OpenLLM-France/wikimedia huggingface dataset:
# Appletons' Cyclopædia of American Biography/Abbot, Francis Ellingwood

Edition of 1900.
​ABBOT, Francis Ellingwood, author, b. in Boston, 6 Nov., 1836. He was graduated at Harvard in 1859, and from 1870 to 1880 was editor of "The Index," a Boston journal of free thought. He has written much on metaphysical subjects, and has published in book form "Scientific Theism" (Boston, 1886).
# Appletons' Cyclopædia of American Biography/Abbot, Joel (naval officer)

Edition of 1900.
ABBOT, Joel, naval officer, b. in Westford, Mass., 18 Jan., 1793; d. in Hong Kong, China, 14 Dec., 1855. He was appointed midshipman at the outbreak of the second war with England, and was orderd to the frigate "President" as aid and signal officer to Com. Rodgers, who, impressed by his zeal and efficiency, recommended him to Com. Macdonough, then in command of the naval forces on Lake Champlain. Learning that the British had accumulated a large supply of spars at Sorel, Macdonough sent for Midshipman Abbot and asked him if he was willing to die for his country. "Certainly, sir; that is what I came into the service for," was the answer. Macdonough then told him what he wished done, and young Abbot, disguised as a British officer, entered the enemy's lines, taking the risk of being hanged as a spy in case of capture, discovered where the spars were stored, and destroyed them. Such were the hardships and dangers encountered during this expedition that when he reported to his commanding officer he was in a state of prostration, from the effects of which he was long in recovering. For this exploit and for gallantry in action off Cumberland Head, 11 September, 1814, he was promoted lieutenant, and congress voted him a handsome sword. During the remainder of the war he had no further opportunity for distinction, though at one time he quelled a formidable mutiny. In December, 1818, he was placed in charge of a 30-gun pirate craft, the "Mariana," captured by Com. Stockton off the African coast. On the voyage to Boston part of his crew mutinied, and the piratical prisoners succeeded in wrenching off their irons, during a terrible gale. Notwithstanding this seemingly hopeless state of affairs, Lieut. Abbot regained command of his crew, kept the mutineers at bay, and brought his ship safely into port. In 1838 he was promoted commander, serving on the various foreign squadrons, and from 1839 to 1842 was in command at the Boston navy-yard. In 1852 he commanded the "Macedonian" in the Japan expedition, succeeding Com. Perry as flag-officer of the squadron. During this critical period of our relations with China he was often called upon to perform delicate diplomatic duties, discharging them to the complete satisfaction of the government. He probably shortened his life by devotion to the interests of commerce in personally superintending the placing of buoys and a light-ship in the harbor of Shanghai, which for the first time then had its channels and sailing-courses properly defined.
# Appletons' Cyclopædia of American Biography/Abbot, Abiel (Massachusetts)

Edition of 1900.
​ABBOT, Abiel, clergvman, b. in Andover, Mass., 17 Aug., 1770; d. on Staten Island, N. Y., 7 June, 1828. He was graduated at Harvard in 1792, became the Congregational minister at Haverhill, Mass., in 1794, and in 1802 took charge of the church at Beverly. He wrote a volume of descriptive "Letters from Cuba" (Boston, 1829) while visiting that island for his health in 1827, and died of yellow fever on his return voyage. Dr. Abbot was an eloquent preacher. His sermons, accompanied by a memoir by Samuel Everett, were published in Boston in 1831.
# Appletons' Cyclopædia of American Biography/Abbot, Ezra

Edition of 1900.
ABBOT, Ezra, biblical critic, b. in Jackson, Maine, 28 April, 1819; d. in Cambridge, Mass., 21 March, 1884. It is said that he knew his letters at the age of nineteen months. When five years old he was promoted to the first class in reading, and at seven he expressed the great interest he felt in Rollin's "Ancient History." In the sports of childhood he manifested the keenest zest, was an expert at catching trout, and was an excellent story-teller. He studied at Phillips Exeter academy, was graduated at Bowdoin college in 1840, and soon afterward made his home in Cambridge, Mass. In 1856 he became assistant librarian at Harvard. He made a careful revision, and collation with the originals, of the numerous learned quotations in Jeremy Taylor's "Holy Living and Dying," and published a new edition (Boston, 1864). In 1869 he received the degree of LL. D. from Yale college, and in 1872 Harvard conferred on him the degree of D. D., although he was a layman. From 1872 till his death he was professor of New Testament criticism and interpretation in the Divinity school at Cambridge. He made important contributions, mostly in the department of biblical criticism, to periodicals. As a bibliographer his labors were very valuable, and he furnished a curious and extensive catalogue of books on the subject, which he prepared as an appendix to Alger's "Critical History of a Future Life," and an invaluable addition to the Prolegomena to the 8th edition of Tischendorf's Greek Testament. His most important work, as well as his latest, was a small volume on "The Authorship of the Fourth Gospel" (1880). Mr. Abbot was a Unitarian, and contributed largely to the periodicals of that denomination. He also furnished occasional papers for the "North American Review" and the "Journal of the American Oriental Society," and was a member of the American committee to revise the New Testament. He left a library of 5,000 volumes, containing many rare books, including a rich collection of Greek New Testaments of various editions. In accordance with his desire, this collection was added to the library of Harvard university. The remainder of his books was given to the library of the Divinity school connected with the university, on condition that "there shall be secured as soon as possible a more adequate and safe place of keeping." Among his works are "New Discussions of the Trinity" and "Literature of the Doctrine of a Future Life." He also edited Norton's "Statement of the Reasons for not Believing the Doctrines of the Trinitarians," Lamson's "Church of the First Three Centuries," and other controversial works, and contributed to ​the pronunciation of names in "Worcester's Dictionary." A memorial of Dr. Abbot was published by the alumni of Harvard divinity school in 1884.
# Appletons' Cyclopædia of American Biography/Abbot, Henry Larcom

Edition of 1900.
ABBOT, Henry Larcom, soldier, b. in Beverly, Mass., 13 Aug., 1831. He was graduated at West Point in 1854, and made brevet second lieutenant of topographical engineers. His first service was in the office of the Pacific railroad surveys in Washington, whence in 1855 he was transferred to the Pacific railroad survey of the route between California and Oregon, and afterward served on the hydrographic survey of the delta of the Mississippi river. During the civil war he was principally engaged as a military engineer, and rose by successive steps until brevetted brigadier-general, U. S. army, 13 March, 1865, and made lieutenant-colonel of engineers, 31 March, 1880. He served in various actions, and was wounded at Bull Run in 1861. Since the close of the war he has been engaged in superintending the defences of the East river; in command of the engineer post and depot at Willet's Point, N. Y., and of the engineer battalion and the engineer school of application, the latter of which he has created. He was a member of the expedition to Sicily to observe the solar eclipse in 1870, member of the engineer board on the U. S. military bridge equipage and drill, of one on a plan for the protection of the alluvial region of the Mississippi against overflows, and of various other boards connected with fortifications and river and harbor improvements. He invented and developed the U. S. system of submarine mines for coast and river defence, 1869 to 1886. He has published “Vol. VI., Pacific Railroad Reports” (Washington, 1857); “Physics and Hydraulics of the Mississippi,” jointly with Capt. A. A. Humphreys (Philadelphia, 1861); “Siege Artillery in the Campaign against Richmond” (Washington, 1867); “Experiments and Investigations to develop a System of Submarine Mines for defending Harbors of the United States” (1881); jointly with boards and commissioners, “United States Bridge Equipage and Drill” (1870); “Reclamation of the Alluvial Basin of the Mississippi River” (1875); “Report of Gun-Foundry Board” (1884); and “Report of the Board on Fortifications or other Defences” (1886).
# Ante-Nicene Fathers/Volume VI/Arnobius/Adversus Gentes/Book III/Chapter II

2. Let us now return to the order from which we were a little ago compelled to diverge, that our defence may not, through its being too long broken off, be said to have given our detractors cause to triumph in the establishing of their charge. For they propose these questions: If you are in earnest about religion, why do you not serve and worship the other gods with us, or share your sacred rites with your fellows, and put the ceremonies of the different religions on an equality? We may say for the present: In essaying to approach the divine, the Supreme Deity suffices us,—the Deity, I say, who is supreme, the Creator and Lord of the universe, who orders and rules all things: in Him we serve all that requires our service; in Him we worship all that should be adored,—venerate that which demands the homage of our reverence. For as we lay hold of the source of the divine itself from which the very divinity of all gods whatever is derived, we think it an idle task to approach each personally, since we neither know who they are, nor the names by which they are called; and are further unable to learn, and discover, and establish their number.

## Footnotes

* ↑ Deus primus, according to Nourry, in relation to Christ; but manifestly from the scope of the chapter, God as the fountain and source of all things.
* ↑ Lit., “propitiate with venerations.”
* ↑ So the ms., reading ducitur; for which Oberthür, followed by Orelli, reads dicitur—“is said.”
# Ante-Nicene Fathers/Volume VI/Arnobius/Adversus Gentes/Book III/Chapter IX

9. What, then, shall we say? That gods beget and are begotten? and that therefore they have received organs of generation, that they might be able to raise up offspring, and that, as each new race springs up, a substitution, regularly occurring, should make up for all which had been swept away by the preceding age? If, then, it is so,—that is, if the gods above beget other gods, and are subject to these conditions of sex, and are immortal, and are not worn out, by the chills of age,—it follows, as a consequence, that the world should be full of gods, and that countless heavens could not contain their multitude, inasmuch as they are both themselves ever begetting, and the countless multitude of their descendants, always being increased, is augmented by means of their offspring; or if, as is fitting, the gods are not degraded by being subjected to sexual impulses, what cause or reason will be pointed out for their being distinguished by those members by which the sexes are wont to recognise each other at the suggestion of their own desires? For it is not likely that they have these members without a purpose, or that nature had wished in them to make sport of its own improvidence, in providing them with members for which there would be no use. For as the hands, feet, eyes, and other members which form our body, have been arranged for certain uses, each for its own end, so we may well believe that these members have been provided to discharge their office; or it must be confessed that there is something without a purpose in the bodies of the gods, which has been made uselessly and in vain.

## Footnotes

* ↑ Lit., “that gods are born.”
* ↑ Lit, “recurring,” “arising again.”
* ↑ Lit., “make trial of themselves by these laws of sex.”
* ↑ Lit., “all things,” etc.
* ↑ Lit., “if the impurity of sexual union is wanting to the gods.”
* ↑ So the first five edd.
* ↑ Lit., “the other arrangement of members.”
* ↑ Lit., “it is fitting to believe.”
# Ante-Nicene Fathers/Volume VI/Arnobius/Adversus Gentes/Book III/Chapter IV

4. But we do not purpose delaying further on this part of the subject, lest we seem desirous to stir up most violent strife, and engage in agitating contests.
Let there be, as you affirm, that crowd of deities, let there be numberless families of gods; we assent, agree, and do not examine too closely, nor in any part of the subject do we assail the doubtful and uncertain positions you hold. This, however, we demand, and ask you to tell us, whence you have discovered, or how you have learned, whether there are these gods, whom you believe to be in heaven and serve, or some others unknown by reputation and name? For it may be that beings exist whom you do not believe to do so; and that those of whose existence you feel assured, are found nowhere in the universe. For you have at no time been borne aloft to the stars of heaven, at no time have seen the face and countenance of each; and then established here the worship of the same gods, whom you remembered to be there, as having been known and seen by you. But this, too, we again would learn from you, whether they have received these names by which you call them, or assumed them themselves on the days of purification. If these are divine and celestial names, who reported them to you? But if, on the other hand, these names have been applied to them by you, how could you give names to those whom you never saw, and whose character or circumstances you in no wise knew?

## Footnotes

* ↑ According to Orelli’s punctuation, “whether there are these gods in heaven whom,” etc.
* ↑ So LB. and later edd., from a conj. of Meursius, reading diebus lustricis for the ms. ludibriis; read by some, and understood by others, as ludicris, i.e., festal days.
* ↑ The ms. followed by Hild. and Oehler, reads neque…in ulla cognatione—“in no relationship,” for which the other edd. give cognitione, as above.
# Ante-Nicene Fathers/Volume VI/Arnobius/Adversus Gentes/Book III/Chapter I

Book III.
1. All these charges, then, which might truly be better termed abuse, have been long answered with sufficient fulness and accuracy by men of distinction in this respect, and worthy to have learned the truth; and not one point of any inquiry has been passed over, without being determined in a thousand ways, and on the strongest grounds. We need not, therefore, linger further on this part of the case. For neither is the Christian religion unable to stand though it found no advocates, nor will it be therefore proved true if it found many to agree with it, and gained weight through its adherents. Its own strength is sufficient for it, and it rests on the foundations of its own truth, without losing its power, though there were none to defend it, nay, though all voices assailed and opposed it, and united with common rancour to destroy all faith in it.

## Footnotes

* ↑ The ms., followed by Oehler, reads neque enim res stare…non potest, Christiana religio aut—“for neither can a thing not stand,…nor will the Christian religion,” etc., while L.B. merely changes aut into et—“for neither can a thing, i.e., the Christian religion,…nor will it,” etc. All other edd. read as above, omitting et.
* ↑ According to Crusius and others, the ms. reads finem; but, according to Hild., fidem, as above.
# Ante-Nicene Fathers/Volume VI/Arnobius/Adversus Gentes/Book III/Chapter III

3. And as in the kingdoms of earth we are in no wise constrained expressly to do reverence to those who form the royal family as well as to the sovereigns, but whatever honour belongs to them is found to be tacitly implied in the homage offered to the kings themselves; in just the same way, these gods, whoever they be, for whose existence you vouch, if they are a royal race, and spring from the Supreme Ruler, even though we do not expressly do them reverence, yet feel that they are honoured in common with their Lord, and share in the reverence shown to Him. Now it must be remembered that we have made this statement, on the hypothesis only that it is clear and undeniable, that besides the Ruler and Lord Himself, there are still other beings, who, when arranged and disposed in order, form, as it were, a kind of plebeian mass. But do not seek to point out to us pictures instead of gods in your temples, and the images which you set up, for you too know, but are unwilling and refuse to admit, that these are formed of most worthless clay, and are childish figures made by mechanics. And when we converse with you on religion, we ask you to prove this, that there are other gods than the one Supreme Deity in nature, power, name, not as we see them manifested in images, but in such a substance as it might fittingly be supposed that perfection of so great dignity should reside.

## Footnotes

* ↑ Lit., “whatever belongs to them feels itself to be comprehended with a tacit rendering also of honour in,” etc., tacita et se sentit honorificentia, read by later edd. for the ms. ut se sentit—“but as whatever,” retained by Hild. and Oehler; while the first four edd. read vi—“feels itself with a silent force comprehended in the honour in,” etc.
* ↑ So LB. and Orelli, reading alia etiamnum capita for the ms. alienum capita, read in the first five edd., alia non capita—“are others not chiefs;” Hild., followed by Oehler, proposes alia deûm capita—“other gods.”
# Ante-Nicene Fathers/Volume VI/Arnobius/Adversus Gentes/Book II/Chapter XXXV

35. But, say my opponents, if souls are mortal and of neutral character, how can they from their neutral properties become immortal? If we should say that we do not know this, and only believe it because said by One mightier than we, when will our readiness of belief seem mistaken if we believe that to the almighty King nothing is hard, nothing difficult, and that what is impossible to us is possible to Him and at His command? For is there anything which may withstand His will, or does it not follow of necessity that what He has willed must be done? Are we to infer from our distinctions what either can or cannot be done; and are we not to consider that our reason is as mortal as we ourselves are, and is of no importance with the Supreme? And yet, O ye who do not believe that the soul is of a neutral character, and that it is held on the line midway between life and death, are not all whatever whom fancy supposes to exist, gods, angels, dæmons, or whatever else is their name, themselves too of a neutral character, and liable to change in the uncertainty of their future? For if we all agree that there is one Father of all, who alone is immortal and unbegotten, and if nothing at all is found before Him which could be named, it follows as a consequence that all these whom the imagination of men believes to be gods, have been either begotten by Him or produced at His bidding. Are they produced and begotten? they are also later in order and time: if later in order and time, they must have an origin, and beginning of birth and life; but that which has an entrance into and beginning of life in its first stages, it of necessity follows, should have an end also.

## Footnotes

* ↑ The ms. reading is, mortalis est qualitatis. The first five edd. merely drop est—“of mortal, of neutral,” etc.; LB. and the others read, es et, as above.
* ↑ Lit., “heard from.”
* ↑ So the ms., according to Crusius, the edd. reading cred-id-imus—“have believed.”
* ↑ Lit., “if we believe that.”
* ↑ So the ms., reading ad modum obsecutionis paratum—“prepared to the mode of compliance;” for which the edd. read adm. executioni—“quite prepared for performing,” except Hildebrand, who gives adm. obsecutioni—“for obedience.”
* ↑ So the ms., according to Crusius, but all edd. read sequ-a-tur (for i)—“Is there anything which He has willed which it does not follow,” etc.
* ↑ So all edd., reading mutabiles, except the two Roman edd. and Oehler, who gives, as the reading of the ms., nu.—“tottering.”
* ↑ Lit., “in the doubtful condition of their lot.”
* ↑ Lit., “which may have been of a name.”
* ↑ LB., followed by the later edd., inserted si, “if they are,” which is certainly more consistent with the rest of the sentence.
# Ante-Nicene Fathers/Volume VI/Arnobius/Adversus Gentes/Book II/Chapter XXXVII

37. But if souls were, as is said, the Lord’s children, and begotten by the Supreme Power, nothing would have been wanting to make them perfect, as they would have been born with the most perfect excellence: they would all have had one mind, and been of one accord; they would always dwell in the royal palace; and would not, passing by the seats of bliss in which they had learned and kept in mind the noblest teachings, rashly seek these regions of earth, that they might live enclosed in gloomy bodies amid phlegm and blood, among these bags of filth and most disgusting vessels of urine. But, an opponent will say, it was necessary that these parts too should be peopled, and therefore Almighty God sent souls hither to form some colonies, as it were. And of what use are men to the world, and on account of what are they necessary, so that they may not be believed to have been destined to live here and be the tenants of an earthly body for no purpose? They have a share, my opponent says, in perfecting the completeness of this immense mass, and without their addition this whole universe is incomplete and imperfect. What then? If there were not men, would the world cease to discharge its functions? would the stars not go through their changes? would there not be summers and winters? would the blasts of the winds be lulled? and from the clouds gathered and hanging overhead would not the showers come down upon the earth to temper droughts? But now all things must go on in their own courses, and not give up following the arrangement established by nature, even if there should be no name of man heard in the world, and this earth should be still with the silence of an unpeopled desert. How then is it alleged that it was necessary that an inhabitant should be given to these regions, since it is clear that by man comes nothing to aid in perfecting the world, and that all his exertions regard his private convenience always, and never cease to aim at his own advantage?

## Footnotes

* ↑ Lit., “a generation of.”
* ↑ Canterus, Elmenhorst, Oberthür, and Orelli omit ut, which is retained as above by the rest.
* ↑ Lit., “obscene.”
* ↑ Elmenhorst endeavours to show that Arnobius coincides in this argument with the Epicureans, by quoting Lucr. v. 165 sqq. and Lact. vii. 5, where the Epicurean argument is brought forward, What profit has God in man, that He should have created him? In doing this, it seems not to have been observed that the question asked by Arnobius is a very different one: What place has man in the world, that God should be supposed to have sent him to fill it?
* ↑ i.e., so far from this being the case.