's command), to the effect that he had been led by the statements of the inhabitants to proceed to Gembloux, where he had seen, at 09:00, a Prussian corps of some 20,000 men. This certainly looked as if the Prussians were not retiring on Namur. Therefore the first thing the French need to do, was to find out where the Prussian corps was going, and what it commanders were proposing to do. At Gembloux—so it now appeared—Grouchy would be sure to get on the track of the Prussians, and obtain news of their movements and designs. Accordingly Napoleon, in the temporary absence of Marshal Soult, dictated to General Bertrand the following order to Grouchy.
Proceed to Gembloux with the cavalry corps of General Pajol, the light cavalry of the 4th Corps, the cavalry corps of General Exelmans, the division of General Teste, of which you will take particular care, it being detached from its own corps, and the 3d and 4th corps of infantry.
You will explore in the directions of Namur and of Maastricht and you will pursue the enemy. Explore his march, and instruct me respecting his manoeuvres, so that I may be able to penetrate what he is intending to do.
I am carrying my headquarters to Quatre Bras, where the English still were this morning. Our communication will then be direct by the paved road of Namur. If the enemy has evacuated Namur, write to the general commanding the second military division at Charlemont to cause Namur to be occupied by some battalions of the national guard and some batteries which he will organise at Charlemont. He will give the command to a brigadier-general.
It is important to penetrate what the enemy is intending to do; whether they are separating themselves from the English or whether they are intending still to unite, to cover Brussels or Liege, in trying the fate of another battle. In all cases, keep constantly your two corps of infantry united in a league of ground, and occupy every evening a good military position, having several avenues of retreat. Post intermediate detachments of cavalry, so as to communicate with headquarters.
Dictated by the Emperor, in the absence of the major-general, to the Grand-marshal Bertrand. Ligny, 17 June, 1815

## Note

* ↑ Breton, pp. 47, 48. Breton supposed it to be the IV Prussian Corps (Bülow's) but it was the III Corps (Thielmann's).
* ↑ "The original is 'et', but this is plainly an error, very possibly caused by the fact that the letter was dictated" (Ropes).
* ↑ "There are other readings varying in unimportant points from the above" (Ropes).
# Napoleon's address to the French army, 25 June 1815

* related portals: Hundred Days.
* sister projects: Wikipedia article, Wikidata item.
On 25 June, having abdicated as Emperor of the French for the second time on 22 June, Napoleon withdrew from the Paris to the country Palace of Malmaison. From there he issued the following address to the French army (which was still in the field and had not surrendered).
Source: Siborne, William (1895), The Waterloo Campaign, 1815, p. 688, <http://archive.org/details/waterloocampaig01sibogoog>.
Soldiers! While obeying the necessity which removes me from the French Army; I carry with me the happy assurance that it will justify, by the eminent services which the country expects from it, the praises which our Enemies themselves have not been able to refuse it.
Soldiers! I shall follow your steps, though absent. I know all the corps; and not one of them will obtain a single advantage over the Enemy, but I shall give it credit for the courage it may have displayed. Both you and I have been calumniated. Men, very unfit to appreciate your labours, have seen in the marks of attachment which you have given me, a zeal of which I was the sole object. Let your future successes convince them that it was the Country above all things, which you served in obeying me; and that if I had any share in your affection, I owe it to my ardent love for France — our common mother.
Soldiers! Some efforts more, and the Coalition will be dissolved. Napoleon will recognise you by the blows which you are about to strike. Save the honour, the independence, of France! Be, unto the last, the same men which I have known you for these twenty years; and you will be invincible.
    Napoleon. De la Malmaison, le 25 juin 1815.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series I/Volume III/Moral Treatises of St. Augustin/On the Good of Marriage/Section 9

9. Truly we must consider, that God gives us some goods, which are to be sought for their own sake, such as wisdom, health, friendship: but others, which are necessary for the sake of somewhat, such as learning, meat, drink, sleep, marriage, sexual intercourse. For of these certain are necessary for the sake of wisdom, as learning: certain for the sake of health, as meat and drink and sleep: certain for the sake of friendship, as marriage or sexual intercourse: for hence subsists the propagation of the human kind, wherein friendly fellowship is a great good. These goods, therefore, which are necessary for the sake of something else, whoso useth not for this purpose, wherefore they were instituted, sins; in some cases venially, in other cases damnably. But whoso useth them for this purpose, wherefore they were given doeth well. Therefore, to whomsoever they are not necessary, if he use them not, he doeth better. Wherefore, these goods, when we have need, we do well to wish; but we do better not to wish than to wish: because ourselves are in a better state, when we account them not necessary. And on this account it is good to marry, because it is good to beget children, to be a mother of a family: but it is better not to marry, because it is better not to stand in need of this work, in order to human fellowship itself. For such is the state of the human race now, that (others, who contain not, not only being taken up with marriage, but many also waxing wanton through unlawful concubinages, the Good Creator working what is good out of their evils) there fails not numerous progeny, and abundant succession, out of which to procure holy friendships. Whence we gather, that, in the first times of the human race, chiefly for the propagation of the People of God, through whom the Prince and Saviour of all people should both be prophesied of, and be born, it was the duty of the Saints to use this good of marriage, not as to be sought for its own sake, but necessary for the sake of something else: but now, whereas, in order to enter upon holy and pure fellowship, there is on all sides from out all nations an overflowing fullness of spiritual kindred, even they who wish to contract marriage only for the sake of children, are to be admonished, that they use rather the larger good of continence.

## Footnotes

* ↑ 1 Tim. v. 14
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series I/Volume III/Moral Treatises of St. Augustin/On the Good of Widowhood

On the Good of Widowhood.
[De Bono Viduitatis.]
Translated by Rev. C. L. Cornish, M.A., of Exeter College, Oxford.

## Contents

* Translator's Preface
* Section 1
* Section 2
* Section 3
* Section 4
* Section 5
* Section 6
* Section 7
* Section 8
* Section 9
* Section 10
* Section 11
* Section 12
* Section 13
* Section 14
* Section 15
* Section 16
* Section 17
* Section 18
* Section 19
* Section 20
* Section 21
* Section 22
* Section 23
* Section 24
* Section 25
* Section 26
* Section 27
* Section 28
* Section 29
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series I/Volume III/Moral Treatises of St. Augustin/On the Good of Widowhood/Section 15

15. Men are wont to move a question concerning a third or fourth marriage, and even more numerous marriages than this. On which to make answer strictly, I dare neither to condemn any marriage, nor to take from these the shame of their great number. But, lest the brevity of this my answer may chance to displease any, I am prepared to listen to my reprover treating more fully. For perhaps he alleges some reason, why second marriages be not condemned, but third be condemned. For I, as in the beginning of this discourse I gave warning, dare not to be more wise than it behoveth to be wise. For who am I, that I should think that that must be defined which I see that the Apostle hath not defined? For he saith, “A woman is bound, so long as her husband liveth.” He said not, her first; or, second; or, third; or, fourth; but, “A woman,” saith he, “is bound, so long as her husband liveth; but if her husband shall be dead, she is set free; let her be married to whom she will, only in the Lord: but she shall be more blessed, if she shall have so continued.” I know not what can be added to, or taken from, this sentence, so far as relates to this matter. Next I hear Himself also, the Master and Lord of the Apostles and of us, answering the Sadducees, when they had proposed to Him a woman not once-married, or twice-married, but, if it can be said, seven-married, whose wife she should be in the resurrection? For rebuking them, He saith, “Ye do err, not knowing the Scriptures, nor the power of God. For in the resurrection they shall neither be married, nor marry wives; for they shall not begin to die, but shall be equal to the Angels of God.” Therefore He made mention of their resurrection, who shall rise again unto life, not who shall rise again unto punishment. Therefore He might have said, Ye do err, knowing not the Scriptures, nor the power of God: for in that resurrection it will not be possible that there be those that were wives of many; and then added, that neither doth any there marry. But neither, as we see, did He in this sentence show any sign of condemning her who was the wife of so many husbands. Wherefore neither dare I, contrary to the feeling of natural shame, say, that, when her husbands are dead, a woman marry as often as she will; nor dare I, out of my own heart, beside the authority of holy Scripture, condemn any number of marriages whatever. But, what I say to a widow, who hath had one husband, this I say to every widow; you will be more blessed, if you shall have so continued.

## Footnotes

* ↑ Rom. xii. 3
* ↑ 1 Cor. vii. 39, 40
* ↑ Al. “or any number.”
* ↑ Septiviram
* ↑ Matt. xxii. 29, 30
* ↑ Luke xx. 35, 36