OpenLLM-France/wikimedia huggingface dataset:
# An Etymological Dictionary of the German Language/Annotated/Granne

| This annotated version expands the abbreviations in the original entry Granne. | Random word Special:RandomInCategory/Annotated entries in Kluge's Etymological Dictionary of the German Language |
​ Granne, feminine, ‘bristle (of swine), awn,’ from Middle High German gran, grane, feminine, ‘point of hair, moustache, fish-bone’ (in the latter sense Granne is also used dialectic), Old High German grana, ‘moustache’; corresponding to Anglo-Saxon ​grǫnu, Old Icelandic grǫn, ‘moustache.’ To the Goth grana, recorded by Isidore, are due Spanish greña, ‘tousled hair,’ and Old French grenon, ‘moustache and whiskers.’ The Teutonic cognates are primitively allied to Old Irish grend, Gaelic greann, ‘moustache’ and ‘shaggy hair.’ See Grat.
# An Etymological Dictionary of the German Language/Annotated/Gran

| This annotated version expands the abbreviations in the original entry Gran. | Random word Special:RandomInCategory/Annotated entries in Kluge's Etymological Dictionary of the German Language |
​ Gran, masculine, ‘grain,’ first occurs in Modern High German from Latin granum, ‘grain.’ From the same source Modern High German Grän is also derived through the medium of French grain.
# Ante-Nicene Fathers/Volume IX/Origen on Matthew/Origen's Commentary on Matthew/Book XIII
## Contents

* Chapter 1
* Chapter 2
* Chapter 3
* Chapter 4
* Chapter 5
* Chapter 6
* Chapter 7
* Chapter 8
* Chapter 9
* Chapter 10
* Chapter 11
* Chapter 12
* Chapter 13
* Chapter 14
* Chapter 15
* Chapter 16
* Chapter 17
* Chapter 18
* Chapter 19
* Chapter 20
* Chapter 21
* Chapter 22
* Chapter 23
* Chapter 24
* Chapter 25
* Chapter 26
* Chapter 27
* Chapter 28
* Chapter 29
* Chapter 30
* Chapter 31
# Ante-Nicene Fathers/Volume IX/Origen on Matthew/Origen's Commentary on Matthew/Book XIII/Chapter 13

13. The Sacred Half-Shekel.
Moreover to the saying, “They that received the half-shekel came to Peter,” you will adduce from Numbers that, for the saints according to the law of God, is paid not a half-shekel simply, but a sacred half-shekel. For it is written, “And thou shalt take five shekels per head, according to the sacred half-shekel.” But also on behalf of all the sons of Israel is given a sacred half-shekel per head. Since then it was not possible for the saint of God to possess along with the sacred half-shekels the profane shekels, so to speak, on this account, to them who do not receive the sacred half-shekels, and who asked Peter and said, “Doth not your master pay the half-shekel?” the Saviour commands the stater to be paid, in which was the half-shekel which was found in the mouth of the first fish that came up, in order that it might be given for the Teacher and the disciple.

## Footnotes

* ↑ Matt. xvii. 24.
* ↑ Num. iii. 47.
# Ante-Nicene Fathers/Volume IX/Origen on Matthew/Origen's Commentary on Matthew/Book XIII/Chapter 11

11. The Freedom of Sons.
And this may be put in another way. There are some who are kings’ sons on the earth, and yet they are not sons of those kings, but sons, and sons absolutely; but others, because of their being strangers to the sons of the kings of the earth, and sons of no one of those upon the earth, but on this very account are sons, whether of God or of His Son, or of some one of those who are God’s. If, then, the Saviour inquires of Peter, saying, “The kings of the earth from whom do they receive toll or tribute—from their own sons or from strangers?” and Peter replies not from their own sons, but “from strangers,” then Jesus says about such as are strangers to the kings of the earth, and on account of being free are sons, “Therefore the sons are free;” for the sons of the kings of the earth are not free, since “every one that committeth sin is the bond-servant of sin,” but they are free who abide in the truth of the word of God, and on this account, know the truth, that they also may become free from sin. If, any one then, is a son simply, and not in this matter wholly a son of the kings of the earth, he is free. And nevertheless, though he is free, he takes care not to offend even the kings of the earth, and their sons, and those who receive the half-shekel; wherefore He says, “Let us not cause them to stumble, but go thou and cast thy net, and take up the fish that first cometh up,” etc. But I would inquire of those who are pleased to make myths about different natures, of what sort of nature they were, whether the kings of the earth, or their sons, or those who receive the half-shekel, whom the Saviour does not wish to offend; it appears of a verity, ex hypothesi, that they are not of a nature worthy of praise, and yet He took heed not to cause them to stumble, and He prevents any stumbling-block being put in their way, that they may not sin more grievously, and that with a view to their being saved—if they will—even by receiving Him who has spared them from being caused to stumble. And as in a place verily of consolation,—for such is, by interpretation, Capernaum,—comforting the disciple as being both free and a son, He gives to him the power of catching the fish first, that when it came up Peter might be comforted by its coming up and being caught, and by the stater being taken from its mouth, in order to be paid to those whose the stater was, and who demanded as their own such a piece of money.

## Footnotes

* ↑ Matt. xvii. 25.
* ↑ Matt. xvii. 26.
* ↑ John viii. 34.
* ↑ Matt. xvii. 27.
# Ante-Nicene Fathers/Volume IX/Origen on Matthew/Origen's Commentary on Matthew/Book XII/Chapter 8

8. The Leaven Figurative Like the Water Spoken of by Jesus to the Woman of Samaria.
But I wonder if the disciples thought, before the saying was explained to them by Jesus, that their Teacher and Lord was forbidding them to beware of the sensible leaven of the Pharisees or the Sadducees as impure, and on this account forbidden, lest they might use that leaven because they had not taken loaves. And we might make a like inquiry in regard to other things; but by-way of illustration the narrative about the woman of Samaria sufficeth, “Every one that drinketh of this water shall thirst again; but whosoever drinketh of the water that I shall give him shall never thirst.” For there, also, so far as the mere form of expression is concerned, the Samaritan woman would seem to have thought that the Saviour was giving a promise about sensible water, when He said, “Whosoever drinketh of the water that I shall give him shall never thirst.” And those things then must be figuratively interpreted, and we must examine and compare the water of the spring of Jacob from which the woman of Samaria drew water with the water of Jesus; and here the like must be done; for perhaps the loaves were not baked, but a kind of raw leaven solely, the teaching, namely, of the Pharisees and Sadducees.

## Footnotes

* ↑ John xiv. 13, 14.
# Ante-Nicene Fathers/Volume IX/Origen on Matthew/Origen's Commentary on Matthew/Book XII/Chapter 7

7. Relative Magnitude of Sins of the Heart and Actual Sins.
But we may also learn from this, that in respect of the reasonings only which we reason within ourselves, we are sometimes convicted and reproached as being of little faith. And I think that just as a man commits adultery in his heart only, though not proceeding altogether to the overt act, so he commits in his heart the rest of the things which are forbidden. As then he who has committed adultery in his heart will be punished proportionately to adultery of this kind, so also he who has done in his heart any one of the things forbidden, for example, who has stolen in his heart only, or borne false witness in his heart only, will not be punished as he who has stolen in fact, or who has completed the very act of false testimony, but only as he who has done such things in his heart.  There is also the case of the man who while he did not arrive at the evil action, came short of it in spite of his own will. For if, in addition to willing it, he has attempted it, but not carried it out, he will be punished not as one who has sinned in his heart alone but in deed. To questions of this sort one might ask, whether any one commits adultery in his heart, even if he does not do the deed of adultery, but lacks self-control in heart only. And the like also you will say concerning the rest of things which are deserving of praise. But the passage possibly contains a plausible fallacy which must be cleared away, I think, in this manner: adultery which takes place in the heart is a less sin, than if one were also to add to it the act. But it is impossible that there can be chastity in the heart, hindering the chaste action—unless indeed one brings forward for an illustration of this the case of the virgin who according to the law was violated in solitude; for it may be granted that the heart of any one may be most pure, but that force in a matter of licentiousness has caused the corruption of the body of her who was chaste. In truth she seems to me to be altogether chaste in secret heart, but no longer to be pure in body such as she was before the act of violence; but though she is not pure outwardly, is she therefore now also unchaste? I have said these things because of the words, “They reasoned among themselves saying, We took no loaves,” to which is added, “And Jesus perceiving it, said, O ye of little faith, why reason ye among yourselves,” etc.; for it was necessary that investigation should be made in regard to the censure of things in secret and correlatively to the praise of things in secret.

## Footnotes

* ↑ Deut. xxii. 25.
* ↑ Or, violence in the licentious person.
* ↑ Matt. xvi. 7, 8.
# Ante-Nicene Fathers/Volume IX/Origen on Matthew/Origen's Commentary on Matthew/Book XIII/Chapter 10

10. Concerning Those Who Demanded the Half-Shekel.
“And when they were come to Capernaum, they that received the half-shekel came to Peter.” There are certain kings of the earth, and the sons of these do not pay toll or tribute; and there are others, different from their sons, who are strangers to the kings of the earth, from whom the kings of the earth receive toll or tribute. And among the kings of the earth, their sons are free as among fathers; but those who are strangers to them, while they are free in relation to things beyond the earth, are as slaves in respect of those who lord it over them and keep them in bondage; as the Egyptians lorded it over the children of Israel, and greatly afflicted their life and violently held them in bondage. It was for the sake of those who were in a bondage, corresponding to the bondage of the Hebrews, that the Son of God took upon Him only the form of a slave, doing no work that was foul or servile. As then, having the form of that slave, He pays toll and tribute not different from that which was paid by His disciple; for the same stater sufficed, even the one coin which was paid for Jesus and His disciple. But this coin was not in the house of Jesus, but it was in the sea, and in the mouth of a fish of the sea which, in my judgment, was benefited when it came up and was caught in the net of Peter, who became a fisher of men, in which net was that which is figuratively called a fish, in order also that the coin with the image of Cæsar might be taken from it, and that it might take its place among those which were caught by them who have learned to become fishers of men. Let him, then, who has the things of Cæsar render them to Cæsar, that afterwards he may be able to render to God the things of God. But since Jesus, who was “the image of the invisible God,” had not the image of Cæsar, for “the prince of this age had nothing in Him,” on this account He takes from its own place, the sea, the image of Cæsar, that He may give it to the kings of the earth for Himself and His disciple, so that those who receive the half-shekel might not imagine that Jesus was the debtor of them and of the kings of the earth; for He paid the debt, not having taken it up, nor having possessed it, nor having acquired it, nor at any time having made it His own possession, so that the image of Cæsar might never be along with the image of the invisible God.

## Footnotes

* ↑ Matt. xvii. 24.
* ↑ Exod. i. 13, 14.
* ↑ Phil. ii. 7.
* ↑ Mark xli. 17; Luke xx. 25.
* ↑ Col. i. 15.
* ↑ John xiv. 31.
# Ante-Nicene Fathers/Volume IX/Origen on Matthew/Origen's Commentary on Matthew/Book XIII/Chapter 12

12. The Stater Allegorized.
But you might sometimes gracefully apply the passage to the lover of money, who has nothing in his mouth but things about silver, when you behold him healed by some Peter, who takes the stater, which is the symbol of all his avarice, not only from his mouth and words, but from his whole character. For you will say that such an one was in the sea, and in the bitter affairs of life, and in the waves of the cares and anxieties of avarice, having the stater in his mouth when he was unbelieving and avaricious, but that he came up from the sea and was caught in the rational net, and being benefited by some Peter who has taught him the truth, no longer has the stater in his mouth, but in place of it those things which contain His image, the oracles of God.
# Anecdotes of Great Musicians/Anecdote 131

131.—FROM HUMBLE ORIGIN TO WEALTH AND FAME.
The goddess of song seems to have chosen her most talented devotees from the humbler walks of life. Among the prime donne we find some of the greatest to have been children of strolling actors, cooks, shopkeepers, and the like. And among singers of the other sex we find porters, school teachers, valets, and coachmen. Very few of the greater singers have sprung from the higher walks of life. We give the circumstances of the discovery of two renowned sopranos, and the list of similar discoveries might be indefinitely extended had we the space and our readers the patience.
Some time during the middle of the last century, Cardinal Gabrielli, who was attached to the Papal Court, was walking in his garden, when his ears were delighted with a stream of joyous melody which, though evidently coming from an untutored throat, still showed remarkable power and sweetness. On investigation, he found the songstress to be the little daughter of his favorite cook. She had been taken to the theater by her father, ​and there her ready memory had retained some of the favorite melodies of the operas she had heard.
The cook had not the means to give the girl the education she deserved, and so that was provided by the liberal Cardinal, whose name she afterward took. La Gabrielli became one of the greatest singers of her day, and delighted nearly all of the crowned heads of Europe by her powers and beauty.
She had a large income and traveled with a royal retinue. But when she retired from the stage it had become greatly reduced by her generosity as well as by her luxurious habits.
The discovery of the vocal powers of Angelica Catalani was made in a different way. At the end of the last century there arose a queer kind of complaint in a certain town in Italy, concerning the singing at one of the churches. It was declared that one of the young novices sang with such power and brilliancy that the people gathered at the church for miles around, and the service became more of a concert than a religious service. This came to the ears of the Bishop and he ordered the scandal to be stopped, which was very easily done by not allowing the young girl whose voice made such a commotion to sing, except in the chorus. Angelica's father had destined her for the cloister and could hardly be persuaded to give up his cherished design of making her spend her life in the dark walls of a convent. But, allured by the promise that the girl had a gold mine in her throat, he finally allowed her to be taken from the convent and to be placed in the hands of the best masters for her vocal education.
Thus, snatched from the convent at the age of twelve years, Catalani began her career, which was one of the most brilliant known to art. No more beautiful person has graced the operatic stage, and no more cultivated or flexible voice is recorded in operatic annals. But her very abilities hurt her career as an artist, for she sacrificed true art in her anxiety to display her wonderful ​powers of vocalization. Her career, like that of Gabrielli, was crowned with riches and fame.
# Anecdotes of Great Musicians/Anecdote 136

136.—REC'D IN FULL OF A/C.
The Irish composer, Field, married from a somewhat peculiar reason, if we may believe his version of it. While yet this originator of the style of music called the "nocturne" was single, he numbered among his pupils one attractive young lady from whom he found it exceedingly difficult to collect the amount of her tuition bill.
Finally, Field concluded to proceed to law in the matter, that is, to use one form of law—for he proposed to the slow-paying damsel and was accepted. He made no secret of the fact that she was his pupil and he married her to get rid of giving her lessons for which she never paid, and for which he felt sure she never would.
This may be a good plan. Who can say but it is applied more than the world knows. But what if the teacher is already the happy possessor of one, or if he has several debtors among the fair sex?
# Anecdotes of Great Musicians/Anecdote 128

128.—IN BÜLOW'S CLASS-ROOM.
Von Bülow, the eccentric pianist and conductor, was even more severe with his pupils than Liszt. Tears were not infrequent things in Liszt's class-room, and yet his gallantry and winning personality did much to dull the sharpness of his cutting criticism.
Not so with Bülow. His classes were large, and he called out whom he chose to play what they had ​prepared. The rest sat trembling in expectation of their turn. An awkward English girl once went to the piano and, because of her great fright, managed to play her piece with so large an assortment of blunders that the irate Doctor cried out: "Ach, Gott! you play the easy passages with a 'difficulty that is simply enormous!" This saying might well be kept as a stock quotation with every teacher, so frequently is it applicable.
# Anecdotes of Great Musicians/Anecdote 130

130.—LISZT'S PLAYING AND HIS GENEROSITY.
Franz Liszt was the Paganini of the pianoforte. We can hardly realize at this day the excitement he created by his wonderful playing. Europe had seen many great players, among them Hummel, Herz, and Thalberg; but no one of them aroused the public to such a pitch of ecstatic enthusiasm as did Liszt. They conquered by their mere brilliancy of effects; he by his greatness of intellect and his poetry of conception, united with a technical skill that was beyond the limits of their comprehension.
He had a certain majesty of bearing, a commanding sway; he carried his audience by his strong personal magnetism. He would come on the concert stage with the step of a conqueror. Tearing his gloves from his hands, he would seat himself at the piano, run his fingers through his hair, and then attack the instrument with the mien of a commanding general. Whether it was because of his magnificent playing, or whether the surrounding excitement reacted on their sensitive natures, the feminine part of his audience would go wild with excitement. Ladies of high rank would throw their jewels at his feet, and perhaps faint in their ecstacy. After the concert there would be a wild rush for the stage to see Liszt, and even to touch the hem of his garment, and to contend for the pieces of broken piano strings that Liszt had shattered in his playing.
As Jenny Lind was noted among singers for her ​generosity, so was Liszt among pianists. A prominent instance of this was when thousands of his countrymen were rendered homeless by an inundation of the Danube. Though Liszt was in Italy, he hastened to Vienna the next morning after hearing the news, and there he began giving concerts for the benefit of the stricken people; and it was not for two months that he ceased, by means of his art, to pour a flood of gold into Hungary.
It is said that his direct contributions to charity, if added to the amounts which he raised by his concerts, would make a sum-total of millions. With his wonderful art, his extensive learning, his magnetic temperament, his kindness of heart, his broad sympathies, and his great beneficence, it is little to be wondered that he was worshiped by all who knew him.
# Anecdotes of Great Musicians/Anecdote 133

133.—ROSSINI AND THE ITALIAN SCHOOL.
It is the fashion nowadays, by the admirers of the modern school of opera, to deride the works of Rossini and the Italian school. They point out his lack of dramatic truth, his sacrifice of the sense to the music. Still there has perhaps never lived a man who could excel him as a writer of bel canto.
The faults of Rossini's music were faults not of the man, but of the time. Rossini was, in his way, a reformer. Prior to his time the composer had been at the mercy of the singer, but with Rossini a new era dawned. He wrote not only the framework of his music, leaving the soloist to ornament at pleasure, but the whole aria, note for note, and insisted that it should be sung as written.
Then he had faith in himself and his music. He knew he was ahead of the public, and he did not drop back to keep pace with them. When, at the first appearance of ​"The Barber of Seville," the audience expressed its disapproval of certain innovations, Rossini shrugged his shoulders, went home and went to sleep. When "La Donna del Lago" was pronounced an utter failure, Rossini openly and loudly proclaimed it a complete success. When "La Gazza Ladra" did not meet the approval of the critics, and he was accused of violating the rules of musical grammar, he retorted:
"So much the worse for the grammar. Reform your grammar; it must be defective."
He might have said "so much the worse for the critics," for the public soon recognized the beauty of the works in question, and Rossini, next to Verdi, ranks as the typical Italian composer.
# Anecdotes of Great Musicians/Anecdote 134

134.—LIVES OF LABOR.
Verily, the old classic composers seemed to take literally the command "be not weary in well doing." Händel, whom Beethoven declared to be "the monarch of the musical kingdom," left nearly four hundred compositions, most of them of considerable length, including his forty-three operas, nineteen oratories, and one hundred and fifty cantatas.
Haydn wrote much more than Händel, his compositions being about eight hundred in number. But many of these were of no great length. The principal ones were one hundred and eighteen symphonies, eighty-three string quartets, twenty-four operas and fourteen masses. Haydn's life was more quiet and his disposition more tranquil than was Händel's. While the latter composer had to fight his way in the musical world, Haydn was enjoying the patronage and support of Prince Esterhazy, in whose musical establishment he reigned supreme.
Another writer who put forth an astonishing number of compositions was Johann Chrysostom Wolfgang Theophilus Amandeus Mozart. That Mozart died young was not owing to the weight of so long a name, ​probable as that might appear. Händel had seventy-one and Haydn seventy-seven years in which to turn out these long arrays of compositions, while Mozart was cut off with thirty-five short years. But in those years his labor was unceasing; and as a result his catalogue shows between six hundred and seven hundred works, large and small. In the larger forms were forty-nine symphonies, twenty-three operas, twenty-eight masses and litanies, thirty-one string quartets, and fifty-five concertos; to say nothing of thirty-three sonatas for piano, forty-five for violin, and ninety sonatas and pieces for the organ.
The catalogue of Beethoven's works shows as many or more compositions than that of Haydn. If we reckon all the smaller numbers as individuals, we find over eight hundred and twenty-five works, of which some two hundred and fifty were vocal; but many of these were combined in sets, and frequently several would appear in the same opus. Of this number but one was an opera and only nine were symphonies; yet those are the "great nine" symphonies of the world.